We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Scientists uncover possible source of homosexuality
Topic Started: Dec 15 2012, 03:43 AM (427 Views)
Riverwide
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Scientists say they may have discovered the source of homosexuality.

The answer may lie in epigenetics, or how the expression of genes is controlled by “temporary switches” known as epi-marks, researchers from the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis explained in a study released Tuesday.

Sex-specific epi-marks are usually “erased” from generation to generation.

But when they do not disappear, they can be passed from father to daughter or mother to son, resulting in homosexuality in children, scientists suspect.

“Transmission of sexually antagonistic epi-marks between generations is the most plausible evolutionary mechanism of the phenomenon of human homosexuality,” Sergey Gavrilets, the study’s co-author, said in a release.

Researchers have long believed that sexual orientation had some hereditary component.

However, scientists say that homosexuality, in terms of evolution, cannot be solely genetic, because the trait would eventually disappear given that homosexuals aren’t expected to reproduce.

Epi-marks, on the other hand, are thought to have an evolutionary advantage that keeps them within the population.

For instance, some epi-marks work to protect a female fetus from becoming too masculine if testosterone spikes in late pregnancy.

“These epi-marks protect fathers and mothers from excess or underexposure to testosterone — when they carry over to opposite-sex offspring, it can cause the masculinization of females or the feminization of males,” William Rice, the study’s lead author, told U.S. News & World Report.

Rice said that epi-marks are “highly variable” and only those that are especially strong would potentially lead to homosexual children.

The evolutionary biologist said that while his theory still needs to be tested on parents and their children, it is the most plausible explanation so far.

“We've found a story that looks really good," Rice said. “This can be tested and proven within six months. It's easy to test. If it's a bad idea, we can throw it away in short order."

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/scientists-uncover-source-homosexuality-article-1.1218017#ixzz2F2XIbLAC
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GimmeSomeRiver
Member Avatar
When I lay in bed I touch myself and I think of you
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
So I'm a 'feminized' male? How delightful.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anastasia Beaverhausen
Member Avatar
Pensioner
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Looks legit. Waiting 6 months for this to explode.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Riverwide
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I'd like to know *why* this is being investigated by scientists. It implies the search for a 'cure' somewhere down the line, or am I being paranoid?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
GimmeSomeRiver
Member Avatar
When I lay in bed I touch myself and I think of you
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
No, I think that's a reasonable way to look at it. Question is, if there was a cure, would you (or I, or anyone) take it?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vancho
Mature
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Riverwide
Dec 15 2012, 12:25 PM
I'd like to know *why* this is being investigated by scientists. It implies the search for a 'cure' somewhere down the line, or am I being paranoid?
I actually think this is for the good, for many reasons:
  1. It's nearly absolutely genetic: no one will claim that people can "turn" gay if adopted by gay couples, or are under the influence of gays;
  2. The mechanism that determines gayness seems random and it doesn't say that "gays produce gays." Therefore, no one will say gays shouldn't reproduce with a heterosexual woman because they will give birth to gays.
  3. Hopefully people will start seeing gayness as any other genetic trait: for example, eye color. The logic is as follows: Some people blue hazel eyes and that's just as normal as brown eyes. Therefore, some people are gay and that's just as normal as straight.
  4. Genetic disorders are increasingly hard to cure (probably the hardest). First, no one will officially try to cure it because it's not a disorder. The only risk is that parents may (sometime in the future) know their child is gay in advance and abort it because they're homophobic.
Edited by Vancho, Dec 15 2012, 09:29 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Riverwide
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Ivane
Dec 15 2012, 09:27 PM
Riverwide
Dec 15 2012, 12:25 PM
I'd like to know *why* this is being investigated by scientists. It implies the search for a 'cure' somewhere down the line, or am I being paranoid?
I actually think this is for the good, for many reasons:
  1. It's nearly absolutely genetic: no one will claim that people can "turn" gay if adopted by gay couples, or are under the influence of gays;
  2. The mechanism that determines gayness seems random and it doesn't say that "gays produce gays." Therefore, no one will say gays shouldn't reproduce with a heterosexual woman because they will give birth to gays.
  3. Hopefully people will start seeing gayness as any other genetic trait: for example, eye color. The logic is as follows: Some people blue hazel eyes and that's just as normal as brown eyes. Therefore, some people are gay and that's just as normal as straight.
  4. Genetic disorders are increasingly hard to cure (probably the hardest). First, no one will officially try to cure it because it's not a disorder. The only risk is that parents may (sometime in the future) know their child is gay in advance and abort it because they're homophobic.
I didn't think of it along those lines at all. Very good points!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Riverwide
Member Avatar
Administrator
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
GimmeSomeRiver
Dec 15 2012, 05:18 PM
No, I think that's a reasonable way to look at it. Question is, if there was a cure, would you (or I, or anyone) take it?
It's WAY too much fun being a gay.

Posted Image

;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TickTock
Member Avatar
I Fckt Riverwide N Da Azz Real Hard Again
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Ivane
Dec 15 2012, 09:27 PM
Riverwide
Dec 15 2012, 12:25 PM
I'd like to know *why* this is being investigated by scientists. It implies the search for a 'cure' somewhere down the line, or am I being paranoid?
I actually think this is for the good, for many reasons:
  1. It's nearly absolutely genetic: no one will claim that people can "turn" gay if adopted by gay couples, or are under the influence of gays;
  2. The mechanism that determines gayness seems random and it doesn't say that "gays produce gays." Therefore, no one will say gays shouldn't reproduce with a heterosexual woman because they will give birth to gays.
  3. Hopefully people will start seeing gayness as any other genetic trait: for example, eye color. The logic is as follows: Some people blue hazel eyes and that's just as normal as brown eyes. Therefore, some people are gay and that's just as normal as straight.
  4. Genetic disorders are increasingly hard to cure (probably the hardest). First, no one will officially try to cure it because it's not a disorder. The only risk is that parents may (sometime in the future) know their child is gay in advance and abort it because they're homophobic.
Thank god I didn't have to post all that.

Mankind always has to be studied.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jimmy Mack
Member Avatar
Pensioner
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Riverwide
Dec 16 2012, 11:14 AM
GimmeSomeRiver
Dec 15 2012, 05:18 PM
No, I think that's a reasonable way to look at it. Question is, if there was a cure, would you (or I, or anyone) take it?
It's WAY too much fun being a gay.

Posted Image

;)

I, for one, am still astounded that you don't like "Glee".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · News & Current Affairs · Next Topic »

Theme by Sith of the ZBTZ and Outline