Posted on 06/01/2013 5:59:38 PM PDT by Coleus
Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way.
“At best genetics is a minor factor,” says Dr. Neil Whitehead, PhD. Whitehead worked for the New Zealand government as a scientific researcher for 24 years, then spent four years working for the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency. Most recently, he serves as a consultant to Japanese universities about the effects of radiation exposure. His PhD is in biochemistry and statistics.
Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay.
“Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.”
Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. “The predominant things that create homosexuality in one identical twin and not in the other have to be post-birth factors.”
Dr. Whitehead believes same-sex attraction (SSA) is caused by “non-shared factors,” things happening to one twin but not the other, or a personal response to an event by one of the twins and not the other.
For example, one twin might have exposure to pornography or sexual abuse, but not the other. One twin may interpret and respond to their family or classroom environment differently than the other. “These individual and idiosyncratic responses to random events and to common environmental factors predominate,” he says.
The first very large, reliable study of identical twins was conducted in Australia in 1991, followed by a large U.S. study about 1997. Then Australia and the U.S. conducted more twin studies in 2000, followed by several studies in Scandinavia, according to Dr. Whitehead.
“Twin registers are the foundation of modern twin studies. They are now very large, and exist in many countries. A gigantic European twin register with a projected 600,000 members is being organized, but one of the largest in use is in Australia, with more than 25,000 twins on the books.”
A significant twin study among adolescents shows an even weaker genetic correlation. In 2002 Bearman and Brueckner studied tens of thousands of adolescent students in the U.S. The same-sex attraction concordance between identical twins was only 7.7% for males and 5.3% for females—lower than the 11% and 14% in the Australian study by Bailey et al conducted in 2000.
In the identical twin studies, Dr. Whitehead has been struck by how fluid and changeable sexual identity can be.
“Neutral academic surveys show there is substantial change. About half of the homosexual/bisexual population (in a non-therapeutic environment) moves towards heterosexuality over a lifetime. About 3% of the present heterosexual population once firmly believed themselves to be homosexual or bisexual.”
“Sexual orientation is not set in concrete,” he notes.
Even more remarkable, most of the changes occur without counseling or therapy. “These changes are not therapeutically induced, but happen ‘naturally’ in life, some very quickly,” Dr. Whitehead observes. “Most changes in sexual orientation are towards exclusive heterosexuality.”
Numbers of people who have changed towards exclusive heterosexuality are greater than current numbers of bisexuals and homosexuals combined. In other words, ex-gays outnumber actual gays.
The fluidity is even more pronounced among adolescents, as Bearman and Brueckner’s study demonstrated. “They found that from 16 to 17-years-old, if a person had a romantic attraction to the same sex, almost all had switched one year later.”
“The authors were pro-gay and they commented that the only stability was among the heterosexuals, who stayed the same year after year. Adolescents are a special case—generally changing their attractions from year to year.”
Still, many misconceptions persist in the popular culture. Namely, that homosexuality is genetic – so hard-wired into one’s identity that it can’t be changed. “The academics who work in the field are not happy with the portrayals by the media on the subject,” Dr. Whitehead notes. “But they prefer to stick with their academic research and not get involved in the activist side.”
Duh. It is a mental illness encouraged by Marxists.
That, and an increasingly feminized, emasculated society.
I believe that's pretty much a BS contrivance of politicized "science," meant to serve the pervert political agenda. There is no such thing as a "female brain" inside of a male.
I had to get to your post #56 before I found one that stated the obvious. Why is this only reported on a pastor's blog?
They will just declare that any test for a gay gene is a hate crime. Any scientist developing one will have all his grants cancelled. Any company producing such a test will be driven into bankruptcy. Any lab processing such a test will be burned.
This is known in advance. Nobody will produce such a test.
Agree, esp. among lesbians. I used to play a lot of softball (yes, I know) and evey lesbian I knew had been molested by a family member when they were young. Every single one.
Deniers of science & reality continue to wrongly believe...
1. Homos are born that way
2. Man “evolved” from apes
3. Man-made global warming
4. Communism is good
5. allah/satan is their leader
Intellectual idiots - all of them!!!!
The research was done twice, first in the 1960s, by top researchers (one of whom I knew), then again in the 1980s, by the USG. Both times there was a very real concern that the use of plant estrogen, very chemically similar to human estrogen, by farmers, and other industrial chemicals, could interfere with this process, perhaps creating a generation of androgynous males.
The research itself was very detailed. Finding what chemicals could block the testosterone or mimic it, the lack of it reaching the brain of male test animals, or introduced to female test animals. They went so far as to provide it to just one hemisphere of the animals brains, and not the other. The same tests were conducted hundreds of times with the same result.
Importantly, in animals, this does come close to dictating their sexuality, since they have little gender identity that is not impulse driven. So males would act with female behavior to attract other males, and females would try to mount other females.
Those with divided brains exhibited both sexual behaviors, willing to mount or be mounted.
However, the research also showed that humans sexual attraction is far more complex than animals. Though human males would have slighter frames and a more androgynous appearance, the rate of heterosexuality was about the same. Women seemed divided on their attraction to more masculine or less masculine males, both by their personal preference, and by the time of their menstrual cycle.
Females with a “male” brain were more “tomboy” before adolescence, but were seen as *more* attractive to men as adults. However, by then, their serum testosterone level had more impact on their sexuality, if not their sexual orientation.
‘...intellectual idiots - all of them...”
Yes....!!!!
1. Ancient Rome/Greece ... male body worshipped/ not born, men like each other!!
2. law of entropy, no evolution, sorry
3.Algae sinks, carbon dioxide easily taken care of by earth
4.communism is atheism/ let the bribes begin
5 Satan is their leader - why are the the liberals in bed with the Islams? Rhetorical question
PS- I am not a bible thumping creationist
Thanks Coleus.
Androgynous Pat?
I thought of this after I posted the other post, was this picture taken in America???
I would think the parents and the doctor would be arrested for allowing a youth to do this irreparable harm to his body.
They are in the States, the program is at Boston Children’s Hospital.
An endocrinologist can prescribe puberty blockers and other hormones without restriction... no law governs this. On the other hand no law protects a physician against lawsuits either.
Generally, puberty blockers are the first step followed later by estrogen.
Interestingly, testosterone is a controlled substance while estrogen is not. This is because of the misguided use of steroids by athletes and bodybuilders...a very stupid practice.
Suppose there were a gene which reduced the reproductive success rate of male carriers to zero, but quadrupled the reproductive success rate of female carriers. Would the fact that the reproductive success rate of male carriers was dropped to zero cause the gene to die out of succeeding generations?
Personally, I very much doubt that there is a gay gene, but would think it likely that some generic factors affect the extent to which people are attracted to males, and other genetic factors affect the extent to which people are attracted to females. If males that have a stronger-than-normal attraction to females mate with females that have a stronger-than-normal attraction to males, then even if half of the children have the wrong 'unusually-strong attraction' gene for their sex (and are thus less likely to reproduce), the union may produce enough children to have a higher net reproductive success rate than would unions of people with "normal" levels of attraction.
On the other hand, even if homosexuality is in some measure genetic, so what? There are probably genetic factors that cause people to be unusually strongly attracted to children, but that even if someone is a pedophile because of genetics, that doesn't mean the person shouldn't be prosecuted if he acts upon those pedophile tendencies and becomes a child molester.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.