Re: Homosexuality in Primitives

[Guest guest]

Lorie,

> " A more logical interpretation would be that there is a brain chemistry

> component specifically related to the receptors and interpretors of

> pheremones. "

> But if your standard is straight males and straight females, and you have a

> gay male as the test subject, and the test subject's brain acts more like a

> female, and the female has a higher percentage of estrogen, that would be

> the way I'd logically interpret it.

No it wouldn't. This would be a horrible and completely

intellectually dishonest way to interpret it. If the female had a

vagina, and the test subject's brain acted " more like a female, " would

you conclude that homosexual males must have vaginas? If so, you'd

run into difficulty positing the existence of homosexuality to begin

with.

Besides that, you stated in your own description of the study that

homosexuals were able to sense the pheremones of other homosexuals.

If they are more attracted to the pheremones of homosexual men than

those of straight men but heterosexual females are not, this would

also provide evidence that saying their mind works like a female's is

inaccurate.

> " What is your evidence that estrogen levels determine reactions to

> pheremones? Wouldn't it be much more direct evidence to show that gay

> men have higher estrogen levels? "

> Exactly. And if the norm (being a much larger population of the same

> species and sex doesn't have a higher estrogen level), then you'd need to

> find out why these certain males do.

Whoa, hold your horses. Please provide evidence that homosexuals have

higher estrogen levels.

> I wonder if they are less prone to depression than those who don't.

>

> " If they did, how would you interpret this vis-a-vis the hormonal cause

> of homosexuality? "

> That wouldn't determine the hormonal cause but it might help those who are

> suffering from the depression. And from there maybe science could

> extrapolate the hormonal imbalances and possible ways to treat the

> condition.

But it would suggest that they were deficient in estrogen to begin

with, which is, if I understand you right, the opposite of what you

were proposing above.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

,

> You have a point. Sex is not EXACTLY a " mental choice " ; it's more

> " mental arousal " .

I guess it depends on how you define " mental. " It seems to me that it

is a much more basic process whereas " mental " processes are more

advanced and involve more calculation and less instinct.

> But here's what I believe according to MY religious

> beliefs.

Thank you for again clarifying that you believe them according to your

religious beliefs rather than common sense.

> fornication, sodomy(homosexuality), lasciviousness, etc. We are all sinners.

> NONE of us are perfect by any means. A homosexual or not, we are all equal

> in the eyes of God. The difference is whether one come's to Christ or not.

And this is mightily off-topic. The question was whether nutrition

and/or exogenous hormones contribute to the differentiation of sexual

orientation. While I respect your religious views, I don't see how

they contribute anything to the subject being discussed or how they

are appropriate for the general topic of the list. (Note that I am

not a moderator but just expressing my opinion).

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

" kilroy " kilroy@... kilroy82us wrote:

http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html

Now

I know that some mental illness including depression has seen some help

with adopting a diet that takes out refined food and sugar and adds B

vitamins among other nutrients. I had a health book that went into

detail about that helping people with schizophrenia and bipolar

disorders. Could consumption of refined foods help the depression in

homosexual men increase? And I wonder if there is a link, like to

people with insulin resistance who crave high carbs. Reading about the

higher incidence of bulemia in homosexuals makes me wonder if they too

might be junk food addicts. I'm not saying high carbs would make

someone gay, but could it be something that not only contributes to the

depression but also to the behaviour in someone that is predisposed?

from Medical Issues

Homosexuality and Mental Health Problems

By N.E. Whitehead, Ph.D.

(Author of " My Genes Made Me Do It " )

said, " These studies

contain arguably the best published data on the association between

homosexuality and psychopathology, and both converge on the same

unhappy conclusion: homosexual people are at substantially higher risk

for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major

depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine

dependence...The strength of the new studies is their degree of

control. "

_______________

If this guy would get his head out of psychiatric abnormality and into

orthomolecular or neurotransmitters besides what pharmaceuticals do he'd see

that these individuals are individuals in that they're dominant brain

neurotransmitters are dopamine and acetylcholine vs. the majority of the

populations GABA and serotonin (aprox. 30 vs. 70% of population). He can maybe

control a study but he can't control anyone's genetic dominance yet. Working

with whatever is an individual's genetic dominance is makes more sense.

http://www.drugnatural.com/mm5/DrugNatural_Library/NutriNews/The_Edge_Effect.pdf

It amazes me that it is pc to get cancer, heart disease or anything physical and

anything mental or behavioral is like having a plague. On NPR month or so ago

was a story from a nurse about a patient of hers in his last days of terminal

cancer. He was happy for his family's concern with his cancer but also was

disappointed in that for years he suffered with insomnia, anxiety and depression

and they couldn't be bothered to support him then.

This is a general comment on the thread subject as the closest to a list

moderator here. If WAP were to describe to the so called primitives this

discussion who would be more primitive in tolerance? As a person of Native

American ancestry and an individual who despises oppression not only do I not

want to moderate this list any longer, I don't want to be anywhere including

here where the same narrowmindedness to human differences that destroyed Price's

groups is.

Wanita

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast

with the Search weather shortcut.

http://tools.search./shortcuts/#loc_weather

[Guest guest]

Wanita,

As members(my family) of the Cherokee nation, I understand your

feelings, and I am asking you to reconsider leaving this list. While

it is hard to read posts from those who have such different opinions,

especially expressed negatively to others, once people voice it,

others can point out other conflicting opinions. Even if the posters

don't change their attitudes, often others who read it will. We tend

to develop ideas by looking at all the alternatives, even extremes

and then weighing out something closer to the center that makes more

sense to us.

There have been arrows thrown from both sides of this thread,

especially when it gets off the subject of nutrition and onto social

issues, but most posts, especially the starting one are straight out

of trying to understand Price and Pottenger, and how their work and

subsequent work in science (I hope that is a broad enough subject)

helps improve our health as a human family (and the animals). And I

think that is what this board is about (I hope).

I, and I am sure others, appreciate the work you do as the current

monitor and hope you will reconsider. Thank you for your time and

your valuable input.

~Jan

>

> This is a general comment on the thread subject as the closest to a

list moderator here. If WAP were to describe to the so called

primitives this discussion who would be more primitive in tolerance?

As a person of Native American ancestry and an individual who

despises oppression not only do I not want to moderate this list any

longer, I don't want to be anywhere including here where the same

narrowmindedness to human differences that destroyed Price's groups

is.

>

> Wanita

[Guest guest]

" No it wouldn't. This would be a horrible and completely

intellectually dishonest way to interpret it. If the female had a

vagina, and the test subject's brain acted " more like a female, " would

you conclude that homosexual males must have vaginas? If so, you'd

run into difficulty positing the existence of homosexuality to begin

with. "

My take on that is the brain of most homosexuals want female parts, and then

have them surgically altered to be as close as the doctors can make them. There

are many women who don't feel feminine without large breasts. Just because they

don't have large breasts doesn't make them any more male. Some also will have

them surgically altered.

" Besides that, you stated in your own description of the study that

homosexuals were able to sense the pheremones of other homosexuals.

If they are more attracted to the pheremones of homosexual men than

those of straight men but heterosexual females are not, this would

also provide evidence that saying their mind works like a female's is

inaccurate. "

There are two types of humans in this world that I know of. Men and Women.

There are mutations of this such as women or men born with some opposite parts

or both sex organs but they are abnormal if male and female are considered the

norm.

So if a gay man's brain is more attracted to a gay male, and not a female, (I

don't remember if they were also attracted to a straight male, I think the

straight male wasn't attracted to the gay man), Then the brain is not total

male. The only alternative is that although it is not total female, when they

look at the female brain that shows response is the same area of the brain that

the gay shows a response, I would think that it shows that there is more female

in the gay guy's brain than would be in a straight man's brain.

> " What is your evidence that estrogen levels determine reactions to

> pheremones? Wouldn't it be much more direct evidence to show that gay

> men have higher estrogen levels? "

I'm wondering that myself. Which is why this discussion started. It would be

interesting to see if an increase in homosexuality started after the birth

control pill. I was hoping to see if anyone did have any data on estrogen and

homo's, because science can't undertake a cure for something when they don't

know how the problem started. And if gays don't really want to be gays, then

they should help with this study.

There are deaf people who refuse the ability to hear when medical intervention

might help. It is up to them if they want to hear or not. But those of us who

can hear, know what they are missing and think they are mistaken in not wanting

to try.

If the gays are telling the truth about not wanting to be gay, then those who

want to go straight need to help science to see if there is some way, whether

with hormones, or other methods to try and get them help.

Those that don't want to change don't have to. I just hope that those who don't

want to change don't stop those who do. Like I have seen on tv with the deaf

people. They have people who make them feel guilty for wanting a chance to

hear.

This subject as most medical subjects interested me, since being a woman, with

all our hormonal problems, I thought I might learn something as well in this

discussion. After all that is why we are all here to learn something that can

hopefully improve our lives.

You seem like a very intelligent person, and truly charged by this discussion.

Hopefully you can start delving into the possibilities of cures, by continuing

your researching this, whether by hormonal or something different, possibly

environment, upbringing, possible sexual molestation, to help those who want to

change.

Lorie

[Guest guest]

Jan,

> Ok I did: " Why don't you look at a few of them, see if you

> find support for the idea that estrogen could induce homosexuality, and

> report back to us " .

Great. This will be a good move forward.

> But MY position is not that estrogen could

> *induce* homosexuality, but that the level or balance of estrogen and

> other hormones *could* contribute to it – specifically in the

> pre-natal period.

I find it reasonable that it could make some contribution in utero,

though it could at best modulate other factors that create a

predisposition, given the percentages of fraternal and identical twins

who share sexual orientation. I don't know what evidence there is or

isn't for this, but it is certainly plausible, much in the way that

some environmental endocrine disruptors have been implicated in

affecting the male/female ratios. I did turn up in a brief stint on

pubmed an abstract suggesting that homosexual men were exposed to

greater testosterone in utero judging by finger length, though I'm not

quite sure how reliable a guage that is.

>I specifically objected to your condescending way of

> talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a connection. And,

> after doing some research it appears you missed some, so with an open

> mind you may want to review the following research.

I missed at least 98% of it because I have barely researched this at

all and never contended that I had done any serious research of it. I

don't think I've been condescending to anyone. All I've done is point

out severe lack of evidence or lack of willingness to gather any when

people have exhibited it.

> There are more than " just one shred of evidence " of the

> imbalance of hormones - both testosterone and Estradiol

> affecting the sexual orientation of people. While you were putting

> people down for among other things; " appeal to popular prejudice

> about hormones " , you must have failed to actually read the studies.

I stated very clearly that I read nothing more than a handful of

abstracts, and my criticisms of appeals to popular prejudice were

valid because that was the only thing anyone had presented. I did not

state that evidence did not exist, but rather that if someone is going

to argue that estrogens can cause or contribute to homosexuality

(whether prenatal or postnatal) then they should establish some

evidence that estrogen might be implicated rather than appealing to

the " it's obvious, of course hormones affect sexuality! " or the

" estrogen is a woman hormone and homosexual males are men who act like

women " lines of thought, which are not particularly logical or

science-based.

> > You stated " although one of them is a recent review that concluded

> > there was no good evidence for a consistent relationship between

> >hormones and homosexuality (don't know if the conclusion was valid or

> > not). "

> But apparently you did not read the rest of the article (printed below)

You are correct, I did not read it, which I stated repeatedly and

which is one of the primary reasons I didn't know whether the

conclusion was valid or not.

> which states: " Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which

> concentrated on differences in prenatal hormone levels (see Ellis &

> Ames, 1987). Many studies have shown that abnormal levels of some

> prenatal hormones can lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an

> individual "

I'm not sure if we're looking at the same review. The one you are

referring to as me having linked to but not read is here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus & list_uids=7560930 & query_hl=1 & itool=pubmed_docsum

The abstract concludes:

==========

Efforts to measure the estrogen feedback as an indication of brain

androgenization have produced inconsistent results. Studies of men and

women who experienced defect in hormone metabolism (i.e., CAH and

testicular feminization) have not found a concurrent increase in

homosexual behavior. Overall, the data do not support a causal

connection between hormones and human sexual orientation.

===========

The statement you quote does not appear to be in the full text of the

review, so this must be a different one. There is an entire section

reviewing the literature on prenatal hormone theories, and their

presentation of this evidence suggests that there is no convincing

evidence of a link.

> " For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously

> play a

> role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at least a

> half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital letters and

> asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several hundred

> studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a few of

> them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could induce

> homosexuality, and report back to us. "

> Did you actually READ those articles?

As I have stated repeatedly, no. I have not been arguing that there

is conclusive evidence that there is no hormone/homosexuality link,

but rather that if you are to argue one, you should use evidence and

logic rather than appealing to the pseudo-obviousness of the

possibility.

> I know you are usually a

> good researcher, but this was really obvious. I found these in the

> first page of results. Maybe there was something wrong with your search

> engine? Here are some of those studies and it's very clear that

> there IS a definite possibility, if not probability, that the level of

> hormones and the balance between testosterone and estradiol during

> pre-natal development *COULD* have an effect on sexual orientation. No

> one is saying it CAUSES homosexuality, only that it could contribute to

> it.

>Many

> studies have shown that abnormal levels of some prenatal hormones can

> lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an individual (e.g.

> Dörner et al. 1983, Money et al. 1984, Ehrhardt et al. 1985).

According to the review I cited, Dorner did experiments with rats

indicating that there was an in utero window of brain development

where the androgen/estrogen ratio was responsible for imprinting

gender on the brain.

The measurements of in utero hormone exposure that I believe this

review is referring to were actualy measurements of hormonal

adjustments to injected estrogen that were presumed to reflect the

relative " andronization " of the brain during embryonic development.

There were some major methodological problems with some of the

positive studies, including one by Dorner in which all of the

homosexuals were being treated for venereal disease and were not

matched to heterosexuals under the same circumstances and studies that

did not account for the possibility of HIV positivity which would

affect the hormonal response, and there were a number of studies that

contradicted the earlier positive results. Then, more evidence was

uncovered that the response to injected estrogen is not, in fact,

imprinted in utero at all, but is imprinted later in life, or at a

minimum the imprinting can be overridden later in life.

Money and Erhardt were not studying normal homosexuality, but were

studying whether or not homosexuality was increased among people with

prenatally based diseases that include testicular feminization from

androgen insensitivity and congenital adrenal hyperplasia syndrome in

females where a cortisol deficiency severely upregulates androgens.

The literature reviewed in the review I linked to above indcates that

the balance of these studies does not support a casusal role of

prental sex hormone exposure in homosexuality.

Even if it did based on these evidences, there would be no clear

application to normal homosexuality. These disorders produce breast

growth in males, masculinization of female genitalia, lack of breasts

in females, deep-pitched male voices. Even if the research

demonstrated a consistent increase in the rate of homosexuality in

these people that could be distinguished from the effect of the

experience of appearing hermaphroditic and being treated as such in

life, it wouldn't necessarily have any relevancy to the vast majority

of homosexuals who do not have these disorders.

By the way, the finger length study I cited, indicating higher in

utero exposure to testosterone in homosexual males contradicts

Dorner's theory pretty severely, though I have no idea if such a

pattern is or could be observed consistently (I uncover below actually

that it is not).

> Ellis and Ames (1987) have proposed a very comprehensive gestational

> neurohormonal theory of human sexual orientation, which deals with the

> genesis of heterosexuality as well as homosexuality. They propose that

> sexual orientation is primarily determined by the degree to which the

> nervous system is exposed to testosterone, estradiol, and to certain

> other sex hormones while neuro-organization is taking place,

> predominantly between the middle of the second and the end of the fifth

> month of gestation. According to this theory, " complex combinations of

> genetic, hormonal, neurological, and environmental factors operating

> prior to birth largely determine what an individual's (adult) sexual

> orientation will be. "

That's fine to propose a hypothesis; the question is whether it is

supported by evidence.

> This theory makes many testable predictions, e.g. that homosexuality

> should primarily be a male phenomenon, that homosexuals should have

> higher frequencies of other sexual inversions than heterosexuals, that

> relationships between parents and homosexual offspring may be strained

> and/or assume some cross-sex characteristics, and that homosexuality

> should reflect a significant degree of heritability (as hormone

> production and action is under significant genetic control). Such

> predictions seem to agree with previous research and general intuitions

> regarding homosexuality.

I was unaware that homosexuality was primarily a male phenomenon

(???). A more specific judge of this hypothesis than the degree of

heredity would probably be to what degree being a homosexual's

fraternal twin increases one's chance of being homosexual over being a

homosexual's brother. The fraternal twins would share the same

hormonal environment of the mother, to whatever extent the mother's

own production of hormones or exposure to dietary or environmental

estrogens would be a factor, though the paragraph below suggests that

the hormonal exposure is primarily a function of the fetus's genes.

I'm not sure how any of the predictions in this paragraph could be

construed to be specific supporters of the above hypothesis.

> In addition, as prenatal testosterone levels are of great importance

> according to the theory, and as, during the proposed critical period,

> intra-uterine testosterone is primarily of foetal, rather than maternal,

> origin, this theory could explain the observed differences in

> concordance rates for sexual orientation between monozygotic and

> dizygotic twins.

If this is true, it would flat-out contradict the hypothesis that

exogenous estrogens from environment or food would play a significant

role.

>According to such an explanation, the increased

> concordance in monozygotic twins is due to their greater similarity in

> prenatal hormone production (both in quantity and in timing) and hormone

> control; processes which are under significant genetic control.

That is consistent with the hypothesis, but is certainly not any

specific support for it. All it supports is a role for genetics.

It is ironic that you are using it in this context, since it argues

against a role for exogenous estrogens.

> Support for the gestational neurohormonal theory includes a recent study

> (LeVay, 1991) which reported a difference in hypothalamic structure

> between heterosexual and homosexual men, although Ellis and Ames warn

> that several decades of intense, further research may be required to

> adequately test the theory. "

So far there is one citation in the entire description of the theory,

and it merely shows a difference a difference in hypothalamic

structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Ok, so there is a

difference in brain physiology.

> " Research in Britain, America, and Germany has all confirmed that a

> prenatal exposure to deficiency of testosterone increases the likelihood

> of a man becoming homosexual. Men with an extra X chromosome and men

> exposed in the womb to female hormones are more likely to be gay or

> effeminate, and effeminate boys do indeed grow up to be gay more often

> than other boys.

Jafa claimed the opposite yesterday, and there's no citation here, so

I'll remain agnostic for now as to whether 47, XXY males have higher

rates of homosexuality or not.

> " Yalom et al. (1973) studied 20 16-year old boys of diabetic mothers,

> who had received estrogen or progesterone during pregnancy. These boys

> showed less heterosexuality and less masculinity than 20 control boys.

Control boys from diabetic mothers? Was there a difference between

estrogen treatment and progesterone treatment?

> Women exposed prenatally via their pregnant mothers to

> diethylstilbestrol (DES, a synthetic nonsteroidal estrogen with

> masculinizing effects in female mammals) received higher ratings of

> homosexual behavior (Ehrhardt et al., 1985) "

I agree this, if correct, would support the estrogen link.

> " Indications are that sex orientation in humans depends critically

> upon the hormone balance prevailing during the third and fourth months

> of pregnancy, while secondary sex characteristics and sex-typical

> behaviour patterns are influenced more by hormones circulating during

> the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy. If the hormone balance changes

> from one phase of foetal development to the next, inconsistencies

> between sexual orientation and sex-role behaviour may be observed. Sex

> orientation is fixed relatively early in the old 'limbic' part of the

> brain, whereas sex-role behaviours are laid down later on in pregnancy

> in more diverse, 'newer' parts of the brain. "

There's an awfully high text-to-citation ratio in these articles.

> " Larkin's team also found that the hypothalamic region had a rich

> supply of the enzyme aromatase, which converts testosterone into

> oestrogen. It is in this form that the hormone interacts with the brain.

> This may help support one theory that sexual orientation, in part at

> least, may be related to the hormones present during fetal development,

> says Balthazart. "

What? The fact that the hypothalamus expresses aromatase supports the

theory that estrogen in fetal development contributes to sexual

orientation? I'm a bit lost.

> " I believe there are many social and psychological, as well as

> biological, factors that make up sexual preference. " ... " Having said

> that, these data do suggest that there are some people in the world who

> are gay because of fetal androgen levels. " - Marc Breedlove, professor

> of psychology

What is the " these data " that he is referring to?

> " The hormonal theory of sexuality holds that, just as exposure to

> certain hormones plays a role in fetal sex differentiation

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differentiation> , such exposure also

> influences the sexual orientation

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation> that emerges later in

> the adult. Fetal hormones may be seen as the primary determiner of adult

> sexual orientation, or a co-factor with genes and/or environmental and

> social conditions. "

Another link describing a theory with no evidence.

> Chris-think about these studies, and then please think about how you

> have responded to people who simply wanted to consider these

> possibilities. You've really hurt some feelings, on both boards and

> I think very un-necessarily in light of the research.

I think I've been entirely fair. I certainly didn't mean to hurt

anyone. To whatever extent I did without meaning to, I apologize. I'm

glad you decided to pull up some research. I think it's a start on

the discussion, and I think it was a fair way to respond to my

likewise fair point that the estrogen-->homosexuality link was

completely unsubstantiated.

It doesn't seem as if the articles that you provided were very well

substantiated (except the diabetic and DES studies), though I find it

interesting that the major theory highlighted in them indicated that

the prenatal hormone exposure was primarily endogenous to the fetus

and was dependent on the fetal genes.

A few snippets of things I see from browsing abstracts AND NOT

THOROUGHLY RESEARCHING:

============

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus & list_uids=16143171 & query_hl=9 & itool=pubmed_docsum

Further evidence demonstrates a role for prenatal sex hormones which

may influence the development of a putative network of

sexual-orientation-related neural substrates. However, hormonal

effects are often inconsistent and investigations rely heavily on

'proxy markers'. A consistent fraternal birth order effect in male

sexual orientation also provides support for a model of maternal

immunization processes affecting prenatal sexual differentiation. The

notion that non-heterosexual preferences may reflect generalized

neurodevelopmental perturbations is not supported by available data.

These current theories have left little room for learning models of

sexual orientation. Future investigations, across the neurosciences,

should focus to elucidate the fundamental neural architecture

underlying the target-specific direction of human sexual orientation,

and their antecedents in developmental neurobiology.

=================

===============

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus & list_uids=16174346 & query_hl=9 & itool=pubmed_docsum

Male bisexuals also are interpreted to have been exposed to high

prenatal testosterone levels. But (for reasons similar to those

outlined above in regard to butch lesbians) it is unclear whether

these have a direct prenatal effect on the brain or whether they are

precursors of high postnatal testosterone levels, which are associated

with male bisexual orientation by promoting sensation-seeking

behaviour.

===============

The study I mentioned before about finger digits and prenatal

testosterone level might not have much value:

==============

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus & list_uids=15971017 & query_hl=9 & itool=pubmed_docsum

Five studies have examined the relationship between sexual orientation

and the relative lengths of the 2nd and 4th fingers (the 2D:4D ratio).

Although differences have commonly been found between heterosexuals

and homosexuals, the direction of the difference has not been

consistent across studies. The original data from all five studies

were reanalyzed in a search for possible explanations of the

discrepancies. Because ethnicity is known to affect the 2D:4D ratio,

the reanalysis focused on participants who identified themselves as

White or Caucasian, the ethnic group that was most numerous in all of

the studies. Age differences did not account for the discrepancies.

Differences in variability within different groups were minor. One

interesting result to emerge from the reanalysis was that the 2D:4D

ratios for the homosexual groups were relatively similar across

studies. It was the 2D:4D values for the heterosexual participants

that varied most, particularly between the USA and the British

studies, and these were responsible for many of the discrepancies in

the conclusions across studies. The constancy of the 2D:4D ratio for

the White homosexuals did not appear to extend to homosexuals of three

other ethnicities, and there were also subpopulation differences

related to right or left hands.

========

Political correctness not withstanding, folks are studying the effect

of prenatal exposure to soy phytoestrogens on male sexual behavior in

quails:

======

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus & list_uids=17274996 & query_hl=16 & itool=pubmed_docsum

======

They found a decrease in various forms of copulatory behavior with

exposure to genistein (injected into the egg), but do not describe

observing any homosexuality.

Apparently " orquiectomy " (castration?) and estrogen treatment can

induce homosexuality in male rats:

=====

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=Abstra\

ctPlus & list_uids=17016704 & query_hl=9 & itool=pubmed_docsum

After this, they were orquiectomized and homosexual hormone-induced

behavior was observed at 45 and 60 days of the treatment.

=======

However, the obvious lack of any evidence that typical homosexuals

have high estrogens and low androgens (and are obviously not

castrated) doesn't make for a good analogy between human homosexuality

and this phenomenon.

I'm glad this discussion is moving towards an evidence-based approach.

Overall, however, it seems like there is little if any substantiation

for the theory that high exposure to estrogens or low exposure to

androgens makes an important contribution to male homosexuality and

if, as the article you cited states, androgen level is primarily

determined by the fetal genes rather than the maternal environment,

that would argue further against the exogenous estrogen theory.

However, you do cite two studies indicating that exposure to hormone

treatments can increase homosexuality rates. I'm not sure how much we

can read into the diabetic study, and I have not read either of them

myself. They may offer some substantiation for the prenatal estrogen

theory, as small a start as it is. I'll try to look at them at some

point.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

I dunno, do you think it

would be possible not to bring religion into this

forum? I'd certainly appreciate it.

thanks.

-Lovely

>

> (I like that name, my middle name is )

> Celibacy, a Roman Catholic doctrine, is not in Scripture.

Yes, some men like have a gift in which they remain unmarried to

accomplish what the Lord wanted him to do. was married. There

are verses in the gospels where Jesus heals 's mother-in-law.

But NO man is forbidden in Scripture to NOT marry. Thats false

doctrine.

>

>

>

>

> Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@...> wrote:

> On 2/16/07, jesusfirst369 <jesusfirst369@...> wrote:

>

> > Why are you so touchy and protective of homosexuality? Are you

> > protective of your own sexual orientation? But IT IS COMMON SENSE

> > that sex is meant between a man and a woman. If we all

went " homo " ,

> > our species would die off. It is abnormal because if we all did

it we

> > COULDN'T REPRODUCE. One man, one woman, the perfect fit.

>

> Our species would die out if we all became celibate priests too.

> Didn't St. wish that all could be chaste, but allowed that

> marriage was good, to save them from burning with passion?

>

> Chris

> --

> The Truth About Cholesterol

> Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

>

>

>

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Everyone is raving about the all-new beta.

>

>

[Guest guest]

i personally think you have been very honest

and not condescending at all. In fact one of the few

that hasnt completely freaked out in one way or another.

I have never since being a member seen such an explosion

on this site.

I personaly feel no subject should be off limits for discussion

as long as we dont bring religion or politics into it and

research it scientifically.

Though some of the actions of a few on here have made me

seriously consider leaving the group.

-Lovely

>

> > Ok I did: " Why don't you look at a few of them, see if you

> > find support for the idea that estrogen could induce

homosexuality, and

> > report back to us " .

>

> Great. This will be a good move forward.

>

> > But MY position is not that estrogen could

> > *induce* homosexuality, but that the level or balance of estrogen

and

> > other hormones *could* contribute to it – specifically in the

> > pre-natal period.

>

> I find it reasonable that it could make some contribution in utero,

> though it could at best modulate other factors that create a

> predisposition, given the percentages of fraternal and identical

twins

> who share sexual orientation. I don't know what evidence there is

or

> isn't for this, but it is certainly plausible, much in the way that

> some environmental endocrine disruptors have been implicated in

> affecting the male/female ratios. I did turn up in a brief stint on

> pubmed an abstract suggesting that homosexual men were exposed to

> greater testosterone in utero judging by finger length, though I'm

not

> quite sure how reliable a guage that is.

>

> >I specifically objected to your condescending way of

> > talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a

connection. And,

> > after doing some research it appears you missed some, so with an

open

> > mind you may want to review the following research.

>

> I missed at least 98% of it because I have barely researched this at

> all and never contended that I had done any serious research of

it. I

> don't think I've been condescending to anyone. All I've done is

point

> out severe lack of evidence or lack of willingness to gather any

when

> people have exhibited it.

>

>

> > There are more than " just one shred of evidence " of the

> > imbalance of hormones - both testosterone and Estradiol

> > affecting the sexual orientation of people. While you were

putting

> > people down for among other things; " appeal to popular prejudice

> > about hormones " , you must have failed to actually read the

studies.

>

> I stated very clearly that I read nothing more than a handful of

> abstracts, and my criticisms of appeals to popular prejudice were

> valid because that was the only thing anyone had presented. I did

not

> state that evidence did not exist, but rather that if someone is

going

> to argue that estrogens can cause or contribute to homosexuality

> (whether prenatal or postnatal) then they should establish some

> evidence that estrogen might be implicated rather than appealing to

> the " it's obvious, of course hormones affect sexuality! " or the

> " estrogen is a woman hormone and homosexual males are men who act

like

> women " lines of thought, which are not particularly logical or

> science-based.

>

>

> > > You stated " although one of them is a recent review that

concluded

> > > there was no good evidence for a consistent relationship between

> > >hormones and homosexuality (don't know if the conclusion was

valid or

> > > not). "

>

> > But apparently you did not read the rest of the article (printed

below)

>

> You are correct, I did not read it, which I stated repeatedly and

> which is one of the primary reasons I didn't know whether the

> conclusion was valid or not.

>

>

> > which states: " Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which

> > concentrated on differences in prenatal hormone levels (see Ellis

&

> > Ames, 1987). Many studies have shown that abnormal levels of some

> > prenatal hormones can lead to an increased chance of

homosexuality in an

> > individual "

>

> I'm not sure if we're looking at the same review. The one you are

> referring to as me having linked to but not read is here:

>

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=7560930 & query_hl=1 &

itool=pubmed_docsum

>

> The abstract concludes:

>

> ==========

> Efforts to measure the estrogen feedback as an indication of brain

> androgenization have produced inconsistent results. Studies of men

and

> women who experienced defect in hormone metabolism (i.e., CAH and

> testicular feminization) have not found a concurrent increase in

> homosexual behavior. Overall, the data do not support a causal

> connection between hormones and human sexual orientation.

> ===========

>

> The statement you quote does not appear to be in the full text of

the

> review, so this must be a different one. There is an entire section

> reviewing the literature on prenatal hormone theories, and their

> presentation of this evidence suggests that there is no convincing

> evidence of a link.

>

>

> > " For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously

> > play a

> > role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> > political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> > connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at

least a

> > half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital letters

and

> > asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several

hundred

> > studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a

few of

> > them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could

induce

> > homosexuality, and report back to us. "

>

> > Did you actually READ those articles?

>

> As I have stated repeatedly, no. I have not been arguing that there

> is conclusive evidence that there is no hormone/homosexuality link,

> but rather that if you are to argue one, you should use evidence and

> logic rather than appealing to the pseudo-obviousness of the

> possibility.

>

> > I know you are usually a

> > good researcher, but this was really obvious. I found these in

the

> > first page of results. Maybe there was something wrong with your

search

> > engine? Here are some of those studies and it's very clear that

> > there IS a definite possibility, if not probability, that the

level of

> > hormones and the balance between testosterone and estradiol during

> > pre-natal development *COULD* have an effect on sexual

orientation. No

> > one is saying it CAUSES homosexuality, only that it could

contribute to

> > it.

>

> >Many

> > studies have shown that abnormal levels of some prenatal hormones

can

> > lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an individual

(e.g.

> > Dörner et al. 1983, Money et al. 1984, Ehrhardt et al. 1985).

>

> According to the review I cited, Dorner did experiments with rats

> indicating that there was an in utero window of brain development

> where the androgen/estrogen ratio was responsible for imprinting

> gender on the brain.

>

> The measurements of in utero hormone exposure that I believe this

> review is referring to were actualy measurements of hormonal

> adjustments to injected estrogen that were presumed to reflect the

> relative " andronization " of the brain during embryonic development.

> There were some major methodological problems with some of the

> positive studies, including one by Dorner in which all of the

> homosexuals were being treated for venereal disease and were not

> matched to heterosexuals under the same circumstances and studies

that

> did not account for the possibility of HIV positivity which would

> affect the hormonal response, and there were a number of studies

that

> contradicted the earlier positive results. Then, more evidence was

> uncovered that the response to injected estrogen is not, in fact,

> imprinted in utero at all, but is imprinted later in life, or at a

> minimum the imprinting can be overridden later in life.

>

> Money and Erhardt were not studying normal homosexuality, but were

> studying whether or not homosexuality was increased among people

with

> prenatally based diseases that include testicular feminization from

> androgen insensitivity and congenital adrenal hyperplasia syndrome

in

> females where a cortisol deficiency severely upregulates androgens.

> The literature reviewed in the review I linked to above indcates

that

> the balance of these studies does not support a casusal role of

> prental sex hormone exposure in homosexuality.

>

> Even if it did based on these evidences, there would be no clear

> application to normal homosexuality. These disorders produce breast

> growth in males, masculinization of female genitalia, lack of

breasts

> in females, deep-pitched male voices. Even if the research

> demonstrated a consistent increase in the rate of homosexuality in

> these people that could be distinguished from the effect of the

> experience of appearing hermaphroditic and being treated as such in

> life, it wouldn't necessarily have any relevancy to the vast

majority

> of homosexuals who do not have these disorders.

>

> By the way, the finger length study I cited, indicating higher in

> utero exposure to testosterone in homosexual males contradicts

> Dorner's theory pretty severely, though I have no idea if such a

> pattern is or could be observed consistently (I uncover below

actually

> that it is not).

>

> > Ellis and Ames (1987) have proposed a very comprehensive

gestational

> > neurohormonal theory of human sexual orientation, which deals

with the

> > genesis of heterosexuality as well as homosexuality. They propose

that

> > sexual orientation is primarily determined by the degree to which

the

> > nervous system is exposed to testosterone, estradiol, and to

certain

> > other sex hormones while neuro-organization is taking place,

> > predominantly between the middle of the second and the end of the

fifth

> > month of gestation. According to this theory, " complex

combinations of

> > genetic, hormonal, neurological, and environmental factors

operating

> > prior to birth largely determine what an individual's (adult)

sexual

> > orientation will be. "

>

> That's fine to propose a hypothesis; the question is whether it is

> supported by evidence.

>

> > This theory makes many testable predictions, e.g. that

homosexuality

> > should primarily be a male phenomenon, that homosexuals should

have

> > higher frequencies of other sexual inversions than heterosexuals,

that

> > relationships between parents and homosexual offspring may be

strained

> > and/or assume some cross-sex characteristics, and that

homosexuality

> > should reflect a significant degree of heritability (as hormone

> > production and action is under significant genetic control). Such

> > predictions seem to agree with previous research and general

intuitions

> > regarding homosexuality.

>

> I was unaware that homosexuality was primarily a male phenomenon

> (???). A more specific judge of this hypothesis than the degree of

> heredity would probably be to what degree being a homosexual's

> fraternal twin increases one's chance of being homosexual over

being a

> homosexual's brother. The fraternal twins would share the same

> hormonal environment of the mother, to whatever extent the mother's

> own production of hormones or exposure to dietary or environmental

> estrogens would be a factor, though the paragraph below suggests

that

> the hormonal exposure is primarily a function of the fetus's genes.

> I'm not sure how any of the predictions in this paragraph could be

> construed to be specific supporters of the above hypothesis.

>

>

> > In addition, as prenatal testosterone levels are of great

importance

> > according to the theory, and as, during the proposed critical

period,

> > intra-uterine testosterone is primarily of foetal, rather than

maternal,

> > origin, this theory could explain the observed differences in

> > concordance rates for sexual orientation between monozygotic and

> > dizygotic twins.

>

> If this is true, it would flat-out contradict the hypothesis that

> exogenous estrogens from environment or food would play a

significant

> role.

>

> >According to such an explanation, the increased

> > concordance in monozygotic twins is due to their greater

similarity in

> > prenatal hormone production (both in quantity and in timing) and

hormone

> > control; processes which are under significant genetic control.

>

> That is consistent with the hypothesis, but is certainly not any

> specific support for it. All it supports is a role for genetics.

>

> It is ironic that you are using it in this context, since it argues

> against a role for exogenous estrogens.

>

> > Support for the gestational neurohormonal theory includes a

recent study

> > (LeVay, 1991) which reported a difference in hypothalamic

structure

> > between heterosexual and homosexual men, although Ellis and Ames

warn

> > that several decades of intense, further research may be required

to

> > adequately test the theory. "

>

> So far there is one citation in the entire description of the

theory,

> and it merely shows a difference a difference in hypothalamic

> structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Ok, so there is

a

> difference in brain physiology.

>

> > " Research in Britain, America, and Germany has all confirmed that

a

> > prenatal exposure to deficiency of testosterone increases the

likelihood

> > of a man becoming homosexual. Men with an extra X chromosome and

men

> > exposed in the womb to female hormones are more likely to be gay

or

> > effeminate, and effeminate boys do indeed grow up to be gay more

often

> > than other boys.

>

> Jafa claimed the opposite yesterday, and there's no citation here,

so

> I'll remain agnostic for now as to whether 47, XXY males have higher

> rates of homosexuality or not.

>

> > " Yalom et al. (1973) studied 20 16-year old boys of diabetic

mothers,

> > who had received estrogen or progesterone during pregnancy. These

boys

> > showed less heterosexuality and less masculinity than 20 control

boys.

>

> Control boys from diabetic mothers? Was there a difference between

> estrogen treatment and progesterone treatment?

>

> > Women exposed prenatally via their pregnant mothers to

> > diethylstilbestrol (DES, a synthetic nonsteroidal estrogen with

> > masculinizing effects in female mammals) received higher ratings

of

> > homosexual behavior (Ehrhardt et al., 1985) "

>

> I agree this, if correct, would support the estrogen link.

>

> > " Indications are that sex orientation in humans depends critically

> > upon the hormone balance prevailing during the third and fourth

months

> > of pregnancy, while secondary sex characteristics and sex-typical

> > behaviour patterns are influenced more by hormones circulating

during

> > the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy. If the hormone balance

changes

> > from one phase of foetal development to the next, inconsistencies

> > between sexual orientation and sex-role behaviour may be

observed. Sex

> > orientation is fixed relatively early in the old 'limbic' part of

the

> > brain, whereas sex-role behaviours are laid down later on in

pregnancy

> > in more diverse, 'newer' parts of the brain. "

>

> There's an awfully high text-to-citation ratio in these articles.

>

> > " Larkin's team also found that the hypothalamic region had a rich

> > supply of the enzyme aromatase, which converts testosterone into

> > oestrogen. It is in this form that the hormone interacts with the

brain.

> > This may help support one theory that sexual orientation, in part

at

> > least, may be related to the hormones present during fetal

development,

> > says Balthazart. "

>

> What? The fact that the hypothalamus expresses aromatase supports

the

> theory that estrogen in fetal development contributes to sexual

> orientation? I'm a bit lost.

>

> > " I believe there are many social and psychological, as well as

> > biological, factors that make up sexual preference. " ... " Having

said

> > that, these data do suggest that there are some people in the

world who

> > are gay because of fetal androgen levels. " - Marc Breedlove,

professor

> > of psychology

>

> What is the " these data " that he is referring to?

>

>

> > " The hormonal theory of sexuality holds that, just as exposure to

> > certain hormones plays a role in fetal sex differentiation

> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differentiation> , such

exposure also

> > influences the sexual orientation

> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation> that emerges

later in

> > the adult. Fetal hormones may be seen as the primary determiner

of adult

> > sexual orientation, or a co-factor with genes and/or

environmental and

> > social conditions. "

>

> Another link describing a theory with no evidence.

>

> > Chris-think about these studies, and then please think about how

you

> > have responded to people who simply wanted to consider these

> > possibilities. You've really hurt some feelings, on both boards

and

> > I think very un-necessarily in light of the research.

>

> I think I've been entirely fair. I certainly didn't mean to hurt

> anyone. To whatever extent I did without meaning to, I apologize.

I'm

> glad you decided to pull up some research. I think it's a start on

> the discussion, and I think it was a fair way to respond to my

> likewise fair point that the estrogen-->homosexuality link was

> completely unsubstantiated.

>

> It doesn't seem as if the articles that you provided were very well

> substantiated (except the diabetic and DES studies), though I find

it

> interesting that the major theory highlighted in them indicated that

> the prenatal hormone exposure was primarily endogenous to the fetus

> and was dependent on the fetal genes.

>

> A few snippets of things I see from browsing abstracts AND NOT

> THOROUGHLY RESEARCHING:

>

> ============

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=16143171 & query_hl=9

& itool=pubmed_docsum

>

> Further evidence demonstrates a role for prenatal sex hormones

which

> may influence the development of a putative network of

> sexual-orientation-related neural substrates. However, hormonal

> effects are often inconsistent and investigations rely heavily on

> 'proxy markers'. A consistent fraternal birth order effect in male

> sexual orientation also provides support for a model of maternal

> immunization processes affecting prenatal sexual differentiation.

The

> notion that non-heterosexual preferences may reflect generalized

> neurodevelopmental perturbations is not supported by available data.

> These current theories have left little room for learning models of

> sexual orientation. Future investigations, across the neurosciences,

> should focus to elucidate the fundamental neural architecture

> underlying the target-specific direction of human sexual

orientation,

> and their antecedents in developmental neurobiology.

> =================

>

>

> ===============

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=16174346 & query_hl=9

& itool=pubmed_docsum

>

> Male bisexuals also are interpreted to have been exposed to high

> prenatal testosterone levels. But (for reasons similar to those

> outlined above in regard to butch lesbians) it is unclear whether

> these have a direct prenatal effect on the brain or whether they are

> precursors of high postnatal testosterone levels, which are

associated

> with male bisexual orientation by promoting sensation-seeking

> behaviour.

> ===============

>

> The study I mentioned before about finger digits and prenatal

> testosterone level might not have much value:

>

> ==============

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=15971017 & query_hl=9

& itool=pubmed_docsum

>

> Five studies have examined the relationship between sexual

orientation

> and the relative lengths of the 2nd and 4th fingers (the 2D:4D

ratio).

> Although differences have commonly been found between heterosexuals

> and homosexuals, the direction of the difference has not been

> consistent across studies. The original data from all five studies

> were reanalyzed in a search for possible explanations of the

> discrepancies. Because ethnicity is known to affect the 2D:4D ratio,

> the reanalysis focused on participants who identified themselves as

> White or Caucasian, the ethnic group that was most numerous in all

of

> the studies. Age differences did not account for the discrepancies.

> Differences in variability within different groups were minor. One

> interesting result to emerge from the reanalysis was that the 2D:4D

> ratios for the homosexual groups were relatively similar across

> studies. It was the 2D:4D values for the heterosexual participants

> that varied most, particularly between the USA and the British

> studies, and these were responsible for many of the discrepancies in

> the conclusions across studies. The constancy of the 2D:4D ratio for

> the White homosexuals did not appear to extend to homosexuals of

three

> other ethnicities, and there were also subpopulation differences

> related to right or left hands.

> ========

>

> Political correctness not withstanding, folks are studying the

effect

> of prenatal exposure to soy phytoestrogens on male sexual behavior

in

> quails:

>

> ======

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=17274996 & query_hl=1

6 & itool=pubmed_docsum

> ======

>

> They found a decrease in various forms of copulatory behavior with

> exposure to genistein (injected into the egg), but do not describe

> observing any homosexuality.

>

> Apparently " orquiectomy " (castration?) and estrogen treatment can

> induce homosexuality in male rats:

>

> =====

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=17016704 & query_hl=9

& itool=pubmed_docsum

>

> After this, they were orquiectomized and homosexual hormone-induced

> behavior was observed at 45 and 60 days of the treatment.

> =======

>

> However, the obvious lack of any evidence that typical homosexuals

> have high estrogens and low androgens (and are obviously not

> castrated) doesn't make for a good analogy between human

homosexuality

> and this phenomenon.

>

> I'm glad this discussion is moving towards an evidence-based

approach.

> Overall, however, it seems like there is little if any

substantiation

> for the theory that high exposure to estrogens or low exposure to

> androgens makes an important contribution to male homosexuality and

> if, as the article you cited states, androgen level is primarily

> determined by the fetal genes rather than the maternal environment,

> that would argue further against the exogenous estrogen theory.

> However, you do cite two studies indicating that exposure to hormone

> treatments can increase homosexuality rates. I'm not sure how much

we

> can read into the diabetic study, and I have not read either of them

> myself. They may offer some substantiation for the prenatal

estrogen

> theory, as small a start as it is. I'll try to look at them at some

> point.

>

> Chris

> --

> The Truth About Cholesterol

> Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

>

[Guest guest]

This is from www.healthnewsflash.com. regarding Kleinfelders Syndrome.

jafa

Sexuality The parents of XXY boys are sometimes concerned that their sons may

grow up to be homosexual. This concern is unfounded, however, as there is no

evidence that XXY males are any more inclined toward homosexuality than are

other men.

In fact, the only significant sexual difference between XXY men and teenagers

and other males their age is that the XXY males may have less interest in sex.

However, regular injections of the male sex hormone testosterone can bring sex

drive up to normal levels.

In some cases, testosterone injections lead to a false sense of security:

After receiving the hormone for a time, XXY males may conclude they've derived

as much benefit from it as possible and discontinue the injections. But when

they do, their interest in sex almost invariably diminishes until they resume

the injections.

---------------------------------

Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.

Try the free Beta.

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your response. Keep in mind that I did not do the

research or write any of the conclusions in each review I sited. I also

did not bring up the argument that estrogens even *could* contribute to

homosexuality, but only supported the idea when it was posted and others

felt it was wrong to even discuss it; and that we shouldn't keep the

argument off a board, when presented, with cited research (which it was

in the original article long ago). I also feel we should try to keep

the emotionalism down and try to stay to discussions on the science.

I do agree that it seemed " intuitive " to me though and I am glad we

finally got this research on the board. I agree that intuitive is not

always correct, and you are right to point that out, but it was not

based on *popular prejudices*, as the idea had been suggested by

research, even if you (or I) later disagree with the research.

I also feel you were right to point out a fallacy in " observing "

increases in various populations. I agree completely with you on that

(much earlier) point.

I hope you see that others also do research, and that often various

research contradicts each other. How one tests, what they were actually

looking for, what the variables were, etc. can lead to widely differing

results, and of course the interpretations of these results are also

suspect.

Please remember, on a board we only see the words, no kind smiles, or

twinkle in an eye. I am sure you feel very passionate about things,

and often you are called on the table to defend unpopular views, but on

these boards, most of us are honestly just trying to learn, as you are.

You have helped many people with your research, but you could soften

your response to people and still make your point.

In regards to this thread, I feel the current state of research leaves

us close enough in agreement.

Sincerely,

Jan

>

> Jan,

>

> > Ok I did: " Why don't you look at a few of them, see if you

> > find support for the idea that estrogen could induce homosexuality,

and

> > report back to us " .

>

> Great. This will be a good move forward.

>

> > But MY position is not that estrogen could

> > *induce* homosexuality, but that the level or balance of estrogen

and

> > other hormones *could* contribute to it – specifically in the

> > pre-natal period.

>

> I find it reasonable that it could make some contribution in utero,

> though it could at best modulate other factors that create a

> predisposition, given the percentages of fraternal and identical twins

> who share sexual orientation. I don't know what evidence there is or

> isn't for this, but it is certainly plausible, much in the way that

> some environmental endocrine disruptors have been implicated in

> affecting the male/female ratios. I did turn up in a brief stint on

> pubmed an abstract suggesting that homosexual men were exposed to

> greater testosterone in utero judging by finger length, though I'm not

> quite sure how reliable a guage that is.

>

> >I specifically objected to your condescending way of

> > talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a connection.

And,

> > after doing some research it appears you missed some, so with an

open

> > mind you may want to review the following research.

>

> I missed at least 98% of it because I have barely researched this at

> all and never contended that I had done any serious research of it. I

> don't think I've been condescending to anyone. All I've done is point

> out severe lack of evidence or lack of willingness to gather any when

> people have exhibited it.

>

>

> > There are more than " just one shred of evidence " of the

> > imbalance of hormones - both testosterone and Estradiol

> > affecting the sexual orientation of people. While you were putting

> > people down for among other things; " appeal to popular prejudice

> > about hormones " , you must have failed to actually read the studies.

>

> I stated very clearly that I read nothing more than a handful of

> abstracts, and my criticisms of appeals to popular prejudice were

> valid because that was the only thing anyone had presented. I did not

> state that evidence did not exist, but rather that if someone is going

> to argue that estrogens can cause or contribute to homosexuality

> (whether prenatal or postnatal) then they should establish some

> evidence that estrogen might be implicated rather than appealing to

> the " it's obvious, of course hormones affect sexuality! " or the

> " estrogen is a woman hormone and homosexual males are men who act like

> women " lines of thought, which are not particularly logical or

> science-based.

> ....

> ....

> I'm glad this discussion is moving towards an evidence-based approach.

> Overall, however, it seems like there is little if any substantiation

> for the theory that high exposure to estrogens or low exposure to

> androgens makes an important contribution to male homosexuality and

> if, as the article you cited states, androgen level is primarily

> determined by the fetal genes rather than the maternal environment,

> that would argue further against the exogenous estrogen theory.

> However, you do cite two studies indicating that exposure to hormone

> treatments can increase homosexuality rates. I'm not sure how much we

> can read into the diabetic study, and I have not read either of them

> myself. They may offer some substantiation for the prenatal estrogen

> theory, as small a start as it is. I'll try to look at them at some

> point.

>

> Chris

> --

> The Truth About Cholesterol

> Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

>

[Guest guest]

> My take on that is the brain of most homosexuals want female

> parts, and then have them surgically altered to be as close as

> the doctors can make them. There are many women who don't feel

> feminine without large breasts. Just because they don't have

> large breasts doesn't make them any more male. Some also will

> have them surgically altered.

I think what you're saying there is that most homosexuals have gender

identity disorder, and I don't think there's any evidence to support

that. If the photos in the ads and articles of gay magazines like Out

and The Advocate are any indication, the brains of most homosexual men

want athletic male bodies. Pictures from the gay party circuit show

crowds of shirtless men with ripped abs and well defined pecs. Another

huge " body culture " among gay men is the bear phenomenon, which is all

about having and desiring hairy masculine bodies. Even most of the

drag queens I've met were just average gay guys when not performing;

in the two years I spent immersed in gay bar culture, I only met one

drag queen who identifies and lives as a female.

[Guest guest]

,

Since I'm not gay, the only information I am getting is from the media. And

maybe they are slanted. Usually the only time they have something on the tv is

to show reconstructive surgery to make males more female or vice versa, the man

who was molested by another man and thinks that is why he turned gay, dominent

mother, weak father image, and things of that nature. I know I am in over my

head on this one, and you have to realize I am coming from a heterosexual point

of view.

I was more interested in the way the hormones might affect the body, brain

included, and how if there was some way to help those who want to change, there

might be an avenue to try, such as hormones, diet, etc. Having had high

testosterone and the aggressive tendencies that gave me, I would have to think

that estrogen might give a male more female tendencies.

Most of the gay men I see on tv, whether in sitcoms or on the news tend to

portray the more feminine types, with thier speech and actions, than a more

manly type. And I think the fitness craze and the constant bombarding of

beautiful bodies we see on tv has boosted those body styles that cross all

sexual boundries. Back in my day you never saw a woman body builder. Times are

changing and I still wonder if it's chance or something we are ingesting.

Lorie

[Guest guest]

Ishtar,

> i personally think you have been very honest

> and not condescending at all. In fact one of the few

> that hasnt completely freaked out in one way or another.

Thank you.

> Though some of the actions of a few on here have made me

> seriously consider leaving the group.

This will blow over quickly. We have occasional heated discussions

and they inevitably disappear and take up a small percentage of the

list space over time. This one has been a little out of hand in a few

posts, but I don't envision that part of it continuing long. I hope

you stay.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Lorie,

[Regarding the conclusion that male homosexuality is estrogenic

because it is similar to female sexuality and females have higher

levels of estrogen, I had written:]

> " No it wouldn't. This would be a horrible and completely

> intellectually dishonest way to interpret it. If the female had a

> vagina, and the test subject's brain acted " more like a female, " would

> you conclude that homosexual males must have vaginas? If so, you'd

> run into difficulty positing the existence of homosexuality to begin

> with. "

[To which Lorie responded:]

> My take on that is the brain of most homosexuals want female parts, and

> then have them surgically altered to be as close as the doctors can make

> them. There are many women who don't feel feminine without large breasts.

> Just because they don't have large breasts doesn't make them any more male.

> Some also will have them surgically altered.

The definition of a homosexual is someone who is attracted to the same

sex. You are describing transsexuals, who wish to change their sex

and do so surgically. Homosexuals do not surgically alter their sex.

Homosexual men generally do not have breasts and do not want them.

Men who are overexposed to estrogen do develop breasts, though do not

to my knowledge become homosexual.

I think we need to back up a bit because we're miscommunicating.

You argued that because homosexual men respond to pheremones closer to

the way heterosexual women do than the way heterosexual men do, and

that because women have high estrogen, that estrogen must cause

homosexuality.

I pointed out that this is not valid, and that if estrogen were

causing male homosexuality, male homosexuals would simply have higher

estrogen levels, and they do not.

In the above paragraph, I am giving an example of why it is invalid to

make the conclusion about estrogen you made. The fact that

heterosexual women have high estrogen and are attracted to men does

not show that estrogen is causing that attraction any more than the

fact that firemen are usually found around fires shows that firemen

cause fires. I used the vagina as an example of something else that

women also have that homosexual men do not have, but I could as easily

have used anything else that women might have to make the point -- the

mere fact that they have estrogen does not show that estrogen causes

their sexual attraction.

The most critical point here is that we can directly measure the

estrogen levels of male homosexuals, and they do not, in fact, from

everything I've thus far read, have high estrogen levels.

This is completely sufficient to refute the belief that high estrogen

levels cause male homosexuality.

[i had written:]

> " Besides that, you stated in your own description of the study that

> homosexuals were able to sense the pheremones of other homosexuals.

> If they are more attracted to the pheremones of homosexual men than

> those of straight men but heterosexual females are not, this would

> also provide evidence that saying their mind works like a female's is

> inaccurate. "

[Lorie responded:]

> There are two types of humans in this world that I know of. Men and Women.

> There are mutations of this such as women or men born with some opposite

> parts or both sex organs but they are abnormal if male and female are

> considered the norm.

Depending on what type of cateogories you make, there are anywhere

from one type of person in the world to over six billion types of

people in the world.

The pheremone evidence you cited suggests that there are at least

three types of sexual attraction, the way you described it.

> So if a gay man's brain is more attracted to a gay male, and not a female,

> (I don't remember if they were also attracted to a straight male, I think

> the straight male wasn't attracted to the gay man),

You stated that they recognized gay male pheremones specifically. If

this is true, it shows that there is a third type of sexual

attraction. It's a critical point.

> Then the brain is not

> total male. The only alternative is that although it is not total female,

> when they look at the female brain that shows response is the same area of

> the brain that the gay shows a response, I would think that it shows that

> there is more female in the gay guy's brain than would be in a straight

> man's brain.

If the females are more attracted to the homosexual male pheremones

than the straight male pheremones just like the gay men are, you'd be

correct. If, however, straight females are more attracted to straight

male pheremones but gay males are more attracted to gay male

pheremones, then your analysis is clearly wrong. Whether one or the

other is true is critical to your argument.

> > " What is your evidence that estrogen levels determine reactions to

> > pheremones? Wouldn't it be much more direct evidence to show that gay

> > men have higher estrogen levels? "

> I'm wondering that myself. Which is why this discussion started.

It actually started with Ishtar's suggestion that Pottenger's research

indicated malnutrition, not estrogen, could contribute to

homosexuality.

> It would

> be interesting to see if an increase in homosexuality started after the

> birth control pill. I was hoping to see if anyone did have any data on

> estrogen and homo's, because science can't undertake a cure for something

> when they don't know how the problem started.

This type of talk -- referring to defects and problems -- is exactly

what started the subdiscussion of bigotry, people's religious views,

and so on. I think it would help if you could try to refer to what

causes homosxuality in a more value-neutral way, rather than in ways

that are likely to be hurtful and offensive to some people. (I know

you are not trying to do that, but you are.)

In any case, my understanding is that a link between high estrogen

levels and homosexuality has been thoroughly discredited, and it has

actually been studied for decades.

> There are deaf people who refuse the ability to hear when medical

> intervention might help. It is up to them if they want to hear or not. But

> those of us who can hear, know what they are missing and think they are

> mistaken in not wanting to try.

Homosexuals can have sex and fall in love. They are not missing out

on this in the way a deaf person misses out on hearing. They are

missing out on having heterosexual sex in the way someone who speaks

and understands French is missing out on speaking and understanding

English. Your statement above is analogous to saying that you feel

sorry for the poor French people, who have no idea how beautiful the

English language is, and only English speaking people understand this

and understand the immediacy with which we must help them and come up

with ways to relive them of their language defect.

Most French people would probably be offended, even though you didn't

mean to offend them.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

" The definition of a homosexual is someone who is attracted to the same

sex. You are describing transsexuals, who wish to change their sex

and do so surgically. Homosexuals do not surgically alter their sex.

Homosexual men generally do not have breasts and do not want them.

Men who are overexposed to estrogen do develop breasts, though do not

to my knowledge become homosexual. "

Ok, you got me there. I was under the assumption that most gays wanted to be

straight, or have thier sex changed in order to feel more like the people they

thought they should have been. I keep hearing gays say that this isn't a

lifestyle they would choose, which to me is very confusing.

And I didn't know there have been countless stating that estrogen is not higher

in homo men then straight. To me an average lay person it would seem that where

estrogen goes, feminine traits follow.

" It actually started with Ishtar's suggestion that Pottenger's research

indicated malnutrition, not estrogen, could contribute to

homosexuality. "

I thought it had to do something with cats that had been exposed to estrogenic

compounds, sorry.

" Homosexuals can have sex and fall in love. They are not missing out

on this in the way a deaf person misses out on hearing. They are

missing out on having heterosexual sex in the way someone who speaks

and understands French is missing out on speaking and understanding

English. Your statement above is analogous to saying that you feel

sorry for the poor French people, who have no idea how beautiful the

English language is, and only English speaking people understand this

and understand the immediacy with which we must help them and come up

with ways to relive them of their language defect. "

I did not mean for that to sound like they were missing out on love and life.

Anymore than a deaf person is. But if someone gay want's to be straight, then

at least they should try different avenues to attain that. That is all I meant.

And there are certain factions in every group that thinks the status quo should

remain. Such as there are deaf people who try to inflict thier point of view on

someone who might be opened to hearing. One person can have a large nose and be

perfectly happy with it. While another is devistated by it to the point they

will curtail thier life because of it. The person who is happy needs to do

nothing. The person who isn't is missing out on life.

And I do feel sorry for anyone who isn't happy with thier life and wishes to

change it, and can't find the means to do so. Life is such a precious gift that

goes by faster than we know. We are all trying to find happiness and

fullfillment. Whether diet, meditation, spirituality, companionship, exercise,

etc is the path, or a combination of.

As I said in another post, I'm over my head with this stuff, but do find it

fascinating. Our bodies though so strong are also so intricate that the

slightest thing that's off kilter, whether hormones, an invading virus or even

depression, can cause serious problems.

I always think of that Sherlock Holmes saying, " " When you dismiss the

impossible, whatever you have left, however improbable, is the answer. " I think

someday there will be answers to this question as long as people keep asking.

Thank you for your responses.

Lorie

[Guest guest]

Jan, you're not addressing Chris's point that homosexuals play a role in society

that seems

to be built into Homo sapiens sapiens and assists in the survival rate of groups

that have

them. Otherwise, you might not call them " im " balances. You are not

questioning your

own assumptions.

Tim

--- In , " bellasol.organics "

<bellasol.organics@...>

wrote:

>

>

> Ok I did: " Why don't you look at a few of them, see if you

> find support for the idea that estrogen could induce homosexuality, and

> report back to us " . But MY position is not that estrogen could

> *induce* homosexuality, but that the level or balance of estrogen and

> other hormones *could* contribute to it – specifically in the

> pre-natal period. I specifically objected to your condescending way of

> talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a connection. And,

> after doing some research it appears you missed some, so with an open

> mind you may want to review the following research.

>

>

>

> BTW, these are the types of statements I am referring to:

>

>

>

> >Then will you please come up with some shred of evidence that

>

> > >increased estrogen or phytoestrogens is actually involved in

>

> > >homosexuality rather than exploiting the intuitive non-science-based

>

> > >association between estrogen, femininity and male homosexuality?>>

>

>

>

> > You mean " actually involved " in sexual *identification*? Are you

>

> > kidding? Hormones and sexuality connected. Absurd, of course!

>

>

>

> What is absurd is that there are over 350 studies on the relationship

>

> between hormones and sexuality indexed for PubMed and that rather than

>

> look into it and see if there is any established connection for a

>

> hormonal cause for homosexuality, those who advocate this position

>

> simply refuse to look for any of it and nevertheless continue to

>

> appeal to popular prejudice about hormones and popular prejudice about

>

> sexuality such as estrogen's association with women and therefore

>

> femininity, and male homosexuality's association with femininity.

>

>

>

> This is not science, but appeals to intuitive concepts that are in

>

> some ways not even correct. Estrogen is essential for bone-building

>

> in men and women, but no one thinks that homosexuality must be caused

>

> by estrogen because homosexuals have such strong bones. But it is

>

> very easy to allude to the common perception that estrogen is a

>

> woman's hormone and that women are feminine and that gay men are

>

> either feminine or woman-like.

>

>

>

> I think I've been extremely clear that I did a very, very quick and

> very random look at the three most recent results that came up, every

> single one of which refuted the high estrogen--> homosexuality theory.

>

> I'm very, very open to the possibility that there is evidence that

> supports this theory, but I would think that if there is, someone

> advocating the position should find some of it.

>

>

>

> The only thing that has

> been offered is the appeal to associations between estrogen,

> femininity, femaleness and male sexuality that demonstrate a

> fundamental physiological ignorance of hormones and a ridiculous

> equivocation between femaleness and male homosexuality.

>

>

>

> There are, however, several hundred studies

> indexed for medline on hormones and homosexuality. I'm not too

> interested in it so I haven't looked at most of them, although one of

> them is a recent review that concluded there was no good evidence for

> a consistent relationship between hormones and homosexuality (don't

> know if the conclusion was valid or not).

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> And this is why:

>

>

>

> There are more than " just one shred of evidence " of the

> imbalance of hormones - both testosterone and Estradiol

>

> [(17β-estradiol) (also oestradiol) is a sex hormone. Labelled the

> " female " hormone but also present in males, it represents the major

> estrogen in humans. Estradiol has not only a critical impact on

> reproductive and sexual functioning, but also affects other organs

> including bone structure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estradiol

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estradiol> ]

>

>

>

> affecting the sexual orientation of people. While you were putting

> people down for among other things; " appeal to popular prejudice

> about hormones " , you must have failed to actually read the studies.

>

>

>

> You stated " although one of them is a recent review that concluded

> there was no good evidence for a consistent relationship between

> hormones and homosexuality (don't know if the conclusion was valid or

> not). "

>

>

>

> But apparently you did not read the rest of the article (printed below)

> which states: " Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which

> concentrated on differences in prenatal hormone levels (see Ellis &

> Ames, 1987). Many studies have shown that abnormal levels of some

> prenatal hormones can lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an

> individual "

>

>

>

> You then said to me:

>

> " For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously

> play a

> role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at least a

> half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital letters and

> asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several hundred

> studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a few of

> them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could induce

> homosexuality, and report back to us. "

>

>

>

> Did you actually READ those articles? I know you are usually a

> good researcher, but this was really obvious. I found these in the

> first page of results. Maybe there was something wrong with your search

> engine? Here are some of those studies and it's very clear that

> there IS a definite possibility, if not probability, that the level of

> hormones and the balance between testosterone and estradiol during

> pre-natal development *COULD* have an effect on sexual orientation. No

> one is saying it CAUSES homosexuality, only that it could contribute to

> it.

>

>

>

>

>

> " Neurohormonal theories

>

> Early studies of hormonal influences on sexual orientation concentrated

> on levels of circulating sex hormones in adults. Different

> investigations reported conflicting results (see Ruse, 1988), and, in

> general, little evidence has been found for consistent differences in

> the levels of these hormones in homosexuals compared to heterosexuals.

>

>

>

> Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which concentrated on

> differences in prenatal hormone levels (see Ellis & Ames, 1987). Many

> studies have shown that abnormal levels of some prenatal hormones can

> lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an individual (e.g.

> Dörner et al. 1983, Money et al. 1984, Ehrhardt et al. 1985).

>

>

>

> Ellis and Ames (1987) have proposed a very comprehensive gestational

> neurohormonal theory of human sexual orientation, which deals with the

> genesis of heterosexuality as well as homosexuality. They propose that

> sexual orientation is primarily determined by the degree to which the

> nervous system is exposed to testosterone, estradiol, and to certain

> other sex hormones while neuro-organization is taking place,

> predominantly between the middle of the second and the end of the fifth

> month of gestation. According to this theory, " complex combinations of

> genetic, hormonal, neurological, and environmental factors operating

> prior to birth largely determine what an individual's (adult) sexual

> orientation will be. "

>

>

>

> This theory makes many testable predictions, e.g. that homosexuality

> should primarily be a male phenomenon, that homosexuals should have

> higher frequencies of other sexual inversions than heterosexuals, that

> relationships between parents and homosexual offspring may be strained

> and/or assume some cross-sex characteristics, and that homosexuality

> should reflect a significant degree of heritability (as hormone

> production and action is under significant genetic control). Such

> predictions seem to agree with previous research and general intuitions

> regarding homosexuality.

>

>

>

> In addition, as prenatal testosterone levels are of great importance

> according to the theory, and as, during the proposed critical period,

> intra-uterine testosterone is primarily of foetal, rather than maternal,

> origin, this theory could explain the observed differences in

> concordance rates for sexual orientation between monozygotic and

> dizygotic twins. According to such an explanation, the increased

> concordance in monozygotic twins is due to their greater similarity in

> prenatal hormone production (both in quantity and in timing) and hormone

> control; processes which are under significant genetic control.

>

>

>

> Support for the gestational neurohormonal theory includes a recent study

> (LeVay, 1991) which reported a difference in hypothalamic structure

> between heterosexual and homosexual men, although Ellis and Ames warn

> that several decades of intense, further research may be required to

> adequately test the theory. "

>

> http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/theories.html

> <http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/theories.html>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> " Research in Britain, America, and Germany has all confirmed that a

> prenatal exposure to deficiency of testosterone increases the likelihood

> of a man becoming homosexual. Men with an extra X chromosome and men

> exposed in the womb to female hormones are more likely to be gay or

> effeminate, and effeminate boys do indeed grow up to be gay more often

> than other boys.

>

>

>

> " Yalom et al. (1973) studied 20 16-year old boys of diabetic mothers,

> who had received estrogen or progesterone during pregnancy. These boys

> showed less heterosexuality and less masculinity than 20 control boys.

>

>

>

> Women exposed prenatally via their pregnant mothers to

> diethylstilbestrol (DES, a synthetic nonsteroidal estrogen with

> masculinizing effects in female mammals) received higher ratings of

> homosexual behavior (Ehrhardt et al., 1985) "

>

> http://www.neoteny.org/a/homosexuality.html

> <http://www.neoteny.org/a/homosexuality.html>

>

>

>

>

>

> " Indications are that sex orientation in humans depends critically

> upon the hormone balance prevailing during the third and fourth months

> of pregnancy, while secondary sex characteristics and sex-typical

> behaviour patterns are influenced more by hormones circulating during

> the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy. If the hormone balance changes

> from one phase of foetal development to the next, inconsistencies

> between sexual orientation and sex-role behaviour may be observed. Sex

> orientation is fixed relatively early in the old 'limbic' part of the

> brain, whereas sex-role behaviours are laid down later on in pregnancy

> in more diverse, 'newer' parts of the brain. "

>

> http://www.heretical.com/wilson/hbrain.html

> <http://www.heretical.com/wilson/hbrain.html>

>

>

>

> " Larkin's team also found that the hypothalamic region had a rich

> supply of the enzyme aromatase, which converts testosterone into

> oestrogen. It is in this form that the hormone interacts with the brain.

> This may help support one theory that sexual orientation, in part at

> least, may be related to the hormones present during fetal development,

> says Balthazart. "

>

> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3008

> <http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3008>

>

>

>

>

>

> " I believe there are many social and psychological, as well as

> biological, factors that make up sexual preference. " ... " Having said

> that, these data do suggest that there are some people in the world who

> are gay because of fetal androgen levels. " - Marc Breedlove, professor

> of psychology

>

> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/03/000330094644.htm

> <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/03/000330094644.htm>

>

>

>

>

>

> " The hormonal theory of sexuality holds that, just as exposure to

> certain hormones plays a role in fetal sex differentiation

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differentiation> , such exposure also

> influences the sexual orientation

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation> that emerges later in

> the adult. Fetal hormones may be seen as the primary determiner of adult

> sexual orientation, or a co-factor with genes and/or environmental and

> social conditions. "

>

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_hormones_and_sexual_orientation

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_hormones_and_sexual_orientation>

>

>

>

>

>

> Chris-think about these studies, and then please think about how you

> have responded to people who simply wanted to consider these

> possibilities. You've really hurt some feelings, on both boards and

> I think very un-necessarily in light of the research.

>

>

>

> ~Jan

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------\

> ---------------------------------

>

>

>

> Jan,

>

> > so are you saying hormones only have an effect on impotence

> > and not on attraction?

>

> Not at all -- I'm sure gay men with high estrogen and low testosterone

> would have a decreased libido too.

>

> Testosterone is a major modulator of libido in both men and women.

> But in heterosexual men it increases desire for women and in

> heterosexual women it increases desire for men.

>

> For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously play a

> role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at least a

> half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital letters and

> asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several hundred

> studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a few of

> them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could induce

> homosexuality, and report back to us.

>

> Again, the question is not whether " hormones have to do with

> sexuality. " It is whether or not the balance of hormones influences

> the specific content of the sexuality -- e.g. the deisre for men

> versus the desire for women. That's the premise that underlies the

> question of whether soy, for example, could cause homosexuality, as

> has been suggested.

>

> Chris

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Wanita, you wrote:

> Could consumption of refined foods help the depression in

> homosexual men increase? And I wonder if there is a link, like to

> people with insulin resistance who crave high carbs. Reading about the

> higher incidence of bulemia in homosexuals makes me wonder if they too

> might be junk food addicts. I'm not saying high carbs would make

> someone gay, but could it be something that not only contributes to the

> depression but also to the behaviour in someone that is predisposed?

What behavior do you mean? I'm a little lost. Bulimic behavior, or homosexual

behavior?

Tim

[Guest guest]

I agree. you've been most level-headed. Jan, in saying " hurt some

feelings " , I

think you meant " hurt some egos " .

Tim

--- In , " lovely.ishtar " <lovely.ishtar@...>

wrote:

>

>

>

> i personally think you have been very honest

> and not condescending at all. In fact one of the few

> that hasnt completely freaked out in one way or another.

>

> I have never since being a member seen such an explosion

> on this site.

>

> I personaly feel no subject should be off limits for discussion

> as long as we dont bring religion or politics into it and

> research it scientifically.

>

> Though some of the actions of a few on here have made me

> seriously consider leaving the group.

>

> -Lovely

>

> >

> > > Ok I did: " Why don't you look at a few of them, see if you

> > > find support for the idea that estrogen could induce

> homosexuality, and

> > > report back to us " .

> >

> > Great. This will be a good move forward.

> >

> > > But MY position is not that estrogen could

> > > *induce* homosexuality, but that the level or balance of estrogen

> and

> > > other hormones *could* contribute to it – specifically in the

> > > pre-natal period.

> >

> > I find it reasonable that it could make some contribution in utero,

> > though it could at best modulate other factors that create a

> > predisposition, given the percentages of fraternal and identical

> twins

> > who share sexual orientation. I don't know what evidence there is

> or

> > isn't for this, but it is certainly plausible, much in the way that

> > some environmental endocrine disruptors have been implicated in

> > affecting the male/female ratios. I did turn up in a brief stint on

> > pubmed an abstract suggesting that homosexual men were exposed to

> > greater testosterone in utero judging by finger length, though I'm

> not

> > quite sure how reliable a guage that is.

> >

> > >I specifically objected to your condescending way of

> > > talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a

> connection. And,

> > > after doing some research it appears you missed some, so with an

> open

> > > mind you may want to review the following research.

> >

> > I missed at least 98% of it because I have barely researched this at

> > all and never contended that I had done any serious research of

> it. I

> > don't think I've been condescending to anyone. All I've done is

> point

> > out severe lack of evidence or lack of willingness to gather any

> when

> > people have exhibited it.

> >

> >

> > > There are more than " just one shred of evidence " of the

> > > imbalance of hormones - both testosterone and Estradiol

> > > affecting the sexual orientation of people. While you were

> putting

> > > people down for among other things; " appeal to popular prejudice

> > > about hormones " , you must have failed to actually read the

> studies.

> >

> > I stated very clearly that I read nothing more than a handful of

> > abstracts, and my criticisms of appeals to popular prejudice were

> > valid because that was the only thing anyone had presented. I did

> not

> > state that evidence did not exist, but rather that if someone is

> going

> > to argue that estrogens can cause or contribute to homosexuality

> > (whether prenatal or postnatal) then they should establish some

> > evidence that estrogen might be implicated rather than appealing to

> > the " it's obvious, of course hormones affect sexuality! " or the

> > " estrogen is a woman hormone and homosexual males are men who act

> like

> > women " lines of thought, which are not particularly logical or

> > science-based.

> >

> >

> > > > You stated " although one of them is a recent review that

> concluded

> > > > there was no good evidence for a consistent relationship between

> > > >hormones and homosexuality (don't know if the conclusion was

> valid or

> > > > not). "

> >

> > > But apparently you did not read the rest of the article (printed

> below)

> >

> > You are correct, I did not read it, which I stated repeatedly and

> > which is one of the primary reasons I didn't know whether the

> > conclusion was valid or not.

> >

> >

> > > which states: " Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which

> > > concentrated on differences in prenatal hormone levels (see Ellis

> &

> > > Ames, 1987). Many studies have shown that abnormal levels of some

> > > prenatal hormones can lead to an increased chance of

> homosexuality in an

> > > individual "

> >

> > I'm not sure if we're looking at the same review. The one you are

> > referring to as me having linked to but not read is here:

> >

> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=7560930 & query_hl=1 &

> itool=pubmed_docsum

> >

> > The abstract concludes:

> >

> > ==========

> > Efforts to measure the estrogen feedback as an indication of brain

> > androgenization have produced inconsistent results. Studies of men

> and

> > women who experienced defect in hormone metabolism (i.e., CAH and

> > testicular feminization) have not found a concurrent increase in

> > homosexual behavior. Overall, the data do not support a causal

> > connection between hormones and human sexual orientation.

> > ===========

> >

> > The statement you quote does not appear to be in the full text of

> the

> > review, so this must be a different one. There is an entire section

> > reviewing the literature on prenatal hormone theories, and their

> > presentation of this evidence suggests that there is no convincing

> > evidence of a link.

> >

> >

> > > " For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously

> > > play a

> > > role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> > > political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> > > connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at

> least a

> > > half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital letters

> and

> > > asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several

> hundred

> > > studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a

> few of

> > > them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could

> induce

> > > homosexuality, and report back to us. "

> >

> > > Did you actually READ those articles?

> >

> > As I have stated repeatedly, no. I have not been arguing that there

> > is conclusive evidence that there is no hormone/homosexuality link,

> > but rather that if you are to argue one, you should use evidence and

> > logic rather than appealing to the pseudo-obviousness of the

> > possibility.

> >

> > > I know you are usually a

> > > good researcher, but this was really obvious. I found these in

> the

> > > first page of results. Maybe there was something wrong with your

> search

> > > engine? Here are some of those studies and it's very clear that

> > > there IS a definite possibility, if not probability, that the

> level of

> > > hormones and the balance between testosterone and estradiol during

> > > pre-natal development *COULD* have an effect on sexual

> orientation. No

> > > one is saying it CAUSES homosexuality, only that it could

> contribute to

> > > it.

> >

> > >Many

> > > studies have shown that abnormal levels of some prenatal hormones

> can

> > > lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an individual

> (e.g.

> > > Dörner et al. 1983, Money et al. 1984, Ehrhardt et al. 1985).

> >

> > According to the review I cited, Dorner did experiments with rats

> > indicating that there was an in utero window of brain development

> > where the androgen/estrogen ratio was responsible for imprinting

> > gender on the brain.

> >

> > The measurements of in utero hormone exposure that I believe this

> > review is referring to were actualy measurements of hormonal

> > adjustments to injected estrogen that were presumed to reflect the

> > relative " andronization " of the brain during embryonic development.

> > There were some major methodological problems with some of the

> > positive studies, including one by Dorner in which all of the

> > homosexuals were being treated for venereal disease and were not

> > matched to heterosexuals under the same circumstances and studies

> that

> > did not account for the possibility of HIV positivity which would

> > affect the hormonal response, and there were a number of studies

> that

> > contradicted the earlier positive results. Then, more evidence was

> > uncovered that the response to injected estrogen is not, in fact,

> > imprinted in utero at all, but is imprinted later in life, or at a

> > minimum the imprinting can be overridden later in life.

> >

> > Money and Erhardt were not studying normal homosexuality, but were

> > studying whether or not homosexuality was increased among people

> with

> > prenatally based diseases that include testicular feminization from

> > androgen insensitivity and congenital adrenal hyperplasia syndrome

> in

> > females where a cortisol deficiency severely upregulates androgens.

> > The literature reviewed in the review I linked to above indcates

> that

> > the balance of these studies does not support a casusal role of

> > prental sex hormone exposure in homosexuality.

> >

> > Even if it did based on these evidences, there would be no clear

> > application to normal homosexuality. These disorders produce breast

> > growth in males, masculinization of female genitalia, lack of

> breasts

> > in females, deep-pitched male voices. Even if the research

> > demonstrated a consistent increase in the rate of homosexuality in

> > these people that could be distinguished from the effect of the

> > experience of appearing hermaphroditic and being treated as such in

> > life, it wouldn't necessarily have any relevancy to the vast

> majority

> > of homosexuals who do not have these disorders.

> >

> > By the way, the finger length study I cited, indicating higher in

> > utero exposure to testosterone in homosexual males contradicts

> > Dorner's theory pretty severely, though I have no idea if such a

> > pattern is or could be observed consistently (I uncover below

> actually

> > that it is not).

> >

> > > Ellis and Ames (1987) have proposed a very comprehensive

> gestational

> > > neurohormonal theory of human sexual orientation, which deals

> with the

> > > genesis of heterosexuality as well as homosexuality. They propose

> that

> > > sexual orientation is primarily determined by the degree to which

> the

> > > nervous system is exposed to testosterone, estradiol, and to

> certain

> > > other sex hormones while neuro-organization is taking place,

> > > predominantly between the middle of the second and the end of the

> fifth

> > > month of gestation. According to this theory, " complex

> combinations of

> > > genetic, hormonal, neurological, and environmental factors

> operating

> > > prior to birth largely determine what an individual's (adult)

> sexual

> > > orientation will be. "

> >

> > That's fine to propose a hypothesis; the question is whether it is

> > supported by evidence.

> >

> > > This theory makes many testable predictions, e.g. that

> homosexuality

> > > should primarily be a male phenomenon, that homosexuals should

> have

> > > higher frequencies of other sexual inversions than heterosexuals,

> that

> > > relationships between parents and homosexual offspring may be

> strained

> > > and/or assume some cross-sex characteristics, and that

> homosexuality

> > > should reflect a significant degree of heritability (as hormone

> > > production and action is under significant genetic control). Such

> > > predictions seem to agree with previous research and general

> intuitions

> > > regarding homosexuality.

> >

> > I was unaware that homosexuality was primarily a male phenomenon

> > (???). A more specific judge of this hypothesis than the degree of

> > heredity would probably be to what degree being a homosexual's

> > fraternal twin increases one's chance of being homosexual over

> being a

> > homosexual's brother. The fraternal twins would share the same

> > hormonal environment of the mother, to whatever extent the mother's

> > own production of hormones or exposure to dietary or environmental

> > estrogens would be a factor, though the paragraph below suggests

> that

> > the hormonal exposure is primarily a function of the fetus's genes.

> > I'm not sure how any of the predictions in this paragraph could be

> > construed to be specific supporters of the above hypothesis.

> >

> >

> > > In addition, as prenatal testosterone levels are of great

> importance

> > > according to the theory, and as, during the proposed critical

> period,

> > > intra-uterine testosterone is primarily of foetal, rather than

> maternal,

> > > origin, this theory could explain the observed differences in

> > > concordance rates for sexual orientation between monozygotic and

> > > dizygotic twins.

> >

> > If this is true, it would flat-out contradict the hypothesis that

> > exogenous estrogens from environment or food would play a

> significant

> > role.

> >

> > >According to such an explanation, the increased

> > > concordance in monozygotic twins is due to their greater

> similarity in

> > > prenatal hormone production (both in quantity and in timing) and

> hormone

> > > control; processes which are under significant genetic control.

> >

> > That is consistent with the hypothesis, but is certainly not any

> > specific support for it. All it supports is a role for genetics.

> >

> > It is ironic that you are using it in this context, since it argues

> > against a role for exogenous estrogens.

> >

> > > Support for the gestational neurohormonal theory includes a

> recent study

> > > (LeVay, 1991) which reported a difference in hypothalamic

> structure

> > > between heterosexual and homosexual men, although Ellis and Ames

> warn

> > > that several decades of intense, further research may be required

> to

> > > adequately test the theory. "

> >

> > So far there is one citation in the entire description of the

> theory,

> > and it merely shows a difference a difference in hypothalamic

> > structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Ok, so there is

> a

> > difference in brain physiology.

> >

> > > " Research in Britain, America, and Germany has all confirmed that

> a

> > > prenatal exposure to deficiency of testosterone increases the

> likelihood

> > > of a man becoming homosexual. Men with an extra X chromosome and

> men

> > > exposed in the womb to female hormones are more likely to be gay

> or

> > > effeminate, and effeminate boys do indeed grow up to be gay more

> often

> > > than other boys.

> >

> > Jafa claimed the opposite yesterday, and there's no citation here,

> so

> > I'll remain agnostic for now as to whether 47, XXY males have higher

> > rates of homosexuality or not.

> >

> > > " Yalom et al. (1973) studied 20 16-year old boys of diabetic

> mothers,

> > > who had received estrogen or progesterone during pregnancy. These

> boys

> > > showed less heterosexuality and less masculinity than 20 control

> boys.

> >

> > Control boys from diabetic mothers? Was there a difference between

> > estrogen treatment and progesterone treatment?

> >

> > > Women exposed prenatally via their pregnant mothers to

> > > diethylstilbestrol (DES, a synthetic nonsteroidal estrogen with

> > > masculinizing effects in female mammals) received higher ratings

> of

> > > homosexual behavior (Ehrhardt et al., 1985) "

> >

> > I agree this, if correct, would support the estrogen link.

> >

> > > " Indications are that sex orientation in humans depends critically

> > > upon the hormone balance prevailing during the third and fourth

> months

> > > of pregnancy, while secondary sex characteristics and sex-typical

> > > behaviour patterns are influenced more by hormones circulating

> during

> > > the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy. If the hormone balance

> changes

> > > from one phase of foetal development to the next, inconsistencies

> > > between sexual orientation and sex-role behaviour may be

> observed. Sex

> > > orientation is fixed relatively early in the old 'limbic' part of

> the

> > > brain, whereas sex-role behaviours are laid down later on in

> pregnancy

> > > in more diverse, 'newer' parts of the brain. "

> >

> > There's an awfully high text-to-citation ratio in these articles.

> >

> > > " Larkin's team also found that the hypothalamic region had a rich

> > > supply of the enzyme aromatase, which converts testosterone into

> > > oestrogen. It is in this form that the hormone interacts with the

> brain.

> > > This may help support one theory that sexual orientation, in part

> at

> > > least, may be related to the hormones present during fetal

> development,

> > > says Balthazart. "

> >

> > What? The fact that the hypothalamus expresses aromatase supports

> the

> > theory that estrogen in fetal development contributes to sexual

> > orientation? I'm a bit lost.

> >

> > > " I believe there are many social and psychological, as well as

> > > biological, factors that make up sexual preference. " ... " Having

> said

> > > that, these data do suggest that there are some people in the

> world who

> > > are gay because of fetal androgen levels. " - Marc Breedlove,

> professor

> > > of psychology

> >

> > What is the " these data " that he is referring to?

> >

> >

> > > " The hormonal theory of sexuality holds that, just as exposure to

> > > certain hormones plays a role in fetal sex differentiation

> > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differentiation> , such

> exposure also

> > > influences the sexual orientation

> > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation> that emerges

> later in

> > > the adult. Fetal hormones may be seen as the primary determiner

> of adult

> > > sexual orientation, or a co-factor with genes and/or

> environmental and

> > > social conditions. "

> >

> > Another link describing a theory with no evidence.

> >

> > > Chris-think about these studies, and then please think about how

> you

> > > have responded to people who simply wanted to consider these

> > > possibilities. You've really hurt some feelings, on both boards

> and

> > > I think very un-necessarily in light of the research.

> >

> > I think I've been entirely fair. I certainly didn't mean to hurt

> > anyone. To whatever extent I did without meaning to, I apologize.

> I'm

> > glad you decided to pull up some research. I think it's a start on

> > the discussion, and I think it was a fair way to respond to my

> > likewise fair point that the estrogen-->homosexuality link was

> > completely unsubstantiated.

> >

> > It doesn't seem as if the articles that you provided were very well

> > substantiated (except the diabetic and DES studies), though I find

> it

> > interesting that the major theory highlighted in them indicated that

> > the prenatal hormone exposure was primarily endogenous to the fetus

> > and was dependent on the fetal genes.

> >

> > A few snippets of things I see from browsing abstracts AND NOT

> > THOROUGHLY RESEARCHING:

> >

> > ============

> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=16143171 & query_hl=9

> & itool=pubmed_docsum

> >

> > Further evidence demonstrates a role for prenatal sex hormones

> which

> > may influence the development of a putative network of

> > sexual-orientation-related neural substrates. However, hormonal

> > effects are often inconsistent and investigations rely heavily on

> > 'proxy markers'. A consistent fraternal birth order effect in male

> > sexual orientation also provides support for a model of maternal

> > immunization processes affecting prenatal sexual differentiation.

> The

> > notion that non-heterosexual preferences may reflect generalized

> > neurodevelopmental perturbations is not supported by available data.

> > These current theories have left little room for learning models of

> > sexual orientation. Future investigations, across the neurosciences,

> > should focus to elucidate the fundamental neural architecture

> > underlying the target-specific direction of human sexual

> orientation,

> > and their antecedents in developmental neurobiology.

> > =================

> >

> >

> > ===============

> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=16174346 & query_hl=9

> & itool=pubmed_docsum

> >

> > Male bisexuals also are interpreted to have been exposed to high

> > prenatal testosterone levels. But (for reasons similar to those

> > outlined above in regard to butch lesbians) it is unclear whether

> > these have a direct prenatal effect on the brain or whether they are

> > precursors of high postnatal testosterone levels, which are

> associated

> > with male bisexual orientation by promoting sensation-seeking

> > behaviour.

> > ===============

> >

> > The study I mentioned before about finger digits and prenatal

> > testosterone level might not have much value:

> >

> > ==============

> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=15971017 & query_hl=9

> & itool=pubmed_docsum

> >

> > Five studies have examined the relationship between sexual

> orientation

> > and the relative lengths of the 2nd and 4th fingers (the 2D:4D

> ratio).

> > Although differences have commonly been found between heterosexuals

> > and homosexuals, the direction of the difference has not been

> > consistent across studies. The original data from all five studies

> > were reanalyzed in a search for possible explanations of the

> > discrepancies. Because ethnicity is known to affect the 2D:4D ratio,

> > the reanalysis focused on participants who identified themselves as

> > White or Caucasian, the ethnic group that was most numerous in all

> of

> > the studies. Age differences did not account for the discrepancies.

> > Differences in variability within different groups were minor. One

> > interesting result to emerge from the reanalysis was that the 2D:4D

> > ratios for the homosexual groups were relatively similar across

> > studies. It was the 2D:4D values for the heterosexual participants

> > that varied most, particularly between the USA and the British

> > studies, and these were responsible for many of the discrepancies in

> > the conclusions across studies. The constancy of the 2D:4D ratio for

> > the White homosexuals did not appear to extend to homosexuals of

> three

> > other ethnicities, and there were also subpopulation differences

> > related to right or left hands.

> > ========

> >

> > Political correctness not withstanding, folks are studying the

> effect

> > of prenatal exposure to soy phytoestrogens on male sexual behavior

> in

> > quails:

> >

> > ======

> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=17274996 & query_hl=1

> 6 & itool=pubmed_docsum

> > ======

> >

> > They found a decrease in various forms of copulatory behavior with

> > exposure to genistein (injected into the egg), but do not describe

> > observing any homosexuality.

> >

> > Apparently " orquiectomy " (castration?) and estrogen treatment can

> > induce homosexuality in male rats:

> >

> > =====

> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=17016704 & query_hl=9

> & itool=pubmed_docsum

> >

> > After this, they were orquiectomized and homosexual hormone-induced

> > behavior was observed at 45 and 60 days of the treatment.

> > =======

> >

> > However, the obvious lack of any evidence that typical homosexuals

> > have high estrogens and low androgens (and are obviously not

> > castrated) doesn't make for a good analogy between human

> homosexuality

> > and this phenomenon.

> >

> > I'm glad this discussion is moving towards an evidence-based

> approach.

> > Overall, however, it seems like there is little if any

> substantiation

> > for the theory that high exposure to estrogens or low exposure to

> > androgens makes an important contribution to male homosexuality and

> > if, as the article you cited states, androgen level is primarily

> > determined by the fetal genes rather than the maternal environment,

> > that would argue further against the exogenous estrogen theory.

> > However, you do cite two studies indicating that exposure to hormone

> > treatments can increase homosexuality rates. I'm not sure how much

> we

> > can read into the diabetic study, and I have not read either of them

> > myself. They may offer some substantiation for the prenatal

> estrogen

> > theory, as small a start as it is. I'll try to look at them at some

> > point.

> >

> > Chris

> > --

> > The Truth About Cholesterol

> > Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> > http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Jan wrote:

>>Please remember, on a board we only see the words, no kind smiles, or

twinkle in an eye. I am sure you feel very passionate about things,

and often you are called on the table to defend unpopular views, but on

these boards, most of us are honestly just trying to learn, as you are.

You have helped many people with your research, but you could soften

your response to people and still make your point.<<

don't alter your approach or style one bit. This is a false criticism.

The feelings

involved here, I feel strongly, are egos. And not only that, but they are egos

involved in an

excited, judgmental state -- they are precious to themselves.

You have been fair and gentle.

Tim

[Guest guest]

I'm wondering that myself. Which is why this discussion started. It would be

interesting to see if an increase in homosexuality started after the birth

control pill. I was hoping to see if anyone did have any data on estrogen and

homo's, because science can't undertake a cure for something when they don't

know how the problem started. And if gays don't really want to be gays, then

they should help with this study.

Hey, doesn't this belong in the Bigot thread?

;-)

Tim

[Guest guest]

Tim, I think you misunderstood me or confused my ideas with someone

else's posts. I totally agree with Chris's point you noted below, I

did not call anything an " imbalance " , and did not imply that. I

didn't state any of my " assumptions " . I posted before that we do

not have " disorders " , but differences, and one is not better than

another. I used the common idea of ADD, which I believe is not

a " disorder " , and is not something we need to cure; in fact it has

many benefits to society, but, I still want to hear the research on

why I may be different from others in that area. I was trying to

use another example that is not so upsetting to people, to show that

people often use language that implies something is wrong with

another person. Although it sometimes gets on my nerves because it

is said so often, I don't get upset at someone that uses that

language(ADD), but I do try to show them, politely that I and my

children do not have a " disorder " , we just do things differently.

I totally agree with the point was making.

~Jan

>

>

>

>

> >

> >

> > Ok I did: " Why don't you look at a few of them, see if you

> > find support for the idea that estrogen could induce

homosexuality, and

> > report back to us " . But MY position is not that estrogen could

> > *induce* homosexuality, but that the level or balance of

estrogen and

> > other hormones *could* contribute to it – specifically in the

> > pre-natal period. I specifically objected to your

condescending way of

> > talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a

connection. And,

> > after doing some research it appears you missed some, so with an

open

> > mind you may want to review the following research.

> >

> >

> >

> > BTW, these are the types of statements I am referring to:

> >

> >

> >

> > >Then will you please come up with some shred of evidence that

> >

> > > >increased estrogen or phytoestrogens is actually involved in

> >

> > > >homosexuality rather than exploiting the intuitive non-

science-based

> >

> > > >association between estrogen, femininity and male

homosexuality?>>

> >

> >

> >

> > > You mean " actually involved " in sexual *identification*? Are

you

> >

> > > kidding? Hormones and sexuality connected. Absurd, of course!

> >

> >

> >

> > What is absurd is that there are over 350 studies on the

relationship

> >

> > between hormones and sexuality indexed for PubMed and that

rather than

> >

> > look into it and see if there is any established connection for a

> >

> > hormonal cause for homosexuality, those who advocate this

position

> >

> > simply refuse to look for any of it and nevertheless continue to

> >

> > appeal to popular prejudice about hormones and popular prejudice

about

> >

> > sexuality such as estrogen's association with women and therefore

> >

> > femininity, and male homosexuality's association with femininity.

> >

> >

> >

> > This is not science, but appeals to intuitive concepts that are

in

> >

> > some ways not even correct. Estrogen is essential for bone-

building

> >

> > in men and women, but no one thinks that homosexuality must be

caused

> >

> > by estrogen because homosexuals have such strong bones. But it is

> >

> > very easy to allude to the common perception that estrogen is a

> >

> > woman's hormone and that women are feminine and that gay men are

> >

> > either feminine or woman-like.

> >

> >

> >

> > I think I've been extremely clear that I did a very, very quick

and

> > very random look at the three most recent results that came up,

every

> > single one of which refuted the high estrogen--> homosexuality

theory.

> >

> > I'm very, very open to the possibility that there is evidence

that

> > supports this theory, but I would think that if there is, someone

> > advocating the position should find some of it.

> >

> >

> >

> > The only thing that has

> > been offered is the appeal to associations between estrogen,

> > femininity, femaleness and male sexuality that demonstrate a

> > fundamental physiological ignorance of hormones and a ridiculous

> > equivocation between femaleness and male homosexuality.

> >

> >

> >

> > There are, however, several hundred studies

> > indexed for medline on hormones and homosexuality. I'm not too

> > interested in it so I haven't looked at most of them, although

one of

> > them is a recent review that concluded there was no good

evidence for

> > a consistent relationship between hormones and homosexuality

(don't

> > know if the conclusion was valid or not).

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > And this is why:

> >

> >

> >

> > There are more than " just one shred of evidence " of the

> > imbalance of hormones - both testosterone and Estradiol

> >

> > [(17β-estradiol) (also oestradiol) is a sex hormone. Labelled

the

> > " female " hormone but also present in males, it represents the

major

> > estrogen in humans. Estradiol has not only a critical impact on

> > reproductive and sexual functioning, but also affects other

organs

> > including bone structure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estradiol

> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estradiol> ]

> >

> >

> >

> > affecting the sexual orientation of people. While you were

putting

> > people down for among other things; " appeal to popular prejudice

> > about hormones " , you must have failed to actually read the

studies.

> >

> >

> >

> > You stated " although one of them is a recent review that

concluded

> > there was no good evidence for a consistent relationship between

> > hormones and homosexuality (don't know if the conclusion was

valid or

> > not). "

> >

> >

> >

> > But apparently you did not read the rest of the article (printed

below)

> > which states: " Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which

> > concentrated on differences in prenatal hormone levels (see

Ellis &

> > Ames, 1987). Many studies have shown that abnormal levels of some

> > prenatal hormones can lead to an increased chance of

homosexuality in an

> > individual "

> >

> >

> >

> > You then said to me:

> >

> > " For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously

> > play a

> > role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> > political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> > connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at

least a

> > half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital

letters and

> > asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several

hundred

> > studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a

few of

> > them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could

induce

> > homosexuality, and report back to us. "

> >

> >

> >

> > Did you actually READ those articles? I know you are

usually a

> > good researcher, but this was really obvious. I found these in

the

> > first page of results. Maybe there was something wrong with

your search

> > engine? Here are some of those studies and it's very clear that

> > there IS a definite possibility, if not probability, that the

level of

> > hormones and the balance between testosterone and estradiol

during

> > pre-natal development *COULD* have an effect on sexual

orientation. No

> > one is saying it CAUSES homosexuality, only that it could

contribute to

> > it.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > " Neurohormonal theories

> >

> > Early studies of hormonal influences on sexual orientation

concentrated

> > on levels of circulating sex hormones in adults. Different

> > investigations reported conflicting results (see Ruse, 1988),

and, in

> > general, little evidence has been found for consistent

differences in

> > the levels of these hormones in homosexuals compared to

heterosexuals.

> >

> >

> >

> > Since the 1970s, hormonal theories emerged which concentrated on

> > differences in prenatal hormone levels (see Ellis & Ames, 1987).

Many

> > studies have shown that abnormal levels of some prenatal

hormones can

> > lead to an increased chance of homosexuality in an individual

(e.g.

> > Dörner et al. 1983, Money et al. 1984, Ehrhardt et al. 1985).

> >

> >

> >

> > Ellis and Ames (1987) have proposed a very comprehensive

gestational

> > neurohormonal theory of human sexual orientation, which deals

with the

> > genesis of heterosexuality as well as homosexuality. They

propose that

> > sexual orientation is primarily determined by the degree to

which the

> > nervous system is exposed to testosterone, estradiol, and to

certain

> > other sex hormones while neuro-organization is taking place,

> > predominantly between the middle of the second and the end of

the fifth

> > month of gestation. According to this theory, " complex

combinations of

> > genetic, hormonal, neurological, and environmental factors

operating

> > prior to birth largely determine what an individual's (adult)

sexual

> > orientation will be. "

> >

> >

> >

> > This theory makes many testable predictions, e.g. that

homosexuality

> > should primarily be a male phenomenon, that homosexuals should

have

> > higher frequencies of other sexual inversions than

heterosexuals, that

> > relationships between parents and homosexual offspring may be

strained

> > and/or assume some cross-sex characteristics, and that

homosexuality

> > should reflect a significant degree of heritability (as hormone

> > production and action is under significant genetic control). Such

> > predictions seem to agree with previous research and general

intuitions

> > regarding homosexuality.

> >

> >

> >

> > In addition, as prenatal testosterone levels are of great

importance

> > according to the theory, and as, during the proposed critical

period,

> > intra-uterine testosterone is primarily of foetal, rather than

maternal,

> > origin, this theory could explain the observed differences in

> > concordance rates for sexual orientation between monozygotic and

> > dizygotic twins. According to such an explanation, the increased

> > concordance in monozygotic twins is due to their greater

similarity in

> > prenatal hormone production (both in quantity and in timing) and

hormone

> > control; processes which are under significant genetic control.

> >

> >

> >

> > Support for the gestational neurohormonal theory includes a

recent study

> > (LeVay, 1991) which reported a difference in hypothalamic

structure

> > between heterosexual and homosexual men, although Ellis and Ames

warn

> > that several decades of intense, further research may be

required to

> > adequately test the theory. "

> >

> > http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/theories.html

> > <http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/theories.html>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > " Research in Britain, America, and Germany has all confirmed

that a

> > prenatal exposure to deficiency of testosterone increases the

likelihood

> > of a man becoming homosexual. Men with an extra X chromosome and

men

> > exposed in the womb to female hormones are more likely to be gay

or

> > effeminate, and effeminate boys do indeed grow up to be gay more

often

> > than other boys.

> >

> >

> >

> > " Yalom et al. (1973) studied 20 16-year old boys of diabetic

mothers,

> > who had received estrogen or progesterone during pregnancy.

These boys

> > showed less heterosexuality and less masculinity than 20 control

boys.

> >

> >

> >

> > Women exposed prenatally via their pregnant mothers to

> > diethylstilbestrol (DES, a synthetic nonsteroidal estrogen with

> > masculinizing effects in female mammals) received higher ratings

of

> > homosexual behavior (Ehrhardt et al., 1985) "

> >

> > http://www.neoteny.org/a/homosexuality.html

> > <http://www.neoteny.org/a/homosexuality.html>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > " Indications are that sex orientation in humans depends

critically

> > upon the hormone balance prevailing during the third and fourth

months

> > of pregnancy, while secondary sex characteristics and sex-typical

> > behaviour patterns are influenced more by hormones circulating

during

> > the fifth and sixth months of pregnancy. If the hormone balance

changes

> > from one phase of foetal development to the next, inconsistencies

> > between sexual orientation and sex-role behaviour may be

observed. Sex

> > orientation is fixed relatively early in the old 'limbic' part

of the

> > brain, whereas sex-role behaviours are laid down later on in

pregnancy

> > in more diverse, 'newer' parts of the brain. "

> >

> > http://www.heretical.com/wilson/hbrain.html

> > <http://www.heretical.com/wilson/hbrain.html>

> >

> >

> >

> > " Larkin's team also found that the hypothalamic region had a rich

> > supply of the enzyme aromatase, which converts testosterone into

> > oestrogen. It is in this form that the hormone interacts with

the brain.

> > This may help support one theory that sexual orientation, in

part at

> > least, may be related to the hormones present during fetal

development,

> > says Balthazart. "

> >

> > http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3008

> > <http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3008>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > " I believe there are many social and psychological, as well as

> > biological, factors that make up sexual preference. " ... " Having

said

> > that, these data do suggest that there are some people in the

world who

> > are gay because of fetal androgen levels. " - Marc Breedlove,

professor

> > of psychology

> >

> > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/03/000330094644.htm

> > <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/03/000330094644.htm>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > " The hormonal theory of sexuality holds that, just as exposure to

> > certain hormones plays a role in fetal sex differentiation

> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differentiation> , such

exposure also

> > influences the sexual orientation

> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation> that emerges

later in

> > the adult. Fetal hormones may be seen as the primary determiner

of adult

> > sexual orientation, or a co-factor with genes and/or

environmental and

> > social conditions. "

> >

> >

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_hormones_and_sexual_orientation

> >

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prenatal_hormones_and_sexual_orientatio

n>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Chris-think about these studies, and then please think about how

you

> > have responded to people who simply wanted to consider these

> > possibilities. You've really hurt some feelings, on both boards

and

> > I think very un-necessarily in light of the research.

> >

> >

> >

> > ~Jan

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > -----------------------------------------------------------------

-------\

> > ---------------------------------

> >

> >

> >

> > Jan,

> >

> > > so are you saying hormones only have an effect on

impotence

> > > and not on attraction?

> >

> > Not at all -- I'm sure gay men with high estrogen and low

testosterone

> > would have a decreased libido too.

> >

> > Testosterone is a major modulator of libido in both men and

women.

> > But in heterosexual men it increases desire for women and in

> > heterosexual women it increases desire for men.

> >

> > For some reason you seem stuck on the " well, hormones obviously

play a

> > role in sexuality " bit and in the absolutely absurd notion that

> > political correctness is stopping anyone from researching the

> > connection between hormones and sexuality. As I've stated at

least a

> > half dozen times, the last time with all sorts of capital

letters and

> > asterisks to try to bring attention to it, there are several

hundred

> > studies on hormones and homosexuality. Why don't you look at a

few of

> > them, see if you find support for the idea that estrogen could

induce

> > homosexuality, and report back to us.

> >

> > Again, the question is not whether " hormones have to do with

> > sexuality. " It is whether or not the balance of hormones

influences

> > the specific content of the sexuality -- e.g. the deisre for men

> > versus the desire for women. That's the premise that underlies

the

> > question of whether soy, for example, could cause homosexuality,

as

> > has been suggested.

> >

> > Chris

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Jan,

> Thank you for your response.

You're welcome.

> Keep in mind that I did not do the

> research or write any of the conclusions in each review I sited.

Of course.

> I also

> did not bring up the argument that estrogens even *could* contribute to

> homosexuality, but only supported the idea when it was posted and others

> felt it was wrong to even discuss it; and that we shouldn't keep the

> argument off a board, when presented, with cited research (which it was

> in the original article long ago). I also feel we should try to keep

> the emotionalism down and try to stay to discussions on the science.

I agree -- I don't think I've become emotional and I didn't consider

your posts to be emotional.

> I do agree that it seemed " intuitive " to me though and I am glad we

> finally got this research on the board. I agree that intuitive is not

> always correct, and you are right to point that out, but it was not

> based on *popular prejudices*, as the idea had been suggested by

> research, even if you (or I) later disagree with the research.

It seems to me that it seeming intuitive that male homosexuality

should be associated with estrogen is indeed largely a result of

popular prejudices about hormones and sexuality. I don't mean

" prejudice " as in " bigotry, " but as in popularly held concepts that

are assumed rather than evidence-based. I'm not sure what research

you are talking about.

> I also feel you were right to point out a fallacy in " observing "

> increases in various populations. I agree completely with you on that

> (much earlier) point.

I'm glad to hear that.

> I hope you see that others also do research, and that often various

> research contradicts each other. How one tests, what they were actually

> looking for, what the variables were, etc. can lead to widely differing

> results, and of course the interpretations of these results are also

> suspect.

Of course.

> Please remember, on a board we only see the words, no kind smiles, or

> twinkle in an eye. I am sure you feel very passionate about things,

> and often you are called on the table to defend unpopular views, but on

> these boards, most of us are honestly just trying to learn, as you are.

> You have helped many people with your research, but you could soften

> your response to people and still make your point.

I don't think I had been very hard in tone. The most in-your-face

that I can recall is my use of asterisks and capital letters to try to

bring attention to the fact that there are hundreds of studies and

that PC is not suppressing research into hormones and homosexuality,

and I did this after making the point probably a dozen times and it

being repeatedly ignored. There must be over 100 posts in this

thread, and many of us were engaged in this same discussion a few

months ago elsewhere, and your most recent post was the first out of

all of these to actually examine some evidence about the link between

estrogen and homosexuality rather than assuming it.

> In regards to this thread, I feel the current state of research leaves

> us close enough in agreement.

Allright, great.

Chris

--

The Truth About Cholesterol

Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

[Guest guest]

Tim,

No, I meant feelings, not egos. When one is asking if x is

possible? They are showing that they do not have the answer, but

rather were considering the possibility - that's exposing one's lack

of knowledge, how can you call that ego? I do not see how

responding roughly (in my opinion) is helpful.

You and Lovely feel is kind and fair. Ok, we all have

different communications styles, and some have thicker skins than

others. I think there is also a tendency to lump together thoughts

from various posts into one response, to save on responding

individually to every post. I am learning how these boards work,

and may have made that mistake, over-responding to one person, when

really I was mixing it up with other posts that were similar, but

not the same. I think many of us do that at times on these boards.

I will try not to.

~Jan

> >

> >

> >

> > i personally think you have been very honest

> > and not condescending at all. In fact one of the few

> > that hasnt completely freaked out in one way or another.

> >

> > I have never since being a member seen such an explosion

> > on this site.

> >

> > I personaly feel no subject should be off limits for discussion

> > as long as we dont bring religion or politics into it and

> > research it scientifically.

> >

> > Though some of the actions of a few on here have made me

> > seriously consider leaving the group.

> >

> > -Lovely

> >

> > > >I specifically objected to your condescending way of

> > > > talking to those who suggest that there is possibly a

> > connection. And,

> > > > after doing some research it appears you missed some, so

with an

> > open

> > > > mind you may want to review the following research.

> > >

> > > I missed at least 98% of it because I have barely researched

this at

> > > all and never contended that I had done any serious research

of

> > it. I

> > > don't think I've been condescending to anyone. All I've done

is

> > point

> > > out severe lack of evidence or lack of willingness to gather

any

> > when

> > > people have exhibited it.

> > >

>...

> > > However, you do cite two studies indicating that exposure to

hormone

> > > treatments can increase homosexuality rates. I'm not sure how

much

> > we

> > > can read into the diabetic study, and I have not read either

of them

> > > myself. They may offer some substantiation for the prenatal

> > estrogen

> > > theory, as small a start as it is. I'll try to look at them

at some

> > > point.

> > >

> > > Chris

> > > --

> > > The Truth About Cholesterol

> > > Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You:

> > > http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Ok I have a question and I just want thoughts no attacks. I am not

judging anyone but I just want to hear your thoughts no matter what

they be.

Regarding the anus not being designed for sex and the arguments that

there are erogenous zones there and getting pleasure from the prostate.

Well just because something gives the receiver pleasure does that mean

that's what the anus is for? Some people get pleasure from auto erotic

aphixiation, S & M, does that mean it is not abnormal or normal? I mean

where do you draw the line? Is it ok to have sex with animals if it

gives you pleasure, or how about with young children who are molested?

They by no fault of their own may experience " pleasure " butis that

normal?

>

> I'm sure they have no problem either...the only problem is that

where they put their frontward parts, is in the exit hole for the

wastes that the body produces. . Anything outside of that....is

abnormal...even down to in-vitro fertilization. Why do people feel

uncomfortable when someone makes a comment about it being

abnormal? .com

> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 10:10 AM

> Subject: Re: Re: Homosexuality in Primitives

>

>

[Guest guest]

> > I also

> > did not bring up the argument that estrogens even *could* contribute

to

> > homosexuality, but only supported the idea when it was posted and

others

> > felt it was wrong to even discuss it; and that we shouldn't keep the

> > argument off a board, when presented, with cited research (which it

was

> > in the original article long ago). I also feel we should try to keep

> > the emotionalism down and try to stay to discussions on the science.

>

> I agree -- I don't think I've become emotional and I didn't consider

> your posts to be emotional.

>

Sorry, emotionalism was too strong of a word to use.

> > I do agree that it seemed " intuitive " to me though and I am glad we

> > finally got this research on the board. I agree that intuitive is

not

> > always correct, and you are right to point that out, but it was not

> > based on *popular prejudices*, as the idea had been suggested by

> > research, even if you (or I) later disagree with the research.

>

> It seems to me that it seeming intuitive that male homosexuality

> should be associated with estrogen is indeed largely a result of

> popular prejudices about hormones and sexuality. I don't mean

> " prejudice " as in " bigotry, " but as in popularly held concepts that

> are assumed rather than evidence-based. I'm not sure what research

> you are talking about.

I was refering to the same studies you were here:

>However, you do cite two studies indicating that exposure to hormone

>treatments can increase homosexuality rates. I'm not sure how much we

>can read into the diabetic study, and I have not read either of them

>myself. They may offer some substantiation for the prenatal estrogen

>theory, as small a start as it is. I'll try to look at them at some

>point.

>

>Chris

>

> > Please remember, on a board we only see the words, no kind smiles,

or

> > twinkle in an eye. I am sure you feel very passionate about things,

> > and often you are called on the table to defend unpopular views, but

on

> > these boards, most of us are honestly just trying to learn, as you

are.

> > You have helped many people with your research, but you could soften

> > your response to people and still make your point.

>

> I don't think I had been very hard in tone. The most in-your-face

> that I can recall is my use of asterisks and capital letters to try to

> bring attention to the fact that there are hundreds of studies and

> that PC is not suppressing research into hormones and homosexuality,

> and I did this after making the point probably a dozen times and it

> being repeatedly ignored. There must be over 100 posts in this

> thread, and many of us were engaged in this same discussion a few

> months ago elsewhere, and your most recent post was the first out of

> all of these to actually examine some evidence about the link between

> estrogen and homosexuality rather than assuming it.

The problem I have with this is that there was 2 references for this

association that were included in the article that was posted from an

outside source to another board that started the posts on this subject

between us. They were:

1. Hines M. Hormonal and neural correlates of sex-typed behavioral

development in human beings. In Marc Haug, ed. The Development of Sex

Differences and Similarities in Behavior (Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic,

1993). 131-147.

2. on PJ, Everall IP et al. Is homosexuality hardwired? Sexual

orientation and brain structure. Psych Med, 1994, 24, 811-16.

I was unable to get to these references and read them myself, so I

cannot attest to their strength or even if they support the author's

conclusion, but they *were given* as his back-up for statement " Right

now, no evidence indicates that soy during childhood or adulthood is

likely to change sexual preference. The danger zone is the first three

months of both pregnancy and infancy, when male physiology and brain

circuitry are still developing " , which I thought was worth discussing.

I suppose, looking back, that if I had found these earlier and posted

them, some of this could have been avoided. I wasn't trying to avoid

your request for " documentation " , I think I just thought you had already

read the article and all the footnotes, and were ignoring them to make a

point at my expense. Sorry for the wrong assumption. I see now, you

hadn't seen them, and truly thought I was just assuming the association.

>

> > In regards to this thread, I feel the current state of research

leaves

> > us close enough in agreement.

>

> Allright, great.

> Chris

Thanks for staying with the thread, I see where I too, could have

communicated better. I think we all learned a lot here, and continue

to, from everyone!

~Jan