Gay DNA found

[illustri]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Someone may have already pointed this out (not going to sift through 9 pages of missed posts ), but not exactly a great source. Have these findings been published?

Identical stretches of DNA on three chromosomes -- chromosomes 7, 8 and 10 -- were found to be shared in about 60 percent of the gay brothers in the study, compared to about 50 percent expected by chance. The region on chromosome 10 correlated with sexual orientation only if it was inherited from the mother.

As usual, any alternative explanations have been neglected by the author who has a clear agenda. Study: 456 men from 146 families with two or more gay brothers. You take a closed genetic sample like that and call a 10% difference from random occurrence proof of genetic causality? Let me know when this study gets published.

- study is published in human genetics, jan 12
- genetic studies have been done from fewer samples
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not
- research before you scream baseless accusations

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Someone may have already pointed this out (not going to sift through 9 pages of missed posts ), but not exactly a great source. Have these findings been published?

365gay.com is a perfectly legitimate news service. Much of their content, including this article, is from the usual providers, like reuters, newswire, etc. This article is content from newswire. Would it be more trustworthy if the same content was reproduced by a news paper of your choice?

As mentioned in the article, the findings are to be published in the next issue of Human Genetics.
[/quote]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Identical stretches of DNA on three chromosomes -- chromosomes 7, 8 and 10 -- were found to be shared in about 60 percent of the gay brothers in the study, compared to about 50 percent expected by chance. The region on chromosome 10 correlated with sexual orientation only if it was inherited from the mother.

As usual, any alternative explanations have been neglected by the author who has a clear agenda. Study: 456 men from 146 families with two or more gay brothers. You take a closed genetic sample like that and call a 10% difference from random occurrence proof of genetic causality? Let me know when this study gets published.

Ah yes, the usual fvck-witted response from PschoWizard.

Show me where the findings are interpreted as "proof of genetic causality".

The 10% difference is statistically significant.

There are likely multiple influences on sexual orientation, & no scientist is expecting to find a single region of genes associated with sexual orientation at 100%.

The study establishes a complex pattern of assocation between regions of dna and sexual orientation. Shared dna on chromosomes 7, 8, and 10 occurred at rates higher than expected by chance. However the region of dna on chromosome 10 only correlated with orientation only if inherited from the mother. That raises the possibility the region of dna exerts influence while the child is within the womb. The study is especially intersting because the regions of dna implicated aren't on the sex chromosomes (previous research has been limited to sex chromosomes).

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: illustri
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not

The agenda of the 365gay.com news site is to report developing news that is of specific interest to the gay and lesbian community. (And also, presumably, to make a profit as a business).

Their news reports are no more or less biased than what appears in other on-line news providers, such as Yahoo news. As with many news services, much of their content is reworded material from newswire, reuters, associated press, etc.

The articles themselves do not, in my opinion, contain a "pro gay" bias. Maybe people are interpreting the absence of an anti-gay bias as evidence of a pro-gay bias; however they would not be correct in doing so.

 

[Nebor]

I'm not a P&N guy. I'm an OT guy. Futhermore, I'm a gay ATOT guy. We're called GAYTOTers. Anyways, I came in here to see what was being said about the Iraqi election, and saw this. So I was drawn in.

Now, I would love for the various hateful and discriminatory people in the world to be put in their place by definitive proof that homosexuality is genetic. That would make me pretty happy. But when they were mapping the human genome, the idea was to cure cancer, parkensons, etc. My point is, isn't there something better that can be done with the HUGE amount of computing power that it takes to search the genome? How do you think many folding@home user's would feel knowing that their proported genome mapping\searching efforts are going towards this petty argument, while mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers die from deadly illnesses every day?

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: illustri
- study is published in human genetics, jan 12
- genetic studies have been done from fewer samples
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not
- research before you scream baseless accusations

1. I didn't scream anything - I simply made observations.
2. I have no stake in which side the hammer falls on in this debate, as I don't see how a genetic predisposition forms the basis of rights any more than a selected state of mind/sexual preference.
3. I'm not seeing the article in Human Genetics/J. of Human Genetics. Have a page number/title?

Edit: Not in Human Genetics.

Behavior Genetics
Publisher: Springer Science+Business Media B.V., Formerly Kluwer Academic Publishers B.V.
ISSN: 0001-8244 (Paper) 1573-3297 (Online)

And here's the actual abstract:

Abstract Aromatase cytochrome P450 (CYP19), which is necessary for the conversion of androgens to estrogens, plays an important role in the sexual differentiation of the brain. To investigate whether differences in the gene encoding the aromatase enzyme influence sexual orientation in men, we conducted linkage, association, and expression analyses in a large sample of homosexual brothers using microsatellite markers in and around CYP19. No linkage was detected, and a gene-specific relative risk of 1.5-fold could be excluded at a lod score of ?2. Results of the TDT demonstrated no preferential transmission of any of the CYP19 alleles in this sample. Expression of aromatase mRNA by microarray analysis was not significantly different between heterosexual and homosexual men. These results suggest that variation in the gene for this subunit of the aromatase enzyme complex is not likely to be a major factor in the development of individual differences in male sexual orientation.

I'd include full text, but I'm pretty sure that violates the copyright.

 

[Nebor]

.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Nebor
I'm not a P&N guy. I'm an OT guy. Futhermore, I'm a gay ATOT guy. We're called GAYTOTers. Anyways, I came in here to see what was being said about the Iraqi election, and saw this. So I was drawn in.

Now, I would love for the various hateful and discriminatory people in the world to be put in their place by definitive proof that homosexuality is genetic. That would make me pretty happy. But when they were mapping the human genome, the idea was to cure cancer, parkensons, etc. My point is, isn't there something better that can be done with the HUGE amount of computing power that it takes to search the genome? How do you think many folding@home user's would feel knowing that their proported genome mapping\searching efforts are going towards this petty argument, while mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers die from deadly illnesses every day?

I guess you'd have to ask the individual researchers what their goals are in pursuing this research.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: illustri
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not

The agenda of the 365gay.com news site is to report developing news that is of specific interest to the gay and lesbian community. (And also, presumably, to make a profit as a business).

Their news reports are no more or less biased than what appears in other on-line news providers, such as Yahoo news. As with many news services, much of their content is reworded material from newswire, reuters, etc.

The articles themselves do not, in my opinion, contain a "pro gay" bias. Maybe people are interpreting the absence of an anti-gay bias as evidence of a pro-gay bias; however they would not be correct in doing so.

Yes, just like lifenews.com isn't biased. :roll:

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Nebor
I'm not a P&N guy. I'm an OT guy. Futhermore, I'm a gay ATOT guy. We're called GAYTOTers. Anyways, I came in here to see what was being said about the Iraqi election, and saw this. So I was drawn in.

Now, I would love for the various hateful and discriminatory people in the world to be put in their place by definitive proof that homosexuality is genetic. That would make me pretty happy. But when they were mapping the human genome, the idea was to cure cancer, parkensons, etc. My point is, isn't there something better that can be done with the HUGE amount of computing power that it takes to search the genome? How do you think many folding@home user's would feel knowing that their proported genome mapping\searching efforts are going towards this petty argument, while mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers die from deadly illnesses every day?

I guess you'd have to ask the individual researchers what their goals are in pursuing this research.

Their goal is clear, to answer the question, "Is homosexuality a direct effect of, or a linked to specific genetic markers?"

That's just not a life threatening question.

 

[illustri]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: illustri
- study is published in human genetics, jan 12
- genetic studies have been done from fewer samples
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not
- research before you scream baseless accusations

1. I didn't scream anything - I simply made observations.
2. I have no stake in which side the hammer falls on in this debate, as I don't see how a genetic predisposition forms the basis of rights any more than a selected state of mind/sexual preference.
3. I'm not seeing the article in Human Genetics/J. of Human Genetics. Have a page number/title?

Edit: Not in Human Genetics.

Behavior Genetics
Publisher: Springer Science+Business Media B.V., Formerly Kluwer Academic Publishers B.V.
ISSN: 0001-8244 (Paper) 1573-3297 (Online)

you're citing a different study by the same researcher on a differentcandidate gene which incidentally was concluded to have no influence on male sexual orientation

abstract of the paper which was cited by the article

 

[CycloWizard]

Dur...

 

[illustri]

cyclowizard
i see by your edited post you bolded the portions of the abstract toward your point
i'm glad you took the time to read the text and attempt some study before posting again...

but surely you realize once you did read it that this paper was not the one referred to in the article?

 

[Riprorin]

aidanjm, there's hope for you:

Men who have left homosexuality showing others the way out

 

[illustri]

aw jeez

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: illustri
cyclowizard
i see by your edited post you bolded the portions of the abstract toward your point
i'm glad you took the time to read the text and attempt some study before posting again...

but surely you realize once you did read it that this paper was not the one referred to in the article?

Yes, I have realized that. The article you were referring to does not appear on the publisher's list for Jan 2005 articles, hence the confusion. And yes, I read the entire other article. The abstract is a summary of the entire paper. Amazingly, the conclusions matched those conclusions I highlighted in the abstract.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: illustri
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not

The agenda of the 365gay.com news site is to report developing news that is of specific interest to the gay and lesbian community. (And also, presumably, to make a profit as a business).

Their news reports are no more or less biased than what appears in other on-line news providers, such as Yahoo news. As with many news services, much of their content is reworded material from newswire, reuters, etc.

The articles themselves do not, in my opinion, contain a "pro gay" bias. Maybe people are interpreting the absence of an anti-gay bias as evidence of a pro-gay bias; however they would not be correct in doing so.

Yes, just like lifenews.com isn't biased. :roll:

The fact you say it is biased, doesn't make it so. In fact, the news reports at 365gay.com are neither pro- nor anti-gay. They provide a pretty much even-handed account of the events being reported on. Any fool can see that, by reading a few of the articles.

Your hinting that this particular article is untrustworthy due to it's supposedly pro-gay source is particularly ludicrous, given that the article is merely a reproduction of content provided by newswire. In fact, many of the articles on that site are content from Reuters, Associated Press, Candaian Press, newswire, etc.

The only "bias" occurs in the selection of news stories, news stories are selected from around the world which are likely to be of interest to the gay and lesbian community.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: illustri

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: illustri
- study is published in human genetics, jan 12
- genetic studies have been done from fewer samples
- news site may have agenda but researcher did not
- research before you scream baseless accusations

1. I didn't scream anything - I simply made observations.
2. I have no stake in which side the hammer falls on in this debate, as I don't see how a genetic predisposition forms the basis of rights any more than a selected state of mind/sexual preference.
3. I'm not seeing the article in Human Genetics/J. of Human Genetics. Have a page number/title?

Edit: Not in Human Genetics.

Behavior Genetics
Publisher: Springer Science+Business Media B.V., Formerly Kluwer Academic Publishers B.V.
ISSN: 0001-8244 (Paper) 1573-3297 (Online)

you're citing a different study by the same researcher on a differentcandidate gene which incidentally was concluded to have no influence on male sexual orientation

abstract of the paper which was cited by the article

Human Genetics
2005 Jan 12; [Epub ahead of print]

Abstract

A genomewide scan of male sexual orientation

Brian S. Mustanski1, 2 , Michael G. DuPree1, 3, Caroline M. Nievergelt4, Sven Bocklandt1, 5, Nicholas J. Schork4 and Dean H. Hamer1
(1) Laboratory of Biochemistry, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Md., USA
(2) Institute for Juvenile Research Department of Psychiatry, University of Illinois at Chicago (M/C 747), 1747 W. Roosevelt Road, Chicago, IL 60608, USA
(3) Department of Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa., USA
(4) Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, Calif., USA
(5) Department of Human Genetics, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif., USA

Received: 16 September 2004 Accepted: 30 November 2004 Published online: 12 January 2005
Abstract This is the first report of a full genome scan of sexual orientation in men. A sample of 456 individuals from 146 families with two or more gay brothers was genotyped with 403 microsatellite markers at 10-cM intervals. Given that previously reported evidence of maternal loading of transmission of sexual orientation could indicate epigenetic factors acting on autosomal genes, maximum likelihood estimations (mlod) scores were calculated separated for maternal, paternal, and combined transmission. The highest mlod score was 3.45 at a position near D7S798 in 7q36 with approximately equivalent maternal and paternal contributions. The second highest mlod score of 1.96 was located near D8S505 in 8p12, again with equal maternal and paternal contributions. A maternal origin effect was found near marker D10S217 in 10q26, with a mlod score of 1.81 for maternal meioses and no paternal contribution. We did not find linkage to Xq28 in the full sample, but given the previously reported evidence of linkage in this region, we conducted supplemental analyses to clarify these findings. First, we re-analyzed our previously reported data and found a mlod of 6.47. We then re-analyzed our current data, after limiting the sample to those families previously reported, and found a mlod of 1.99. These Xq28 findings are discussed in detail. The results of this first genome screen for normal variation in the behavioral trait of sexual orientation in males should encourage efforts to replicate these findings in new samples with denser linkage maps in the suggested regions.

Brian S. Mustanski and Michael G. DuPree contributed equally to this work.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Dur...

what is this supposed to mean?

Is this some kind of apology for you going off half cocked and making an ass of yourself?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
aidanjm, there's hope for you:

Men who have left homosexuality showing others the way out

not my cup of tea, riprorin.

 

[illustri]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: illustri
cyclowizard
i see by your edited post you bolded the portions of the abstract toward your point
i'm glad you took the time to read the text and attempt some study before posting again...

but surely you realize once you did read it that this paper was not the one referred to in the article?

Yes, I have realized that. The article you were referring to does not appear on the publisher's list for Jan 2005 articles, hence the confusion. And yes, I read the entire other article. The abstract is a summary of the entire paper. Amazingly, the conclusions matched those conclusions I highlighted in the abstract.

glad to clear up the confusion
/im glad the paper you originally cited had an abstract matching its actual body, i'd be frightened to think of the state of science if any work that did otherwise would be published

 

[CycloWizard]

.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: PatboyX
i think those suggesting any sexual attraction is a behavior issue are either purposefully ignoring their own experiences or asexual.

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Nebor
I'm not a P&N guy. I'm an OT guy. Futhermore, I'm a gay ATOT guy. We're called GAYTOTers. Anyways, I came in here to see what was being said about the Iraqi election, and saw this. So I was drawn in.

Now, I would love for the various hateful and discriminatory people in the world to be put in their place by definitive proof that homosexuality is genetic. That would make me pretty happy. But when they were mapping the human genome, the idea was to cure cancer, parkensons, etc. My point is, isn't there something better that can be done with the HUGE amount of computing power that it takes to search the genome? How do you think many folding@home user's would feel knowing that their proported genome mapping\searching efforts are going towards this petty argument, while mothers, fathers, sisters and brothers die from deadly illnesses every day?

It's not "petty", next to Terrists and The Looney Left Liberal Losers, Gaydom is the biggest threat to the U.S.

Haven't you been listening to the President???

 

[Codewiz]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Gaard
I think if I could know in advance if my child was going to be gay, and if I were given the power to make it so that he was born straight, I would do so. I think he would have a better chance at having a happy life if he were straight. Not that he couldn't be happy if he were gay, but I think the chances of happiness would be greater if he weren't. I could be wrong.

And I should probably say this to clarify, the reasons for opting to alter any gay gene would have absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality being 'immoral'.

I guess that's a more acceptable form of eugenics, you don't have to liquidate gay people, just prevent them from being born in the first place. it will be far easier to eliminate homosexuality, than to eliminate homophobia, no doubt.

Damn dude you are blind. What did you stated earlier, you would WANT your kids to be gay. Have you thought about why? People generally want to be around other people like themselves. It is a fact of life. You want a kid that is LIKE YOU!!!!!!!

Same for hetrosexuals. They want children that are like themselves.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

I don't think that is what he was saying.

So you guys don't follow the "Looking Straight Ahead" rule while peeing in a public bathroom?

[/quote]

Obviously not...guess common courtesy isn't something that is considered when it comes to checking out someones hogan.