Courtesy by: gulfnews.com

A large population of the UAE suffers from genetic disorders, including common ailments like diabetes, high blood pressure and thalassemia, which affect one in 12 people in the country

Dubai: The first genetic and bio-technology conference opened here on Monday with experts warning that the world is being challenged today by serious diseases and viruses that threaten our communities.

The event is organised by the UAE Genetic Diseases Association, in partnership with Yamaguchi University, Japan, Zayed University and DuBiotech.

“This event is all about inspiring students to think creatively about science and society, and to see themselves as part of a global community of practitioners working in similar fields,” said Dr. Michael Allen, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Zayed University.

He said genetics and biotechnology is still a burgeoning field in the UAE.

A large population of the UAE suffers from genetic disorders, including common ailments like diabetes, high blood pressure and thalassemia, which affect one in 12 people in the country.

Dr Sulaiman Al Jassim, Vice-President of Zayed University, said the conference will help raise awareness on prevention and treatment methods of these diseases.

Graduate and post graduate students from the Zayed University, Higher College of Technology and Manipal University are taking part in the day-long conference.

Common genetic disorders in UAE

• Diabetes
• High blood pressure
• Obesity
• Birth Defects
• Cancer, such as breast cancer
• Leukaemia (1 in 12 in UAE has this)
• Thalassemia
• Alpha Thalassemia
• Sickle-cell anaemia
• G6PD (not enough of enzyme glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase)

Ahhh yes, Christmas.  Used to be a time when we’d be excited for like, an entire month long, and get up at 4AM to wake up our siblings and see whether Santa had come bearing good tidings and all that.

What’s happened since?

Seems like people everywhere are just … just … cynical and sort of unhappy with the stress it all brings.

Now, before I say more about that, yes … there are definitely tons of great things still going on, lots of peeps happy and whistling and enjoying the true spirit of the holiday.  I see it every day, I do.  I admire the folks who go about this season with nothing but optimism in their voices, with smiles on their faces, and with unrelenting good cheer.  It’s truly awesome to see that.

Maybe it’s just me getting older (33 is a magical number, they say), but there just doesn’t seem to be as much delight in the Christmas air.  Are people really that stressed out by it all?  Your comments are welcome!

Onto other topics.  W pointed out in my previous post that a “Bucket List” is really something you do when you’re about to “kick the bucket,” per se, so I suppose I should re-word that.  I don’t plan on keeling over anytime soon.  I mean, I have like, 3 more semesters of nursing school to finish first!  So perhaps it’s more like a “Christmas Break To-Do List.”  But then that might imply that I have to do these things, which I really don’t.  Oh, I dunno, call it what you will.

And lastly, another thing — I went over to one of the nursing buildings yesterday to have a look at the final exams and see what I got wrong.  While I was there, I got to stop in to another professor’s office and see the feedback the other students had given us on our group presentation on Genetic Counseling.  I have to say, I wasn’t too surprised at the feedback — both positive and negative.  All of the things I worried about as potentially negative were represented by some of the students’ feedback.  And probably with good enough reason.

I have to stop beating myself up over mistakes I make, and here is a prime example.  I worried about some of these things prior to the presentation, but decided to go ahead with them, and got a bit of negative feedback.  So there it is.  Gotta live with the decision, and be okay with that.  It wasn’t anything that really nagged terribly at my conscience, so at least I have that to fall back on.  Most of the feedback was entirely positive, and that made me feel good for myself and for our group.  And we got a great grade on the presentation.  But the perception others have of me will always nag at me somewhere deep inside.  I don’t want to ever disappoint my classmates or friends.

So gotta work on that.

Human being as we all know have evolved from apes. Human evolution, or anthropogenesis, is the origin and evolution of Homo sapiens as a distinct species from other hominids, great apes and placental mammals. There have been may scientific evidences trying to prove that humans evolved from apes. But is this really true? Has mankind really evolved from 4 legged  creatures. If so why are there so many difference between humans and mamels. Why we lost 2 chromosomes from our dna? Our bone structure is entirely different from hominids. There are many questions that need answers.

What you are about to find out will blow your mind. According to Zecharia Sitchin in the ancient Sumerian’s scriptures roughly 6000 years ago humans were genically enginered by exterrestrial beings called the Annunaki. In Sumerian Mythology they were a pantheon of good and evil gods and goddesses who came to Earth to create the human race. According to the some resources, these gods came from Nibiru – ‘Planet of the Crossing.’ The Assyrians and Babylonians called it ‘Marduk’, after their chief god. Sumerians said one year on planet Nibiru, a sar, was equivalent in time to 3,600 Earth years. Anunnaki lifespans were 120 sars which is 120 x 3,600 or 432,000 years. These were very advanced beings and they gave the Sumerians the knowledge about the solar systems, the human dna and much more.

The creation of the first human (Adam).

Ancient Structures used to depict DNA.

Our DNA has been manipulated in the past by beings that passed themselves off as gods.. In Sumer, the alien race of gods were known as the Anunnaki. In Greece, the Annodoti. In the Celtic lore, the Tuatha de Danaan. In the Semetic scriptures (Torah, Talmud, Old Testament, and other Apocryphal texts like the Book of Enoch), they are called The Nephilim, The Sons of God, or The Watchers.

The gods themselves had their own monarchy, with laws of succession similar to our own, and they built a global empire upon the Earth, with great cities, temples and monuments, and mighty nations established on several continents. They created mankind as a slave race to work on their farms and in their gold mines, among other things. The Sumerian legends are very clear: man was made to bear the yoke of the gods. Man was separate from the gods, like a domesticated animal, and there was a great cultural taboo amongst the gods against sharing any of their sacred information with humanity, even things such as writing and mathematics. These gods ruled directly over Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Indus Valley, and their rule is recorded in the histories of all three civilizations

At some point, it is told, some of the gods broke rank. This is again recorded in just about every culture on Earth that has a written or oral history of legends. Some of the gods, finding human females most appealing, intermarried with them (breaking, of course, a major taboo within their own culture), and creating a race of human/god hybrids.

However, these actions (the interbreeding and sharing of secrets with humans) incurred the wrath of the Most High God, and a number of other gods who were disgusted by this interracial breeding. This sparked the massive and devastating battle of the gods that has come down to us in the legends of both the War in Heaven, and the Deluge. Then, in order to cleanse the Earth,s surface of the curse of humanity, they covered it with a flood. Interestingly, this flood is mentioned in the legends of almost every ancient culture on Earth.You can read about the great flood that wiped off humanity in almost all religions.

1. Bible: the great flood.

2. Sumerian version of the great flood: Tiamat battle.

3. Hinduism version: Vishnu as Matsya Avatar to save humanity. 

So basically since humans were created in the image of their gods there are various stories and scriptures about their kind being saved by a savior. Below is the story about lord Vishnu as Matsya avatar saving humanity.

Once upon a time there was a great devotee of Lord Vishnu,King Satyavrata.He is a very great and vigorous devotee of Lord Vishnu.He used to perform all the vedic rituals and customs,and has done tapas.Once during his sandyavandanam,when he was at the river,a fish was into the hand of King Satyavrata.The fish was asking the king to save it from the larger fishes which r in the river. So the king took it in his kamandala. When he returned to his kingdom, the fish enlarged itself asking the king to provide a more spacious one. It began enlarging itself as big as an ocean, the king recognised that itself is the very great Lord, and prayed. Lord Matsya saved King Satyavrata for his great devotion from the flood which is going to destroy whole universe. King Satyavrata protected the seeds of all creatures on a boat for the next age from the great flood.

I was sad yesterday afternoon as I watched the large group of people leaving for Mexico.  I so very much wanted to go with them.  They are bringing Christmas gifts to the children at Casa Hogar Elim, an annual thing started last year by Jeff Harrell.  We collect shoe boxes, fill them up with small age-appropriate toys and sugar-free candy, then wrap them up.  Now these gifts aren’t just for a boy, age 6, or a girl, age 10, there’s a package for each individual child with their name on it.  We can’t put bows on these boxes, as they would be crushed under the weight of all the supplies in the cars and vans.

There are so many people from our church that want to go to Casa Hogar, they don’t even need to advertise the trips.  If you’ve been there, you’re a walking billboard for CHE.  The Thanksgiving trip even had a waiting list this year.  The ‘regulars’ have gone so many times, they can’t even tell you how many trips they’ve made.  We love these kids, and for those of us whom visit often, these kids are our extended family.

You know the old saying, ‘you can choose your friends, but you can’t choose your family?’    I beg to differ.  I was thinking last night about family and friends, and all of the funny ways God placed them in my life.  God clearly has a sense of humor!

I moved into my house three years ago, although my kids didn’t start attending the local school until two years ago.  We live at the end of the street, walking distance from the elementary school.  I noticed a house that had some fun yard decor, more specifically, ‘little skeleton girl’.  She was out for Halloween, dressed in her hippie costume, but she stayed out for other holidays.  What!?  Could this be?  Could I really have a soul sister on my street?

I was intrigued.  Why did I think this was my soul sister?  I have a full size mannequin named Darla.  You can learn more about her on Facebook at facebook.com/luvplasticpeople.  Anyway, I wanted to meet little skeleton girl’s mom.  I did, and her name is Patty.

Patty loves to volunteer her time for great causes, so we cross paths quite a bit, not only walking down the street, but many other places.  Patty was at Victoria Gardens with me when I met Flo, the ghost of Christmas future.  I can’t wait to go to Casa Hogar with Patty!  I live in a great neighborhood, as it’s filled with fun, caring people like Patty.

As I said in yesterday’s post, I was an only child until my teen years.  I really don’t remember ever bugging my parents about wanting a baby brother or sister.  I don’t know if that’s because I didn’t want one or because I knew it was a horrible idea for my parents to have anymore children.  I guess God knew I needed some siblings, but decided to bring them in under different circumstances.  At the age of 14, I got a step brother, two step sisters, and soon after, a half brother.

The funny thing about this is my sister Jo.  We are not blood related at all, yet we are just alike.  Our beliefs, our personalities, our creativity… and the list goes on.  The more perplexing thing here is our kids.  My son Joe and her son Isaac, again, no genetic relation, not only look alike, but act alike.  Jo lives in Wisconsin, so we don’t get to see each other too often.  We were on vacation in Florida several years ago, Joe and Isaac both ’sitting’ on their heads on the sofa watching TV.  Jo says, “Look, Isaac taught Joe to do that.”  I replied, “What?  Joe’s been doing that for months.”  Both kids had been doing this separately for months.  And just for the record, they look alike right-side up too.

This next one isn’t as much humor funny as it is implausible funny.  Let me just start by saying it’s an extremely rare occasion when I can find anything good to say about my ex-husband.  The aftermath of an interaction with him frequently results in misery and relational mass destruction.

Dawn and Genna live near Kansas City, so we don’t get to see them very often.  Genna is my step-daughter and Dawn is her mother.  The boys and I took our family vacation up there this past summer and we had a blast!  Okay, I know what you’re thinking.  You probably think it’s odd that we’re friends, so this next statement will really throw you.  We consider ourselves family.  Yes, family.  You may not be able to choose your genetic family, but through love and friendship, you do choose your ‘preferred’ family.  One of the definitions of family is “a group of people who are generally not blood relations but who share common attitudes, interests, or goals…”   Yes, that’s us.  I’ve realized one thing this Christmas, one very big positive thing to say about the boys dad.  Without him, I would not have my boys, nor would I have Dawn and Genna.  As you can tell by the photo, they are obviously ‘related’, as they are a bunch of little camera junkies!  Genna is a very talented photographer and is doing an internship right now.  The boys like to make funny YouTube videos, a couple that have gone small-time viral.

God has brought many other people into my life in unexpected ways, from church and Facebook to a lady at church who accidentally door dinged my beat-up car.  I’ll take 100 of those kind of door dings!  Oh, wait, I have 100 door dings, but only one has a great story behind it.

So what does all of this have to do with Christmas?  This is the time of year when many people experience strong feelings of loneliness, seemingly endless despair and high levels of stress.  I’m no different, but as these feelings arise, I have this faint awareness of hope.  I appreciate my friends and family, realizing I don’t tell them that nearly enough.  I also appreciate you for taking the time to read my 25 days of Christmas blog.  :)

(here are my various posts in various Facebook threads this morning.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onan

The very FIRST of the 613 mitzvahs (commands) in the Torah is “be fruitful and multiply.” I doubt if we can understand, in the context of our age and culture, the desperation that, say, Lot’s daughters, or Sarah or Hannah felt at the prospect of being childless. Lot’s daughters were not being lewd or prurient when they copulated with their own father; they were merely seeking a poor solution to what they saw as a problem of paramount importance. Our minds perhaps focus on what we perceive as the naughtiness of any sexual activity. But the real focus in those times was procreation. In Egypt, where polygyny is still allowed, one barren woman felt guilty and pushed her husband to take a young wife. At the wedding the wife functioned as a bridesmaid. In prehistoric times, you perhaps had no government, and you certainly had no social security. All that you had was family in the immediate sense, and clan or tribe in the broad sense. One important motive for giving a minor daughter in marriage was to forge a protective allegiance with a more wealthy and powerful family. Nowadays, our main problem is overpopulation. In prehistoric times, humanity was often on the verge of extinction. It took until around 1830 for world population to reach 1 billion. But by 1930 it had DOUBLED to two billion. And by the 1960s it had TRIPLED to 6 billion.

——

It is not inconceivable that a world run by robots, or genetically redesigned humans or cyborgs would be a better world than the world we currently have which is run by us. Perhaps our Pandora’s box technologists will tinker around and develop some self-replicating form of superior being which will come to view us as vermin to be exterminated. If the “world” became a much better place for conscious intelligent life, but a world without us, would that really be a bad thing? We could see it as bad for us, because we would not be there. But we wont be here in 100 years anyway. Some future generation, yet unborn, will be here despoiling the ecosystem and exploiting, tyrannizing, colonizing and torturing each other (that is when they are not busy saving each others souls by preaching the “one true faith.”)

————

There is all that work on “the compassionate gene”, arguing that since such behavior is actually a survival advantage to our species, hence it was spread by a process of natural selection, since those groups with the “rotten-selfish-sonovabitchova-screw-everyone-else” gene faded into extinction. Then too, what comes to mind suddenly is the Netflix DVD I watched last week, “Pulp Fiction”. The boxer has freed himself and is about to flee, but he hear the screams of his sworn enemy who is being sodomized. He stops and searches for the appropriate weapon. First he picks up a hammer (which of course symbolizes for Tarantino the stoneage man of pre-history), next he picks up a chain saw (which of course symbolizes the industrial revolution) and next he picks up a baseball bat (which symbolizes weirdo American sports notions of a manliness which is both homophobic, yet strangely homoerotic), but FINALLY, he sees the Samuri Sword, which is the eternal unchanging symbol for principles of personal honor and courage. The “greasy gooks” were not worthy to touch his father’s gold watch, but that same Asian culture acquired and passed on a symbol of honor which transcends race and nationality. So, in addition to our genetic traits, Sufi teaching stories and myths can often mold our choices and behavior.

—-

If I cannot find true meaning in this very moment, then all of my life was for nothing. If I can find true meaning in this moment, then even if I die the next moment, I shall not have lived in vain. (Don’t bother to Google, I just now made this up)

—–

It is ironic how all the little babes, who are innocent and loved and adored by definition, grow up to be our enemies, our tyrants, our slaves, our financial swindlers, our false prophets and heretics, and… furthermore, each babe is made to feel very special, adored… and yet part of adulthood and maturity is realizing that we are not special to the world, and in fact we are quite dispensable

+++

I feel that if someone truly had faith in God, then they would not fret so much about whether the Bible is consistent. The Bible tells us that God’s ways are beyond all human comprehension, and then theologians busy themselves trying to explain how God thinks and what God did and how and why.

—-

I watched a Japanese man carefully tending a very small garden, and asked him if he takes any interest in Buddhism or any other religion. He explained that this life is all there is, and then we are gone, nothing, so that is why he makes the most of each day (in his case, with a small flower garden).
I asked my cousin a similar, in his 70s, who worked the family dairy farm all his life, who married a 17 year old girl and has never tried out another woman, who never drinks, smokes, swears, steals or tells a lie, or goes to church, and he said the same thing; namely, this is all there is, and once you die, that is it. Now, we know (or some of us know) that in 500,000 our sun, on its way to death as a white dwarf, will expand to the point that the earth will burn to a crisp, and with it, Shakespeare, Plato, the Bible, the Qur’an, the Three Stooges, Judge Judy, Family Guy, the Bush archives… the whole nine yards. So, tell me what meaningless means unless you believe in “pie in the sky” heaven with angles strumming harps and blowing trumpets. I think Sartre and Frankl are probably two other good examples of two people who created meaning in a meaningless world. But if you are “saved” then you won’t want to understand one word of this (and I cant blame you).

—–

So then, if once you die, there is no trace left of you, except whatever way you might have influenced society, culture, and if one day, all human culture and tradition will be vaporized, then in what sense is their meaning. And do you feel that those things which Jeffrey Dahmer enjoyed are good. I mean, you seem to imply that enjoyment is good, so I suppose you would agree with Doestoevsky’s character that “all is permissible.” Now, if there is no God or afterlife or judgment, and you can kidnap and torture people and eat them, and never get caught, and the planet earth will disappear one day anyway, then that should fit in with your notion of “enjoyment even for a moment.” And I am certain that Hitler felt a great deal of enjoyment and satisfaction that he came so close to world conquest and complete genocide (“the Jewish Problem”). Hmmm perhaps by “meaning” we might resort to Socrates wisdom that “every person by nature (or definition) desires the good.” Perhaps we will add a pinch of Solomon: “There are ways which seemeth good unto a person, but the end thereof is death.”
But, wait, suppose we agree that one of the goals of certain postmodernist novelists is meaninglessness, and suppose some philosophers actually cherish their theories of a meaningless world in which we create meaning. Now I have found an example which refutes your assumption that no one could POSSIBLY find meaning in a world they see as meaningless. Remember what Carl Sagan said “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”

—–

I do feel the world and life is quite meaningless from many angles, but we CREATE something subjective for ourselves that gives us meaning. Picasso painted women with 3 breasts. For him, at that time, it had meaning. It just so happens that the world, posterity, took a fancy to such paintings. But if I were to paint a women with 3 breasts, they would say “Oh, he is imitating Picasso.” Sartre found meaning in his Existentialism, and then abandoned it when it was at its height of popularity and embraced Communism. After some years Sartre abandoned Communism as a failed ideology. My statement that “we create meaning for ourselves in a meaningless existence” is no more or less flawed than Socrates’ statement “I only know that I know nothing.” If Socrates truly knows absolutely nothing then surely he cannot know his status, for that would constitute one thing. So the point about Carl Sagan is pertinent. If you cannot find any evidence, you cannot assume absence. BUT, if you can find any number of people who feel that existence is essentially meaningless apart from the meaning we impose upon it, then obviously, your premise is disproved. Now, perhaps Di Ridgway Hunt agrees with me. Or perhaps she sees the flaw in my thinking but feels sorry for me.

——
Calvin Johns replies:

I agree with William. The idea of the world being essentially meaningless does not necessarily lead to depression or self-delusion, nor is it illogical. It simply means that the world has no meaning “in and of itself.” I find that even irreligious people who claim to think life has no meaning still ascribe to some essential meaning somewhere in their paradigms. In fact, meaning is generally the invisible bedrock of any paradigm or perspective.

I think “meaningless” is the perfect word for it. The world is inherently devoid of meaning, i.e. it has nothing inherently to do with human concerns or values.

I think the old gardener and the farmer are right. … See More

However, I think Rebecca points out the limitation of Existentialism. I think Existentialism has a limitation that Buddhism does not in that Ex. seeks to build meanings and thinks that self-made meanings are necessary, whereas Buddhism teaches that you can embrace a meaningless world and not create your own to fill in the gap.

Joy and happiness have little to do with meaning, though some

—-
William continues:

Tom Hanks movie, Castaway, is for me a perfect example of our neurotic need to impose meaning, pretend that we know something, pretend that anything matters. On the island, Hanks’ best friend is Wilson, a soccer ball. Finally, Hanks makes it back to civilization. He finds that his wife has moved on and married someone else. The movie ends with the hint of a possible new romance. But really, deep down, everyone and everything is Wilson, the soccer ball. The native American Indians for thousands of years had more meaning in their lives than we do, in part, because they were clueless. Our sun is four times too small to go out as a spectacular supernova, so we dont even have the thrill of that to look forward to. But the natives knew nothing about that. They were lucky if they lived to be as old as 40. But every day was filled with meaning and adventure. Individuals sometimes suffered terribly, but the society as a whole was in perfect health because of natural selection. They had no worries about health insurance. But the real laugh is that our particular homo sapiens variety has not been around as long as the Neanderthal’s 400,000 years. Now, all our modern science makes it possible to life to 100 or beyond. But our culture has no use for us after 50. And even the weakest among us, even the barren and sterile, can reproduce and pass on their weaknesses and become more and more dependent upon antibiotics and medications.
And we were so good at the “be fruitful and multiply” thing that our population is increasing exponentially. But, the glaciers are disappearing, the Ganges will dry up by 2060, etc. And we don’t even have the comfort of our Jungian dream-time beliefs. We feel pretty certain that the universe itself will run down into a thermodynamic heat death of maximum entropy, where no further change can take place. Now, yes Calvin, if I were a wise courageous Buddhist or Jain, I would not even need my Wilson soccer ball. I could just stop eating and perform Jain Sallekhana. But I cant. I am a coward, and I have to live out however many days are left to me talking to my make-believe soccer ball, Wilson, and yet simultaneously know the entire plot and how all movies end. Care for some popcorn?

We’ve gotten so many great skinny jeans in this month—many different washes from Current/Elliot, Acne, Nobody, and Genetic. And we’re still waiting for more denim to arrive in the next week. Here’s a glimpse at some of the styles we have in store now:

Genetic James in Royal

Current/Elliot Bluebird legging

Nobody Mod Tube in Cadet

Nobody Cult Straight in Code

Coming soon:

Goldsign denim leggings in both black and dark blue (sometime next week!)

Autism Speaks Initiative cited in TIME   Top 10 Medical Breakthroughs

An important genetic finding in autism landed at number seven in TIME Magazine’s “Top 10 Medical Breakthroughs of 2009.” Autism Speaks’ Autism Genetic Resource Exchange (AGRE) was cited as an important resource in the study, which was published earlier this year in Nature. The spotlighted study, lead by Hakon Hakonarson, M.D., Ph.D, identified a genetic clue to autism: variations on a region of chromosome 5 appear to play a crucial role in about 15% of cases of autism. Working with AGRE – a DNA database of more than 2,000 families affected by autism, and the largest

Courtesy by: gulf-times.com

Folic acid or vitamin supplement before and in early stage of pregnancy reduces the risk of birth defects by 70%, participants at the Qatar Health 2009 were told yesterday.

Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar’s Prof Ahmed Teebi was presenting a lecture in the obstetrics and gynaecology track on “Paediatrics: Inherited disorders-proposed strategy for prevention.”
“Other proposed strategies for prevention could include genetic testing and screening at the level of family, high schools and premarital, early prenatal diagnosis and or pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, newborn screening for metabolic disease and endocrinopathies as well as genetic counselling and public education,” he said.

However, Dr Teebi, who is a professor of paediatrics and genetic medicine, said the most common tool for prenatal diagnosis for birth defects was ultrasound scan.

He highlighted some of the examples of genetic testing available in Arab countries such as testing for sickle cell trait in Bahrain, testing for thalassemia trait in some Mediterranean countries including Saudi Arabia, testing for thalassemia and sickle cell traits in Kuwait and homocystinuria, spinal muscular atrophy, cystic fibrosis, sickle cell and thalassemia traits testing in Qatar.

He said other methods of prevention included avoidance of drugs and X-rays during pregnancy, healthy diet before and during pregnancy, artificial insemination of donor being used in the Western countries as a method if husband is affected with a genetic disease or a carrier of a disease that is also carried by wife.

However, Prof Teebi said termination of pregnancy, though not accepted in the Arab world, was generally accepted before 120 days of gestation if the fetus was diagnosed with severe birth defects or a genetic condition not compatible with normal life.

He said genetic problems can be solved through medical or surgical treatment of the foetus right in the womb, medical treatment of metabolic disorders by dietary restriction or supplementation, co-factors, drugs and enzymes.

He said that surgical treatment of some metabolic disorders with bone marrow transplant, treatment of endocrinopathies, surgical correction of births defects and gene therapy were all treatments for genetic disease.

The expert stressed the importance of public education and awareness of major health issues such as consanguinity, autosomal recessive disease, healthy food and folic acid supplementation, effects of smoking during pregnancy, promotion of measures to prevent or reduce the burden of genetic disease and birth defects as well as general health
education.

Also, speaking during a lecture on “Opportunities for research in busy clinical practice” Sidra Medical research adviser Dr David Kerr urged clinicians to find time to engage in research to the betterment of the populace.

“Our colleagues here are too busy seeing many patients that they are not engaging in many research studies, but if they can contribute to research efforts while doing their work it would really be nice as this will ensure not only quality care, it would improved treatment and provide quick solutions to health problems as well as create an impact on the health sector across the world,” he said.

Dr Kerr mentioned that research efforts on three major killer diseases diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease would soon be underway.

“Sidra is hoping to initiate several researches in collaboration with the Supreme Council of Health, WCMC-Q and the Oxford University, on these three major health problems affecting the region and we hope that our findings will benefit many across the world,” he explained.

“While initiating your clinical research protocol, be curious, logical, be open to partnership, build your own experience and observations and make use of your own busy practice to contribute to global knowledge,” he advised clinicians.

“Stop it, you’re killing me!” I laughed and continued to tickle her tender tendrils. She caught my wrist and slowly eased it away, trembling with mirth. Turned out her race has a genetic mechanism built in that synthesizes a deadly, fast-acting poison from the oxytocin released by laughter. She went on to say she wasn’t sure whether the process was natural or it was introduced into their DNA during the species’s dystopian epoch; in the end, they never bothered to remove it from their genetic code. She and I had a falling out not long after that and I never saw her again. I heard on the grapevine that she died out on some hole in Centauri. With her condition, I guess it’s not a bright idea to work at a comedy club.

Courtesy: gulf-times

The mandatory pre-marital medical check-up being proposed in Qatar since 2007 will be officially launched on December 13, Media and Communication department director of Supreme Council of Health, Jassim Fakhroo, said yesterday.

A media campaign aimed at creating awareness on the process among residents, especially would-be couples, begins today.

The launch of the medical check-up, sponsored by Qatar Petroleum and Qtel, was initially scheduled for September 2007, but was delayed due to some technical reasons.

The compulsory pre-marriage check-up will test couples for infectious diseases like HIV, hepatitis and genetic and hereditary ailments to prevent them from giving birth to children with complicated diseases, deformities or abnormalities.

Pre-marital medical screening is a religious and civilised requirement which has been endorsed by the Arab League with some Arab countries, including Qatar, passing laws and regulations on the testing.

In 2006, HH the Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani had passed instructions to issue the Family Law No. 22 for 2006, which stipulates – in its Article No. 18 – mandatory pre-marital screening for all, with the aim of maintaining better health for tomorrow’s generations, and building up the society of health and wellness.

An Emiri decree was issued on June 29, 2006 enforcing the provisions of the Family Law, and Article 18, chapter three of the decree stipulates that a separate medical certificate shall be provided by the competent authorities to each one of the couple concerned before certifying the marriage contract.

However, while maintaining the confidentiality of the test results, the pre-marital committee would not stop couples from getting married in case of negative results.

According to documents made available to mediapersons by the SCH officials yesterday, in the Arab world – including Qatar – there are certain prevalent genetic diseases, which are hereditary anemias (sickle cell anemia and thalassemia), spinal muscular atrophy (SMA), inherited metabolic diseases in general particularly homocystinuria in Qatar and cystic fibrosis.

In the report, professor of Paediatrics and Genetics at Well Cornell Medical College-New York and Qatar and an adviser to SCH professor Ahmad Teebi said all the diseases were transmitted through autosomal recessive genes that are driven primarily by cousin marriages.

“The married couples are usually cousins or distant relatives, that is why such diseases spread in most Arab countries due to the prevalence of cousin marriages. However, marriage of non-related couples does not guarantee the birth of healthy children free from genetic disorders and birth defects,” he explained.

Professor Teebi said pre-marital screening was highly important regardless of the degree of relationship between the couples (future husband and wife).

“In other words, pre-marital screening is equally important for relatives and non-relatives,” he added.
He stressed that pre-marital screening for both man and woman will reveal if one or both are carriers for the same disorder tested.

“The advice is to avoid the marriage if both are carriers as their chance to have children affected with the disease is 25% or one in four in each pregnancy,” he cautioned.

“We all know that the person carrying the hereditary disease is not a sick person or looking abnormal. On the contrary, he/she is fit but only carrying disease genes that can be transmitted to his/her children,” professor Teebi explained.

He mentioned that on average each human carries around three deleterious recessive genes. If the same gene is shared with a partner the chance of having affected children will be high. When one of the couple is a disease carrier, and the other is not, there will be no problem.

Examination clinics’ schedule
A number of health centres in the country have been designated as pre-marital examination clinics.
The health centres will operate according to the following time schedule:
Sunday
* Morning: Airport Health Centre
* Evening: Al Khor Health Centre
Monday
* Morning: Al Gharrafa Health Centre
* Evening: Airport Health Centre
Tuesday
* Morning: Al Rayyan Health Centre
* Evening: West Bay Health Centre
Wednesday
* Morning: Al Khor Health Centre
* Evening: Al Rayyan Health Centre
Thursday
* Morning: West Bay Health Centre
Clinic working hours:
Morning: 8:00 – 1:00pm
Evening: 5:00pm – 10:00pm

IS SEXUAL IDENTITY FIXED? RESPONDING TO THE WILDFIRE MYTH OF ‘GENETIC HOMOSEXUALITY’

A Research Paper

Presented to

Professor Daniel R. Heimbach

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for

ETH6550B Moral Foundations of Marriage & Family

Leonard O Goenaga

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

December 10, 2009

IS SEXUAL IDENTITY FIXED? RESPONDING TO THE WILDFIRE MYTH OF ‘GENETIC HOMOSEXUALITY’

As a youth pastor, I am in the front lines of the culture war. The number of questions we receive, from sex to salvation, are quite diverse. Having an open question policy, a student of mine recently approached me with the following. A friend from school had made the statement that homosexuality was genetic, and thus fixed and unchanging. The friend had quoted an article from the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay-friendly activist organization within the Republican Party, as proof.[1] Within this article were numerous studies by researchers and psychologists I had never heard of. However, understanding God’s revelation on sexual morality, and the serious threat immorality poses upon both society and faith, I sought to do some research and provide my student with an answer. What I discovered was simply shocking: “contrary to what many Americans believe, there are no replicated scientific studies demonstrating that homosexuality is determined by biological or genetic factors.”[2]

From here I began to pour through the research and dig through various journals and studies, finding this statement affirmed within the scientific record. I had written these findings in a short essay and provided them to my student to share with his friend. This essay was then posted on my Facebook, with the following remarks from friends: Female 1: “The fact that you are arguing that homosexuals CHOOSE this life style is hatred in itself,” Female 1: “But the Bible says nothing against homosexuality.” Male 1: “And to think if being gay were truly a matter of choice, why would I, or any one else bother to pick it?” Male 2: “And for the record, I think Homosexuality is genetic, and there are many geneticists who believe so.”[3] In short, I was again in shock.  Why would I have received such comments? Was the evidence not studied? What assumptions were being made? Where did this claim that homosexuality was genetic come from, and how has it been absorbed so fully by the public? To answer these various questions, as well as provide a detailed exploration, I had done the following research. The claims made by such individuals needed answers, and it is the purpose of this paper to do so.

One more concern must be clearly expressed before the evidence is presented is the spirit of this research. In all things, we must have love. Our presentation must always be one of grace. However, we must not mistake this for political correctness, or a fear of man. The very motivation of love should motivate us to share knowledge with one another, regardless of one’s subjective preference. To share in a civil and well-supported manner cannot be perceived as hate simply because it brings about an opposition to emotionally attached issues. Such is the method of suppressing exchange, which is true bigotry (to simply toss the hate sticker at anyone who disagrees). Rather, a deconstruction of presuppositions must occur, and the approach to the evidence must be done with honesty. In this paper, I will explore the initial groundbreaking studies that lead to the myth of genetic homosexuality, and critique them both on scientific and moral grounds, as well as on biblical exegesis. I will argue that the idea that homosexuality is genetic and thus fixed is simply unsupportive, and contradicts the works in which the myth stems, as well as the body of scientific research. I will summarize the essential studies in which this myth arose (LeVay, Swaab & Hofman, Bailey & Pillard, and Hamer), as well as the vehicles that propagated the myths. After analyzing the source of the myth and how it spread, I will critically analyze the above individual’s work, place focus on the scientific community’s reaction, and the earlier mentioned researchers own later conclusions. Following this critical analysis, I will proceed to develop an understanding of homosexuality and it’s source of origin. When this framework is established, I will explore God’s Word on the subject, and refute contaminated readings of key topical passages. When the presentation is complete, I will conclude the paper by asking whether change possibly exists.

Sparking the Myth: Root of ‘Genetic Homosexuality’

In his study of the male brain, Dr. LeVay takes three subject groups (presumed heterosexual men, homosexual men, and women), and studies four cell groups (INAH 1, 2, 3,and 4).[4] The specific area of study is the anterior hypothalamus, which regulates male sexual behavior. Dr. LeVay takes postmortem tissue measured from the three subject groups, and finds no grave difference in the measurement of INAH 1, 2, and 4. However in INAH 3, Dr. LeVay discovers twice a difference between the amount in heterosexual men versus homosexual men, and women.

In addition to the LeVay brain studies, a second source of research studied the cell groupings in the brain and their relation to homosexuality:

The Swaab and Hofman research studied the volume of the suprachiasmatic nucleus [SCN]…in homosexual men. The SCN is a cell group located in the basal part of the brains of mammalians. It has been thought to be the principal component of the biological clock that generates and coordinates hormonal, physiological and behavioral body rhythms…it has been thought to have involvement in sex because of the varying body rhythms in sexual desire as well as the sexual changes that come with aging.[5]

The study conducted by Swaab and Hofman studied the brains of 34 subjects, divided into several groups. The first group was one of reference, consisting of eighteen males who died of various causes. The second group consisted of ten homosexuals who died of AIDS. The third group consisted of six heterosexuals who had also died of AIDS. The final group consisted of four males and four females. The study concludes: “…the human hypothalamus revealed that the volume of the…SCN in homosexual men is 1.7 times as large as that of the reference group of male subjects and contains 2.1 times as many cells.”[6]

In addition to the brain studies, a major area that contributed to the ‘genetic homosexuality’ illusion is that of twin studies. In J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard’s “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,” research was conducted upon identical twins with the intention to show a high concordance rate (the rate at which both twins are homosexual). Their findings concluded with a 50% concordance rate for identical twins.[7] The concordance rate for non-identical rates hovered around 22%.[8] Their claim was that “the pattern of rates of homosexuality by type of relative was generally consistent with substantial genetic influence…”[9]

Complimentary to the works on brain studies and those of twins, proponents have cited gene studies by Dean Hamer. Geneticist Dean Hamer of the National Cancer Institute released a study by a team he led that studied genetic material on the x chromosomes of homosexual twins. Dr. Hamer states, “The goal of our work was to determine whether or not male sexual orientation is genetically influenced. We used the standard techniques of modern human genetics, namely pedigree analysis and family DNA linkage studies.”[10] Hamer’s study led him to conclude that “We have now produced evidence that one form of male homosexuality is preferentially transmitted through the material side and is genetically linked to chromosomal region Xq28…[and that it] contributes to homosexual orientation in males.”[11]

Fanning the Flames: The Media Response

Although the various studies may have sparked the myth of genetic fixed homosexuality, it is clear the media’s response fanned the flames. From Larry Thompson’s “Search for a Gay Gene,” in TIME magazine, to Newsweek’s “Is This Child Gay?” numerous stories propagated the myth in their headlines. Other works worth mentioning include the Wall Street Journal’s July 16 1993 headline, “Research Points toward a Gay Gene,” and the New York Time’s “Report Suggests Homosexuality is Linked to Genes.” Predictably, these various pieces did a poor job providing the fullness of the research and its opposition, and instead provided headlines that easily sway simple readers into leaving with the conclusion that homosexuality is genetically fixed. We cannot underestimate the profound impact such media stories have had on the public, and their failure to provide the substantial volume of scientific work clarifying and critiquing the above-mentioned studies.

Spreading the Flames: Gay Activists

In addition to the work of the media, gay activists have played a major role in spreading about the genetic homosexuality myth. One accompanying statistics that needs to be addressed before we go further is in reference to the myth of the homosexual population size. “John Money of Johns Hopkins University, a well-known sex researcher, defined a homosexual as one who had six or more sexual experiences with members of the same sex. Using this as the definition, he found that 13% of adult males were gay and about 7 percent of adult females were lesbians.”[12] However, John Money’s estimations appear quite high.[13] [14] A study of adult men in the U.S. published 1989 by Charles F. Turner, Robert E. Fay, Albert D. Klassen and John H. Gagnon provide lower estimations.[15] According to the study, 20.3% of adult males had participated in some same-sex experience by the age of 21. However by the age of 20 the percentage of 6.7% is given, arguing for such an exploratory stage between the ages of 20 and 21. The value of the study comes in the percentages post-20 years of age. The study suggests that as few as 1.8% of males rarely had a same-sex encounter, 1.9% occasional had them, and 1.4% had them quite often.[16] With this, statistics of the numbers of homosexuals begs the question, what is a homosexual? Clearly one cannot define a homosexual by an unrepeated sexual same-sex act. It is better defined as continual same-sex activity, and as the study shows above, keeping this in mind provides a drastically lower percentage.

What is most troubling is the politicization of the above-mentioned research and homosexual population estimations. From Log Cabin Republicans to Bruce Voller’s National Gay Task Force, many homosexual advocacy groups have touted the numbers and claims in an effort to develop political collateral. Offering the public the illusion that homosexuality is genetically fixed fostered sympathy and political justifications for claims of violations. In addition, the claim of 10% homosexuals tricks the public into believing one out of every ten Americans is gay. No better can political abuse upon science be seen then with the handling of homosexuality within the American Psychiatric Association.

The point worth mentioning is in regards to the American Psychiatric Association’s removal of homosexuality as deviant behavior. Many proponents point to this change as evidence of some internal fixed nature of homosexual attraction. However, one must understand the political reasoning for this change. In the words of Dr. Charles Socarides, a longtime APA member who witnessed the change:

The change in the diagnosis was strictly a political one. No scientific evidence was produced. A board of trustees heavily weighted towards gay activism took charge and removed it without scientific study whatsoever. No scientific study had been done. And nor had the experts in the field – like Irving Bieber, myself, and other people – never were we asked for our opinion. It was just rammed through without scientific study and without evidence…The organization was under political assault by gay activists – some of them members of the APA itself. It was easier for the leadership to switch than fight.[17]
Dr. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe add additional insight on the issue in relation to psychiatry around the world: “According to a 1992 study of 125 psychiatric associations around the world, all but three still consider homosexuality a mental illness or sexual deviation. That means that U.S. psychiatrists are joined only by Denmark and South Africa in their liberal stance,”[18]

Putting out the Fire: Refuting the Work of LeVay, Swaab & Hofman

First thing we must acknowledge regarding the works of LeVay and Swaab & Hofman, is the sample size. We address both studies collectively as they address similar issues as well as fall under similar critique (although most focused of our critique would be the work of LeVay, as it focuses directly on an area of sexual response). Within the Swaab & Hofman study, merely ten homosexuals are studied (out of a sample size of thirty-four).[19] Within the work of LeVay, the number is slightly higher (nineteen).[20] A total sample of twenty-nine homosexual men is quite immature to make universal claims.

In addition to a critique of the tiny sample sizes, there was a presumption of the heterosexual samples that must be explored. Within the heterosexual sample of Swaab and Hofman, eighteen heterosexuals were presumed to contain such sexual preference. However, as Swaab and Hofman acknowledge, “Sexual preference of the subjects of the reference group was generally not known.”[21] As for the work of LeVay, the same presumption was made. Within his very sample of assumed heterosexuals, six had died of aids. Regarding the sample, he himself stated that they were “men who were presumed to be heterosexual.”[22] There are also a myriad of homosexual activity that leaves further questioning regarding the male samples. As John Frame explains in his massive work of ethics, The Doctrine of the Christian Life:

People have bisexual inclinations, and still others are largely heterosexual, but willing to enter homosexual relationships under certain circumstances (experimentation, prison, etc.). Is there a genetic basis for these rather complicated patterns of behavior? Neither LeVay nor anyone else has offered data suggesting that.[23]

In addition to the weakness of sample size, and the presumption of heterosexual sexual orientations, their work comes into an additional problem: the cause of changes within the INAH 3 cell groupings and brains. First, all homosexual subjects studied died of aids, which could mean that a possibility of the change was not an object of ingrained sexual orientation, but the effect the disease could have upon their brains. Others have argued for other such unknown causes, as seen in the work of Mariage Barinaga[24]

One final point worth mentioning regarding the work of LeVay, Swaab & Hofman, is whether changes within the brains were the cause or consequence of sexual orientation. It is basic biological fact that, much like physical exercise, behavior can issue forth changes within the body. Besides the obvious physical changes that occur with bodily exercise, certain patterned behaviors exercise specific areas of the brain. These areas then change according to the practice, and this understanding may be applied to the work of LeVay, Swaab & Hofman. How can we remain assured that homosexual orientation is the product of such brain sizes, and not the cause there of?[25]

Putting out the Fire: Refuting the Work of Bailey and Pillard

Before critiquing the finds of Bailey and Pillar, we must acknowledge their potential research bias. It must then be observed that Michael Bailey is openly sympathetic to gay politics, while Richard Pillard identifies himself as a homosexual. Although we cannot cast aside their research on such grounds, it is fruitful to keep this in mind when we evaluate their findings and observations. Besides acknowledging potential bias, a solid refutation occurs within an analysis of the concordance rate. Jeffrey Satinover, the author of the work Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, provides a solid critique on the concordance rate of the study:

If ‘homosexuality is genetic,’ as activists and their media supporters repeatedly claim, the concordance rate between identical twins [monozygotic twins] – that is, the incidence of the two twins either both being homosexual or both being heterosexual – will be 100 percent. There would never be a discordant pair – a pair with one homosexual twin and one heterosexual twin.[26]
Within identical twins we always find the exact eye color, as determined by their genes. To make the suggestion that homosexuality is genetic, is to expect the same results. However, this clearly is not the case.[27]

Within Satinover’s work, five essential objectives are raised. First, the author claims that the determining factor was genetic, which makes little sense given the shared environmental factors, specifically amongst identical twins.[28] Second, homosexual twins were sought after in gay magazines, thus polluting the study (homosexual twins are more likely to answer such an advertisement versus homosexual/heterosexual twins).[29] Third, sexual orientation was assessed by a report from the respondent (the inaccuracy of this method is overt). Fourth, the absolute similarity of genes can exaggerate the concordance rate, given the similarities. Fifth, Bailey and Pillard predicted an early childhood genetic nonconformity, which simply did not occur to any significant degree.[30]

Hardly do their conclusions verify the claim that homosexuality is genetic. If anything, it enforces the idea that several shared environmental factors play key roles. When other twin studies were pursued, conflicting conclusions were found. Regarding monozygotic and dizygotic twins, The Journal of Sex Research concluded, “for men, no significant genetic effects were found for number of opposite- and same-sex sexual encounters, not for sexual orientation.”[31] Bailey and Pillard admit other studies they conducted “found a strong familiar resemblance, but had insufficient power to determine whether that correlation was due to genetic or environmental factors or both.”[32] In the British Medical Journal, Miron Baron concludes regarding the report that “most of these results are un-interpretable because of small samples or unresolved questions about phenotypic clarification…the finding that the adoptive brothers of homosexual twins are more prone to homosexuality than the biological siblings suggests that male homosexuality may well be environmental.”[33] [34]

Putting Out the Fire: Refuting the Work of Hamer

In addition to LeVay, Bailey, and Pillard, we must first establish the existence of any bias, and come to discover that like LeVay and Pillard, Dr. Hamer is also a self-professed homosexual. By Hamer’s earlier mentioned conclusion of his study, the novice may leave with an impression that Xq28 somehow causes homosexuality. However this was never Hamer’s conclusion, regardless of the direction of his language. It is important to clarify what he did not find: 1) That homosexuality is directly inherited, and 2) That all homosexuals contain this gene marker.[35] What then can we conclude? Perhaps the analogy of a basketball player is best used. Searching the genetic traits of professional basketball players, we may find specific genetic markers that contribute to their ability to perform as professional basketball players (genes for body mass, lean muscle, ambidexterity, etc). However, these specific gene markers will not be found in every professional basketball player, nor can we assume that the presence of such gene markers absolutely predict whether one will be a basketball player. Rather, such genetic traits may incline someone to play basketball, but there is no ‘basketball player gene’! The same can be said of the misleading nature of Hamer’s research. Specific genetic markers may incline someone to homosexual desires, however they do not absolutely predict a fixed homosexual orientation. If anything, it will merely highlight the willful response towards such inclinations.

The most damaging evidence to Hamer’s research is that it has not been replicated (as can be said of all the studies in question). George Rice’s 1999 study in the journal Science failed to provide Hamer’s results. As their work concludes “It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer’s original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer… we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as was reported in the study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position Xq28.”[36]

Perhaps the best evidence regarding the works of these individuals is their own words. Regarding his work, LeVay states,  “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality was genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.”[37] In his work, Bailey claims he “did not provide statistically significant support for the importance of genetic factors” for homosexual orientation.[38] As for Dr. Hamer he comments “Homosexuality is not purely genetic… Environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay… I don’t think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay.”[39]

To Rebuild: Presentation of a Defense

In addition to the works of LeVay, Swaab & Hofman, Bailey, and Hamer, others have suggested hormonal irregularities as a cause to predispose one towards homosexuality. This is found within such works as G. Dorner’s, which studied the imbalance of sex hormones in rats. Within his work, prenatal development and hormonal irregularities during the fourth-seventh week may incline them to homosexuality.[40] However, other scientists have not confirmed Dorner’s work.[41] In addition, hormonal treatment for homosexuality has been rather unsuccessful, leading some to presume that perhaps the cause is more psychological than physiological.[42] If we have been able to readily dismiss the argument of genetic homosexual, as well as having observed the weakness of some hormonal imbalance as its cause, where then shall we go? How shall we approach the cause of sexual orientation? Our answer shall be two-fold: In the observance of research and consensus, and the revelation of biblical insight.

In discussing the source of homosexuality, a useful tool is to probe into the research of Irving Bieber and others. Regarding a study done on numerous homosexuals and their family background, Bieber and his team found that “a ‘triangular’ pattern in the family backgrounds of many male homosexuals [exist].[43] These men reported an emotionally detached or hostile father and an enmeshed, ‘close-binding’ mother who tended to ‘minimize’ her husband.”[44] Also in agreement, Mark Siegelman found that “homosexuals, in contrast to the heterosexuals, reported their fathers to be more rejecting and less loving. The homosexuals also described their mothers as more rejecting and less loving… homosexuals indicated less closeness to their fathers than the heterosexuals.”[45] Finally, Columbia University professors Richard Friedman and Jennifer Downey conclude the following on the issue of homosexual orientation, “The assertion that homosexuality is genetic is so reductionistic that it must be dismissed out of hand as a general principle of psychology… It is apparent that biological, psychological and social factors interacting in complex and various ways shape human sexual orientation.”[46]

After having reviewed the false evidence for a genetic justification for fixed orientation, as well as the myriad of factors that possibly result in homosexual attractions, we must make something clear. Regardless of future evidence, and whether or not we advance in some discovery that shows such attractions to be biologically advanced, we must understand that it does not make it natural or excusable. It has been known that an individual may have a genetic predisposition to alcoholism, yet that by no means makes it excusable. The same can be said of violence and other such factors. We cannot excuse all actions on the basis of some predisposition within the biological genetic makeup, as accountability for actions would be impossible. In addition, we cannot hold to some subjective moral understanding. God had designed his moral law to be objective and absolute, and some predisposition does not justify disobedience. In relation to this concern, John Frame provides the following conclusion:

Would a genetic predisposition for homosexuality eliminate the element of choice? Certainly not. A person with a genetic propensity for alcoholism still makes a choice when he decides to take a drink, and then another, and then another. If there is a genetic propensity for homosexuality, then those with that makeup face greater temptation in this area than others. But those who succumb to the temptation do choose to yield to it, as do all of us when we succumb to our own besetting temptations… they are not forced to do this by their genes or by anything contrary to their own desires.[47]

A Biblical Perspective on Homosexuality: ‘Gay Christianity’

In addition to the problem of interpreting the above critiqued work to argue for genetic and biological reasons for unchanging sexual orientation, individuals have made the claims that the practice of loving same-sex sexual union is compatible with the teachings of scripture. The modern protestant church is engulfed with the flames of such a controversy. From the Anglicans heresy trial of Bishop Righter, to the United Methodist Church convention’s 2000 riots caused by sexual revisionists, to the various mainline denominational splits that have occurred over the issue of revised sexual policies, the arguments are not merely within the homosexual community. Rather, they stretch much further, to the very reformed understanding of Scripture and it’s authority.[48] Such a revisionist understanding of homosexuality’s relation to Christianity is seen within Walter Barnett’s work, which he states “Some theologians and a number of Gay Christians, working from a growing understanding of the biblical texts, have come to the conclusion that the Bible does not exclude homosexual people from the Christian fellowship…”[49] In addition to Walter Barnett, John J. McNeill states that according to scholars, “nowhere in the Scripture is there a clear condemnation of a loving sexual relationship between two gay persons.”[50]

Beyond merely arguing that scripture lacks a condemnation of homosexual sexual relationships, some have even stated that there is something intrinsically divine regarding ‘coming out’, and that even the process may be considered sacramental. Dr. Daniel Heimbach identifies this ‘Sacrament’ of coming out, as well as a general morphing of sexual morality and theology to support fixed homosexual orientations, in his book True Sexual Morality: Recovering Biblical Standards for a Culture in Crises. Surveying the works of James B. Nelson, Eugene Rogers, Chris Glaser and others, Dr. Heimbach shows the compulsive direction theology and sexual morality descend upon observing sexual orientation as fixed, and ignoring specific biblical revelations on sexual behavior. As clarified in his work, we may see the danger of such descent by quoting Glaser from his Sacrament of Coming Out: “those of us who come out as bisexual and lesbian and gay reveal a glory larger than our self-identity: we reveal the glory of sexuality itself, a divinely created and graciously given glory… because we have seen in our sexuality the glory of God.”[51] It is interesting to note Glaser’s assumptions as they relate to the debunking of fixed genetic homosexual orientation listed previously. Glaser assumes homosexual, bisexual, and lesbian orientation to formulate self-identity, and that it is even a divinely created gift. Besides having acknowledged the removal of his assumption (gay orientation being fixed, let alone one’s very self-identity), what may we discover within scripture regarding the claim that homosexuality is a “divinely created and graciously given glory”?[52] What clarification does the work of God offer on this subject? Does my friend’s charge that “the Bible says nothing against homosexuality” hold true? We will study four major proof-texts on the subject: Gen. 19:1-11, Lev. 18:22, Lev. 20:13, and Rom. 1:26-27.000214

A Biblical Perspective on Homosexuality: Genesis 19:1-11[53]

One of the first major objections to the text by proponents is found within the claim that the passage merely condemns acts of rape. As defended by Walter Barnett in “Homosexuality ad the Bible”, the crowd sought to gang rape Lot’s visitors. They then argue that the act to be condemned is not homosexuality itself, but any form of rape. However, this understanding is quite lacking. Feinberg and Feinberg in their work Ethics for a Brave New World provide a clarification and refutation of this:

Nowhere does the text even slightly hint that what the men of Sodom wanted to do would be permissible if only Lot’s guests had consented. Moreover, this interpretation does not account for the fact that God’s judgment fell upon two entire cities. Was homosexual rape a common practice and thus brought the judgment of God? It could have been, but such is not stated in the text. What is more damaging is that God’s judgment on homosexuality in Sodom and Gomorrah is quite in harmony with his prohibition and denunciation of this sin in other Scriptures properly interpreted. It is not as though this is the only time homosexuality is denounced and judged.[54] (p. 190)

In addition to the argument of rape, a second popular explanation is offered. This argument is founded upon an understanding that the Hebrew word yada is used only 10 out of the 943 times in the OT to refer to sexual relations.[55] [56] For a response to this argument, known as the argument of hospitality, we must remember that mere statistics of word usage cannot account for meaning. We must take the word yada, and look at it within its context and author. Of interesting note, given the earlier statistic, is that seven usages of yada in the sexual sense occur within the book of Genesis (Gen 4:1, 17, 25; 24:16, 38:26, plus those in question). Given that proponents of the hospitality argument acknowledge that, absent of the two usages of yada in question, only ten usages refer to sexual acts, and half of these occur in Genesis. We have evidence to suggest that it’s author, Moses, would have used the word stylistically to refer to sexual acts.[57]

However, the best understanding of this text must be an evaluation in context. If we take yada to refer to some hospitable act of getting to know each other, how does Lot’s offering of his daughter make any sense? To quote the text, “Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man,” (Genesis 19:8, ESV), however if understood absent sexual relations, we must take this to mean Lot’s daughters have never become acquainted with and met men. This makes no sense, simply because their father, Lot himself, is a man. In addition, it is impractical to assume they had never before met men, and as such the sexual understanding makes more sense. Lot was offering his daughters up for the men sexually, and their rejection points in the way of homosexual desires. It would then make most sense, given the sexual understanding of yada in Genesis 19:8, that it’s usage in Genesis 19:1-11 would mean the same.[58]

Finally, in response to this argument, we may cross-check it with other references in scripture. Jude provides commentary on the actions and judgment cast upon Sodom and Gomorrah, stating: “just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire,” (Jude 1:7, ESV). The cause stated was ’sexual immorality’, and the Greek used is σαρκπσ ἐτερασ, which describes unnatural sex. As Feinberg and Feinberg explain, “Jude uses the verb porneuo with the preposition ek, which means they gave themselves up to sexual immorality completely and utterly! This is an extremely strong statement!”[59] When we take this in combination with the fact the city was punished, and not Lot (who would have breached the hospitality code and merited punishment), we see how weak such an understanding is.
A Biblical Perspective on Homosexuality: Leviticus 18:22, 20:13

The next set of major texts on homosexuality includes Lev. 18:22[60] and 20:13[61], which attempt to define Holy Living for the set apart people of the Israelites. The texts seem quite clear on restricting the acts of homosexuality, however this has not stopped proponents from formulating several interpretations. Perhaps the majority of these include an understanding of the practice to be directly tied to pagan idolatrous worship. The homosexuality in question is simply a form of idolatry, and not essentially evil. The pagan worship, which included homosexual acts as found within the practices and prostitutes of their neighbors, was the ‘abomination’ in question.[62] Furthermore, given the preceding texts regarding idolatrous sexuality, it is argued chapter 18 specifically seeks to set apart the Israelites from pagan worship, and must then be understood in this context.[63]

This argument is wrong, given several reasons. It is perhaps best to understand it in light of other biblical prohibitions. In relation to this issue, Feinberg and Feinberg provide the following clarification:

In the Leviticus Code incest, adultery, child sacrifice, bestiality, spiritism and the cursing of one’s parents are all prohibited. Only one act condemned in the Code has cultic or symbolic significance – child sacrifice, and it is condemned whether associated with religious worship or not. Child sacrifice was practiced in pagan religious rites, but it was wrong on two counts – in itself and because of its association with idolatry… Moreover, homosexuality is condemned in the context of adultery, bestiality, and incest. Clearly, those practices were not prohibited simply because of their association with idolatry or Egyptian and Canaanite cultures.[64]

A Biblical Perspective on Homosexuality: Romans 1:26-27

In addition to Genesis and Leviticus take on the issue, we may find prohibitions on homosexuality within the New Testament. Perhaps our best proof-text occurs within Romans 1:26-27, where Paul discusses the moral descent and heart-hardening that occurs within fallen humanity. Here Paul specifically discusses the practice of homosexuality and lesbianism.[65]

Similar to the approach taken above for Leviticus, proponents seeking to justify homosexuality argue that Romans 1:26-27 is to be taken within the context of idolatrous pagan practices.[66] It is argued that the context of the text provides the context of adultery to the homosexuality and lesbianism described in Romans 1:26-27.[67] However, this is poorly deceptive, as it ignores Paul’s clarifications of the acts as ’sexual impurity’ and ’shameful lusts’. In addition, Paul clarifies his statement by proclaiming the actions ‘unnatural’, as opposed to God’s natural creation. Being against God’s design is clearly a product of sin, and taken together with the clarifications as sexual impurity and shameful lusts, we may understand the act of homosexuality beyond idolatry or pagan worship, but a perversion of God’s created order, and something immoral in and of itself. If Paul sought to simply condemn pagan prostitution, which included heterosexuals, why leave this absent? Rather, Paul’s clarification as being ‘unnatural’ and growing out of lust is enough to understand the text as a condemnation on the act, and not merely it’s association with pagan practice.

One further point of clarification on Romans 1:26-27 is the argument of ‘unnatural’. Proponents such as Sherwin Bailey in his work Homosexuality and the Western Christian Tradition have argued that Paul merely refers to acts of ‘unnatural’ homosexuality. He then argues that, given sexual orientation is fixed, a constitutional gay individual committing homosexuality is in accordance to nature. A heterosexual committing the act of homosexuality, or a homosexual committing the act of heterosexuality is thus unnatural and within the condemnation of Romans 1:26-27. However, this is perhaps the great flaw of leftist theologians in general. They place man’s works as a filter for God’s Word. Clearly Bailey and others make the presumption that sexual orientation is fixed, however the science, as shown above, is simply absent to make such an absolute genetic charge. It also assumes Paul knew of such fixed orientation, which is unlikely. As such, we can see the initial error in such proponent’s presuppositions. Additionally, it fails to take God’s mega-narrative on sexuality. From the very beginning in Genesis, man was created for woman, and the two were committed to exclusive sex within the confines of marriage. Scripture is quite clear on the reservation of sex to marriage, as outside of it produces adultery. As such, we can apply these principles to understand that any sex outside of marriage is immoral, and this would include homosexual relations. Marriage is clearly defined as between a woman and man (affirmed by Jesus in his divorce statements), and thus any committed sexual homosexual engagement is thus unnatural, and thus immoral.[68] A removal of the presuppositions of fixed homosexual orientation, a proper exegesis on the words ’sexual impurity’ and ’shameful lusts’, and an understanding of the grand narrative of sexual morality debunk the proponent’s assumptions in Romans.

Opportunity from Ashes: Hope and Healing

Having analyzed the evidence, we may safely verify our initial statement: no replicated scientific studies exist that prove individuals are born homosexuals. Rather, it is a combination of complex environmental, social, and biological factors. In addition, we may trace the root of this myth not only to the studies mentioned, but the work of several over-eager activists and media sources. Further more, we may turn to the vast body of research to verify this claim, as well as a proper exegesis of Scripture that illuminates homosexuality. We are left now to ask two questions: 1) Why embark on such research, and 2) Is there a possibility for change?

With the utmost concern and love for humanity, I must humbly profess the following: lying to the public regarding homosexuality being genetic is damaging. This is not to be stretched as some wild call for punishing homosexuals. This is simply to say that a message is being conveyed to youth and the public that they cannot help being gay, regardless of a desire to be straight. There is an irony in this: in their attempts to verify homosexual identity, and claim a fixed constitutional sexual orientation, they trap individuals into the belief that their desires are unchangeable, regardless of an assumption of normality. As much as gay activists may assume, some individuals may not desire such sexuality (as made clear by the thousands of individuals who seek help), and to tell them there is no other way, given the clarity of research I provided, is unfair. This also begs the question whether aspects of homosexuality are unhealthy, and if so, it adds a real physical danger to misleading someone into believing they are fixed and unchanging.[69] However, let me again recall for the need not to allow one’s emotions to get the best of them, but to evaluate the evidence as is.

This leads us to ask if change is available and possible for those desiring to remove unwanted homosexual desires. We can answer this in the affirmative. Both secular and religious help exist, as we’ll make evident. An example of secular treatment that has seen some success is found in Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D. and NARTH (the National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality) founder’s Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality: A New Clinical Approach. On the issue of success rate, and debunking the activist’ claim that change is not possible, the following sample is found regarding counseling:

Of 49 patients… 31 (63 percent) were contracted for follow-up. The average period since the end of treatment was 4 years. Nineteen subjects (61 percent) have remained exclusively heterosexual, whereas nine (29 percent) have had homosexual intercourse. Heterosexual intercourse was reported in 28 (90 percent), including the previous nine subjects. Thee (10 percent) subjects have had neither homo nor heterosexual intercourse.[70]

The Masters and Johnson program has had similar results over a five-year follow-up, showing a 65% success rate.[71]

In addition to secular therapies for unwanted homosexual desires, numerous Christian treatments are available. Perhaps best known is Exodus International, an open-ended organization across denominational lines. An example of one of Exodus International’s ministries involves Desert Stream in Los Angeles. It is led by Andrew Comiskey, a former homosexual, and seeks to train ministers via his method and book Pursuing Sexual Wholeness (a biblical approach to removing unwanted homosexual desires).[72] A host of other resources are available as well.[73]

In conclusion, I have dug through the sources and research on the subject, providing corresponding information and findings when necessary. We have seen, by the individuals behind the studies’ own admission that “it’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality was genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.”[74] Hopefully, I have clarified LeVay’s very statement by providing evidence to refute the common misinterpretation of his work. It is also my hope that this paper serves as a tool, to those who desire it, to aid them in bringing about change. I must also clarify a motivation behind this work. If I am to truly love my neighbor, then how much would I have to hate people not to speak to them the truths of God? For this reason, I hope proponents will understand, that regardless of how they react to the research, that it is my servant and loving heart that drives me to share what I understand to be purely beneficial. To do otherwise would be unloving and hypocritical on my part. In conclusion, I will end with a simple meditation of God’s Word that offers hope and change regarding the topic:

Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.  And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Cor. 6:9-11, ESV)[75]

Bibliography

Bailey, Michael J.  “Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orienation and Its
Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample,” Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology 78 (2000): 534.

Bailey, Michael and Richard C. Pillard. “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,”
Archives of General Psychiatry 48 (December 1991): 1089, 1094.

Barinaga, Mariage. “Is Homosexuality Biological?,” Science 253 (1991): 956.

Barnett, Walter. Homosexuality and the Bible (Wallingford: Pendle Hill Pamphlets, 1979).

Baron, Miron. “Genetic Linkage and Male Homosexual Orientation,” BMJ 307, no. 337 (August
1993).

Biracee, Tom and Nancy. Almanac of the American People (New York: Facts on File, 1988).

Dutari, Cantom. “Combined Intervention for Controlling Unwanted Homosexual Behavior,” (),
269-74.

Diamond, Milton. “Homosexuality in Different Populations,” Archives of Sexual Behavior 22
(1993): 303.

Family Research Council, Getting it Straight: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality,
ed. Peter Sprigg and Timothy Dailey (Washington DC: Family Research Council,
2004).

Fay, Albert D., Klassen, John H. Gagnon and Charles F. Turner, “Prevalence and Patterns of
Same-Gender Sexual Contact Among Men,” Science, 1989: 338-348.

Feinberg, John S.  and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway
Books, 1993).

Fergusson, D. M., L. J. Horwood and A. L. Beautrais, “Is Sexual Orientation Related to Mental
Health Problems and Suicidality in Young People?,” Archives of General Psychiatry 56
(1999): 876-80.

Frame, John M. The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg: Crossway Bibles, 2001).

Friedman, Richard C. and Jennifer I. Downey, Sexual Orientation and Psychoanalysis: Sexual
Science and Clinical Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002).

Glaser, Chris. Coming out as Sacrament (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1998).

Greenwood, G. L. “Battering Victimization Among a Probability-based Sample of Men Who
Have Sex with Men,” American Journal of Public Health 92 (2002): 1964-69.

Hamer, Dean H. “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual
Orientation,” Science 261 (1993): 321-327.

Heimbach, Dr. Daniel. True Sexual Morality: Recovering Biblical Standards for a Culture in
Crises (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004).

Hershberger, Scott L. “A Twin Registry of Male and Female Sexual Orientation,” The Journal of
Sex Research 34, no. 2 (1997): 212.

Hogg, R. S.  “Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men,”,”
International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657-61.

Kennedy, Dr. James and Jerry Newcombe, What’s Wrong with Same-Sex Marriage? (Wheaton:
Crossway Books, 2004).

Laumann, Edward O., John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael and Stuart Michaels, The Social
Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1994).

LeVay, Simon “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual
Men,” Science 235 (August 1991): 1034-1037.

Masters and Schwartz, “The Masters and Johnson Treatment Program for Dissatisfied
Homosexual Men,” American Journal of Psychiatry 141: 173-81.

McNeill, John J.  “Homosexuality: Challenging the Church to Grow,” Chr Cent, March 1987:
246.

Micthell, Nancy “Genetics, Sexuality Linked, Study Says,” The Standard Examiner, April 30,
1995: 7-B.

Nimmons, David “Sex and the Brain,” Discover 15, no. 3 (1994): 64-71.

Owen Jr., W.E. “Medical Problems of the Homosexual Adolescent,” Journal of Adolescent
Health Care 6, no. 4 (1985): 278-85.

Rice, George, Carol Anderson, Neil Risch and George Ebers, “Male Homosexuality: Absence of
Linkage to Microsatillite Markers at Xq28,” Science 284, no. 666 (April 1999).

Sandfort, Theo G. M. “Same-sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders,”,” Archives of
General Psychiatry 58 (2001): 85-91.

M.D., Jeffrey Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House Company, 1996).

Siegelman, Marvin “Parental Background of Male Homosexuals and Heterosexuals,” Archives of
Sexual Behavior 3 (1974): 10.

Stanton, Glenn T., and Dr. Bill Maier, Marriage on Trial: The Case for Same-Sex Marriage and
Parenting (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004).

Swaab, D. F. and M. A. Hoffman, “An Enlarged Suprachiasmatic Nucleus in Homosexual Men,”
Br Res 537 (1990): 141.

Tourney, Garfield “Hormones and Homosexuality,” in Homosexual Behavior: A Modern
Reappraised, 55 (New York: Basic Books).

U.S. Department of Justice, “Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence,”
Office of Justice Programs (2000), 30.

[2] Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, Marriage on Trial: The Case for Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004): 138

[3] The comments and exchange are available online for your own judgment. It is calm, collected, and well researched. I find it interesting that individuals are quick to brand Christians as ‘bigots’. Here we have a clear example where empirical research and studies were provided (by someone who so happens to be a Christian), and is met in return with vile charges of hatred, and an overlooking of the evidence. http://www.facebook.com/notes/leonard-goenaga/argument-against-the-so-called-gay-gene/160002933062

[4] Simon LeVay, “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men,” Science 235 (August 1991): 1034-1037.

[5] John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993).

[6] D. F. Swaab and M. A. Hoffman, “An Enlarged Suprachiasmatic Nucleus in Homosexual Men,” Br Res 537 (1990): 141.

[7] Other studies regarding homosexuality within twins includes Michael King and Elizabeth McDonald’s “Homosexuals Who Are Twins: A Study of 46 Probands.” Their conclusion: “Disconcordance for sexual orientation in the monozygotic pairs confirmed that genetic factors are insufficient explanation for the development of sexual orientation.”

[8] King and McDonald also discovered “a relatively high likelihood of sexual relations occurring with same-sex co-twins at some time, particularly in monozygotic pairs.” As Satinover comments on the observation, “this finding hints at a principle that turns out to be quite important in understanding the development of any embedded pattern of behavior, namely the role of early experience and subsequent repetition. The fact that identical twins in particular tended to have sexual relations with each other suggests that the experience of twinhood… itself can cause an increase in homosexuality as a factor in its own right, apart from the shared genes.” (p. 88). 1/5 of same-sex twins engaged in sex.

[9] J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard, “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry 48 (December 1991): 1089, 1094.

[10] Dean H. Hamer, “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation,” Science 261 (1993): 321-327.

[11] Ibid 325

[12] Tom and Nancy Biracee, Almanac of the American People (New York: Facts on File, 1988).

[13] “In addition to John Money’s high number, an often quoted number of 10% is given, rooted in the work of sex researcher Alfred Kinsey. “The oft-used 10 percent figure needs downward revision in light of the more reliable and valid data from the scientifically randomized samples reported here.” “Milton Diamond, “Homosexuality in Different Populations,” Archives of Sexual Behavior 22 (1993): 303

[14] “[A]ll the recent population-based surveys of sexual behavior, including this one, have found rates that are much lower than 10 percent.” Edward O. Laumann, John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael and Stuart Michaels, The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994).

[15] Robert E. Fay, Albert D. Klassen, John H. Gagnon and Charles F. Turner, “Prevalence and Patterns of Same-Gender Sexual Contact Among Men,” Science, 1989: 338-348.

[16] John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993).

[17] Dr. Charles Socarides as quoted in Dr. James Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe, What’s Wrong with Same-Sex Marriage? (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004) 104.

[18] Ibid 104-5

[19] Simon LeVay, “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men,” Science 235 (August 1991): 1035.

[20] D. F. Swaab and M. A. Hoffman, “An Enlarged Suprachiasmatic Nucleus in Homosexual Men,” Br Res 537 (1990): 143

[21] Ibid 141

[22] Simon LeVay, “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men,” Science 235 (August 1991): 1035.

[23] John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg: Crossway Bibles, 2001).

[24] Mariage Barinaga, “Is Homosexuality Biological?,” Science 253 (1991): 956-957

[25] Ibid 956

[26] M.D. Jeffrey Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House Company, 1996) 83. “The best book on homosexuality written in our lifetime…” – Congressional Record, May 1996

[27] Ibid 84, “In the small number of recent identical twin studies that have been touted as proving ‘homosexuality is genetic,’ concordance rates turn out to be considerably less than 100 percent – less than 50 percent, in fact – even though all the sizable studies to date have examined only twins that have not been adopted away after birth. (In fact, the only study of adopted-away twins, which had a very small sample size, showed a concordance rate of zero.) This means that some proportion of the rate of concordance – which is anyway smaller than anticipated – is itself caused not by genes but by something else.”

[28] Although small in it’s sample size, a study observing the concordance rate among identical twins raised apart found a rate of 0%. Study reported in Eckert’s “Monozygotic Twins Reared Apart,” pp. 421-25

[29] On the issue of their sampling size, Bailey and Pillard state the following: “The sampling method employed in this study falls short of the ideal genetic epidemiological study,” J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard, “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry 48 (December 1991): 1094

[30] Ibid 1089. On homosexuality among non-twin biological siblings: “significantly lower than would be predicted by a simple genetic hypothesis and other published reports.”

[31] Scott L. Hershberger, “A Twin Registry of Male and Female Sexual Orientation,” The Journal of Sex Research 34, no. 2 (1997): 212.

[32] J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillard, “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry 48 (December 1991): 1090.

[33] Miron Baron, “Genetic Linkage and Male Homosexual Orientation,” BMJ 307, no. 337 (August 1993).

[34] For additional rebuttals, refer to Byne and Parson’s solid work, “Human Sexual Orientation: The Biological Theories Reappraised.”

[35] Family Research Council, Getting it Straight: What the Research Shows About Homosexuality, ed. Peter Sprigg and Timothy Dailey (Washington DC: Family Research Council, 2004): 11.

[36] George Rice, Carol Anderson, Neil Risch and George Ebers, “Male Homosexuality: Absence of Linkage to Microsatillite Markers at Xq28,” Science 284, no. 666 (April 1999).

[37] LeVay, cited in David Nimmons, “Sex and the Brain,” Discover 15, no. 3 (1994): 64-71.

[38] Michael J. Bailey, “Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orienation and Its Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78 (2000): 534.

[39] Hamer, cited in Nancy Micthell, “Genetics, Sexuality Linked, Study Says,” The Standard Examiner, April 30, 1995: 7-B.

[40] John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993): 188.

[41] Garfield Tourney, “Hormones and Homosexuality,” in Homosexual Behavior: A Modern Reappraised, 55 (New York: Basic Books).

[42] Ibid 42.

[43] “About 67 percent of male homosexuals come from a home where the mother is a domineering man-hater and the father is weak, detached and often uninvolved in the family. “John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993).
[44] Irving Bieber’s “Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study of Male Homosexuals”, as summarized in Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, Marriage on Trial: The Case for Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004).

[45] Marvin Siegelman, “Parental Background of Male Homosexuals and Heterosexuals,” Archives of Sexual Behavior 3 (1974): 10.

[46] Richard C. Friedman and Jennifer I. Downey, Sexual Orientation and Psychoanalysis: Sexual Science and Clinical Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002).

[47] John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg: Crossway Bibles, 2001): 264.

[48] A detailed summary of the Revisionist Sexual Morality controversy within mainline churches can be found within Dr. Daniel Heimbach, True Sexual Morality: Recovering Biblical Standards for a Culture in Crises (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004): 89-112.

[49] Walter Barnett, Homosexuality and the Bible (Wallingford: Pendle Hill Pamphlets, 1979).

[50] John J. McNeill, “Homosexuality: Challenging the Church to Grow,” Chr Cent, March 1987: 246.

[51] Chris Glaser, Coming out as Sacrament (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1998): 2

[52] Ibid 91

[53] “¹The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them and bowed himself with his face to the earth ²and said, “My lords, please turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night and wash your feet. Then you may rise up early and go on your way.” They said,” No; we will spend the night in the town square.”  ³But he pressed them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house. And he made them a feast and baked unleavened bread, and they ate.

⁴But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house.  ⁵And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them [yada].”  ⁶Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, ⁷and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly.  ⁸Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man [yada]. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”  ⁹But they said, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down.  ¹⁰But the men reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them and shut the door.  ¹¹And they struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, both small and great, so that they wore themselves out groping for the door.” (Genesis 19:1-11, ESV) [Underscore and brackets added]

[54] John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993): 190

[55] “The men of Sodom and Gomorrah were simply interested in getting to know the angelic visitors.” John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993): 190

[56] Proponents claim Intra-biblical exegesis: Isa 1:10, Jer. 23:14, Ezek 16:48, 49 Matt 1-:14, 15, and Luke 10:10-12 do not mention sexual sin.
[57] John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993): 191

[58] Ibid 192-3

[59] Ibid 192

[60] “²²You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” (Leviticus 18:22, ESV)

[61] “¹³If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.” (Leviticus 20:13, ESV)

[62] “Support for this position is found in the word “abomination” (to’ebah), which, on this view, does not signify something that is inherently evil such as rape or theft, but something that is ritually unclean like the eating of pork or engaging in sexual intercourse during menstruation, both of which are prohibited in this context.”  John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, Ethics for a Brave New World (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1993): 194.

[63] Proponents of this argument suggest that Lev. 18:3 set the tone of set apart, while the homosexuality text follows 18:21, which is a direct condemnation of idolatrous sexuality.

[64] Ibid 194-5

[65] 6For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.” (Romans 1:126-27, ESV)
[66] “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.” (Romans 1:22)

[67] “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator,” (Romans 1:25, ESV).

[68] “But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’  7 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, 8 and they shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh.  9 What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” (Mark 10:6-9, ESV)

[69] “Homosexuals are more likely to suffer from mental illness, alcohol and substance abuse, and a variety of life-threatening diseases such as AIDS, certain types of cancer, and hepatitis…on average, male homosexuals die a premature death by up to twenty years… gays and lesbians are more likely than heterosexuals to commit suicide, and be victims of domestic violence at the hands of a sex partner.”  Glenn T. Stanton and Dr. Bill Maier, Marriage on Trial: The Case for Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004). Studies regarding the health statistics listed above are found in the following: W.E. Owen Jr., “Medical Problems of the Homosexual Adolescent,” Journal of Adolescent Health Care 6, no. 4 (1985): 278-85.  Theo G. M. Sandfort, “Same-sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders,”,” Archives of General Psychiatry 58 (2001): 85-91.  D. M. Fergusson, L. J. Horwood and A. L. Beautrais, “Is Sexual Orientation Related to Mental Health Problems and Suicidality in Young People?,” Archives of General Psychiatry 56 (1999): 876-80.  R. S. Hogg, “Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men,”,” International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657-61.  G. L. Greenwood, “Battering Victimization Among a Probability-based Sample of Men Who Have Sex with Men,” American Journal of Public Health 92 (2002): 1964-69.  “Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence,” Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice (2000), 30.

[70] A. Cantom-Dutari, “Combined Intervention for Controlling Unwanted Homosexual Behavior,” 269-74.

[71] Schwartz and Masters, “The Masters and Johnson Treatment Program for Dissatisfied Homosexual Men,” American Journal of Psychiatry 141: 173-81.

[72] “Comiskey reports that 50 percent of those who start the program complete it with substantial progress out of homosexuality and into heterosexuality.”  M.D., Jeffrey Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House Company, 1996): 203

[73] Redeemed Life Ministries, Setting Love in Order (Mario Bergner, former homosexual), Pastoral Care Ministries (Leanne Payne), and Focus on the Family’s Love Won Out are but a few.

[74] LeVay, cited in David Nimmons, “Sex and the Brain,” Discover 15, no. 3 (1994): 64-71.

[75] As the author states “And such were some of you”. Some of them were once homosexuals. However, as the author then reminds them: “you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Cor. 6:9-11, ESV)

Research Shows Parenting Can Prevent Drug Use, Aid Brain Development.

From the founding of National Families in Action during the height of the War on Drugs to Joseph A. Califano’s book, How to Raise a Drug-Free Kid, parents and communities have been touted as the keys to preventing alcohol and other drug problems among youth, and research now shows that environmental and genetic risk factors can be trumped by parental engagement during the critical adolescent years, according to Nora D. Volkow, M.D., director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

"Parents are incredibly important in raising drug-free kids, but in many instances they are not there or are not involved" — absences that can have measurable effects on brain development as well as other aspects of growing up — said Volkow. For example, studies of orphans have demonstrated that the brains of children who lack connections to parents actually mature more slowly, raising the risk of drug use and other impulsive behaviors.

Half of all vulnerability to addiction can be traced to an individual’s genetic background, but that hardly means that a child’s fate is sealed if they have a family history of addiction. Rather, Volkow said that addiction is, in many ways, a developmental disorder that is intimately linked to the maturation of the brain from childhood through adolescence and into early adulthood.

Full story at; http://www.jointogether.org/news/features/2009/research-shows-parenting-can.html

In Part IV of this essay, I reviewed Shultziner’s conceptualization of self-esteem, as manifested in the pursuit of recognition, and specifically as it relates to the development of democratic governance.  One point that I did not consider concerns the question as to whether self-esteem is a concept that only pertains to Western societies.  Shultziner has this to say about the issue.

Pursuit of self-esteem can take on different avenues pending on cultural influence. Western societies define self-esteem more on individualistic traits than Eastern societies. This difference has led some to propose that eastern societies, like the Japanese society, do not pursue self-esteem and that self-esteem is strictly a Western cultural construct [citation in original]. However, as Sedikides, Gaertner and Toguchi [citation in original] have shown in a comparative research between Japanese and American cultures, “People in all cultures strive to maintain and achieve positive self-regard.  Humans use different tactics to do so, but their goal remains the same. In a similar vein, both individualistic and collectivistic cultures permit self-enhancement, but they do so through different norms.” Indeed, it was found that also hunter-gatherers hunt to ’show off’ and gain prestige and recognition in various ways [citations in original].

It appears, judging from the research review by Shultziner and summarized in the preceding installment of this essay, that the pursuit of recognition is a a universal, human trait that appears to serve a fundamental self-enhancing motive.  The question then arises as to what extent there may be evidence that this trait is wired-in or given at birth.  I shall now consider Shultziner’s review of genetic research on self esteem and the pursuit of recognition.

The Pursuit of Recognition and Genetic Research

Shultziner reviews research comparing identical and fraternal twins on measures of self esteem.  He reports on one set of studies that compared the influence of shared and non-shared environments on levels of self-esteem in identical (MZ) and fraternal (DZ) twins.  He writes:

[T]he findings show that “MZ twins manifested greater similarity (correlations between 0.46 and 0.67) than did DZ twins…” and “approximately 50% of the variance […] was attributable to genetic factors” [citation in original]. Moreover, the overall pattern of the studies reported [by Neiss, et al (citation in original)] suggests “that shared environmental effects on self-esteem are minimal” while non-shared environmental influences account for most variance. These findings mean, for example, that non-identical twins will have different levels of self-esteem although they are influenced by the same environment, because their different genetic makeup mediates (through different interpretations and perceptions) their level of self-esteem [Emphasis added].

In additional studies, [Neiss, et al , in press] explored the relations between the level of self-esteem (i.e. high or low), stability of self-esteem (namely, the degree of fluctuations in one’s self-esteem level) and genetic factors. One research examined 183 adolescent twin siblings’ level and stability of self-esteem with regard to both environmental and genetic factors. Once again, shared environments were not significant in explaining self-esteem, however genetic and non-shared environmental factor were significant. These studies show that environments have important influence over one’s self-esteem properties. However, these studies reveal that the environment is not the sole factor. The inherited genetic factor explains considerable variance of one’s level and stability of self-esteem. Under the same environmental conditions genetic differences produce different levels of self-esteem. This, for instance, means that properties of self-esteem–i.e. level, stability and the degree one needs to pursue positive self-esteem–are influenced by genetic composition and are not a matter of environmental influence alone [Emphasis added].  The implications of [the research of Neiss, et al, 2002]…are quite clear. Almost all theorists of self-esteem agree that in actual fact people do pursue positive self-esteem in various ways, to different degrees and in healthy and unhealthy ways. Given this fact, and combined with the recent findings that flesh out the genetic factor that influences properties of self-esteem, it is, I believe, safe to conclude that the pursuit of recognition itself is inherent to our biology [Emphasis added]. If properties of self-esteem are partly determined by our genes, then it is quite clear that the pursuit of recognition itself is also genetically determined given the fact that the phenomenon is so widespread among the population [citations in original]. 

Shultziner concludes that our genes determine not simply ”the level and stability of self-esteem” but they also determine “the motivation to gain positive self-esteem, namely to pursue and to gain recognition.”  Thus the pursuit of recognition  ”is part and parcel of our biological makeup as well” [Emphasis added].

Two Historical Avenues to Modern Democracy

So, how did the presumed wired-in tendencies for egalitarian social structure and the pursuit of recognition interact to produce the movement in the direction of the democratic forms of governance that exist today?

Shultziner writes:

Human beings were democratizing their regimes even before they knew what democracy or procedural definitions of democracy were. Throughout the centuries human beings were revolting and replacing regimes because they were dissatisfied with the way their regimes and rulers treated them, and with the demeaning condition of their existence. The failure of leadership to provide apt conditions of existence and to recognize and respect the populace led to legitimacy erosion, to widespread unrest, and to the overthrow of regimes. This does not mean, however, that every unrest or dissatisfaction necessarily led to democracy. In many instances in the 20thcentury and before, widespread unrest led to other nondemocratic regimes. The arrival at democratic regimes, thus, can be roughly divided into two avenues. The first type of transition is through trial and error, and the second pertains to the intentional aim of setting up a democracy [Emphasis added].

Shultziner explains the difference.

The process of trial and error is best illustrated in the unfortunate historical periods of humankind. Since the Neolithic era, human beings tried various regimes: empires, kingdoms, feudalism, communism, Nazism and fascism, military regimes, etc. Human beings created the most horrendous and despotic forms of government and social organization this planet has ever seen. None of these forms of government and social structures stood the test of history, because, as Fukuyama (1992) argued [citation in original], they all contained an inherent contradiction that led to their downfall. These regimes were based on brute force, paternalism or distinct social hierarchies, all of which entailed social practices and structure that denied recognition from significant segments of the population. The factor of the pursuit of recognition has been selecting these forms of social (or anti-social) structures as inapt to human nature.

The process of trial and error eliminates nondemocratic forms because of the gradual rejection of what dissatisfies human beings [citation in original].  Those who experienced tyranny fought for the essential things they did not have from their previous regimes, basic freedoms and recognition [citation in original].  As Isaiah Berlin so vividly put it, “What I may seek to avoid is simply being ignored, or patronised, or despised, or being taken too much for granted–in short […] having my uniqueness insufficiently recognised…” [citation in original].  Primarily in this way, through trial and error, democracy gradually attained its 20th century character. Social structures and policies that satisfy recognition last; those that do not, gradually disappear [Emphasis added].

Democracies also develop, according to Shultziner, as a result of conscious intention.

Democracy can come about in conscious and intended ways as well. Human beings are fast learners and, combined with the advanced communications and the accumulation of knowledge in the 20th century, people do not start a process of trial and error anew each time [citation in original].  Those who protested against the communist regimes in east Europe, for example, could witness and were influenced by an attractive alternative on the west side of the Berlin wall. The grass in the neighbor’s garden is indeed objectively greener for some people. This is an important environmental factor with a twofold dimension [sic? -- three dimensions are later described]. First, it becomes a direct measure for people to evaluate their own regimes. Nondemocratic regimes have a limited capacity to prevent their citizens from knowing about the benefits of living in a proper functioning democratic state. People who do not enjoy basic freedoms and rights may be stimulated to demand these benefits after comparing their regimes with a proper democratic regime.

Secondly, the measure can easily, but not necessarily, become a standard by which institutions could be shaped or modified. Strike examples are the influence of the American Revolution on the French Revolution, the Philippines where democratic institutions were profoundly shaped by American standards, Japan after World War II where democracy was first imposed but then accepted by the people, and Eastern European countries in the late 1980’s. In other words, existing democracies can become measures and standards for citizens of other countries. This is a powerful environmental incentive for the fast expansion of democracies and freedoms.

Thirdly, in the realm of ideology, no serious ideological alternative to democracy exists any more. Real criticisms of democracy are mostly restricted to ancient political philosophy. Current criticisms of democracy are actually calls for a different type of balance between equality and freedom or modifications inside liberal democracy; they are not truly posed as alternatives to democracy [citation in original].  In fact, no real alternatives to democracy are even part of the international parlance. Regimes (even nondemocratic ones) speak and justify their rule in the language of democracy [citation in original]. In other words, democracy has gained ideological and moral supremacy and has become the only viable option for an intentional regime change or reform [Emphasis added].

In the final installment of this essay, I shall summarize the work of Shultziner discussed previously and the conclusions which he and I draw.

Thrifty Genotype, kalau secara harfiah diartikan sebagai genotipe hemat. Genotipe sendiri berarti “tipe gen”, yaitu tipe materi genetik yang miliki oleh individu atau populasi. Genotipe ini bisa berarti apakah orang atau populasi tersebut di DNA-nya memiliki mutasi atau normal.

Istilah thrifty genotype pertama kali dikemukakan oleh James V. Neel tahun 1962 [Neel et al 1962]. Istilah thrifty genotype ini mengacu pada genotipe-genotipe yang ditemukan dalam populasi manusia berkaitan dengan proses adaptasi manusia dalam menghemat energi dalam kondisi lingkungan yang kurang menguntungkan, dalam hal ini terutama ketika kekurangan makanan.

Sebenarnya ide utamanya juga menyangkut proses migrasi manusia modern (Homo sapiens), yang jalurnya bisa dilihat di gambar ini:

Peta ini adalah jalur migrasi manusia modern menurut bukti-bukti DNA mitokondria (marka maternal) dan kromosom Y (marka paternal). Jika kita lihat, seluruh populasi manusia modern sekarang ini berasal dari sepasang nenek moyang yang sama (Out of Africa hypothesis). Analisis DNA mitokondria menunjukkan seluruh perempuan di muka bumi ini memiliki nenek moyang seorang perempuan yang hidup di Afrika sekitar 160.000 tahun yang lalu (disebut mitochondrial Eve), sedangkan kakek moyang seluruh laki-laki adalah seorang laki-laki yang juga hidup di Afrika tapi kemuculannya baru 60.000 tahun yang lalu (Y-chomosomal Adam) . Mengapa bisa berbeda jauh begini? Eee, ada hipotesisnya sih, tapi puanjaaaang :|. Lebih enak dibahas di satu postingan terpisah kali ya *nanti kalo lagi ga males*.

Anyway, dari single ancestor ini kemudian keturunannya mulai bermigrasi ke berbagai tempat. Kalau kita lihat di peta, ada yang menuju ke bumi bagian utara menuju Eropa, ada juga yang ke Asia lalu menyebrang ke Amerika dan ada juga yang menuju kepulauan Indonesia lalu menyebrang ke Pasifik. Populasi-populasi itu dalam perjalanan bermigrasinya dihadapkan pada kondisi lingkungan yang berbeda, dan supaya bisa bertahan hidup mereka harus beradaptasi dengan berbagai cara terhadap kondisi lingkungan yang tidak bersahabat tersebut. Misalnya, populasi yang menuju daerah subtropis, mereka harus bertahan hidup dalam musim dingin sehingga harus lebih efisien menjaga suhu tubuh. Lain halnya dengan populasi yang bergerak ke arah selatan menuju Asia, Amerika, dan Pasifik. Lingkungan yang mereka hadapi umumnya memiliki temperatur hangat, tapi tantangannya adalah mereka harus menempuh perjalanan yang jauh, apalagi ketersediaan makanan pun tak selalu ada karena di jaman itu masih mengandalkan berburu dan mengumpulkan makanan. Alhasil, mereka harus lebih efisien mengolah energi dari asupan makanan yang serba terbatas itu.

Inilah yang mungkin menjelaskan ditemukannya banyak variasi pada DNA orang-orang yang tinggal di kontinen yang berbeda. Misalnya, tipe mutasi A banyak ditemukan di populasi Eropa dan tidak berasosiasi dengan penyakit apapun, sementara di populasi Asia meskipun frekuensinya rendah tapi mutasi itu menyebabkan penyakit. Dalam hal ini, mungkin bagi orang Eropa mutasi itu bersifat menguntungkan karena membantunya beradaptasi dengan lingkungan di sana, sementara untuk populasi lain justru malah merugikan.

Dalam kaitannya dengan thrifty genotype, mungkin sebenarnya di DNA kita sudah tersimpan mutasi-mutasi yang sesuai dengan pola hidup jaman purba. Di mana dari ketersediaan makanan yang terbatas tubuh bisa efisien menggunakannya sehingga tidak ada yang berlebih dan menumpuk menjadi timbunan lemak misalnya. Namun dengan berjalannya waktu dan berkembangnya beradaban manusia, dimana manusia mulai bertani, beternak, dan revolusi industri yang mengakibatkan makanan (relatif) melimpah dan terjaga sepanjang tahun (asal punya duit aja dah). Dan terjadilah perubahan gaya hidup, yang dulunya sering kelaparan sekarang jadi sering kekenyangan . Masalahnya, tubuh kita sudah teradaptasi hidup dalam situasi makanan yang terbatas, maka ketika kemudian kita makan lebih banyak muncul lah gangguan kesehatan, terutama kegemukkan (obesitas) dan kencing manis (diabetes mellitus). Dan resiko terkena penyakit itu akan makin meningkat jika tidak diimbangi olahraga dan menjaga pola makan.

Dan demikianlah thifty genotype itu, intinya di dalam DNA kita terdapat variasi yang merupakan hasil adaptasi yang menguntungkan manusia menempuh perjalanan panjang dari generasi ke generasi melintasi batas benua. Tapi ketika sekarang pola hidup berubah, variasi yang tadinya menguntungkan itu justru malah menyebabkan penyakit. Tentu saja ini baru hipotesis yang sampai sekarang masih dicari bukti-buktinya. Penelitiannya berkisar pada gen-gen yang berkaitan dengan obesitas dan diabetes, dan itu banyak sekali :| . Masih banyak yang perlu dipelajari, tapi menarik juga ya. Mengingat nenek moyang populasi Indonesia itu menempuh perjalanan jauh dari Afrika, berarti resiko kena penyakit diabetes dan obesitas apakah besar juga? dan apakah kita perlu kembali ke pola makan jaman purba? *asli bercanda*

For years, a mantra of medicine has been that you can’t do much about your genetic makeup.

A new study has found, however, that strenuous, long-term exercise may have anti-aging properties by virtue of its effect on chromosomes.

“People automatically assume there’s not anything you can do about your genetics,” said Patrick McBride, a professor of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. “We can exercise our chromosomes.”

McBride, who was not a part of the study, said the new research helps explain on a cellular level many of the known benefits of exercise.

“Regular exercise is an anti-aging activity,” he said.

While the study did not show that exercise can change genes, it suggests that exercise may have beneficial properties at a chromosomal level, specifically on telomeres, the ends of chromosomes that are believed to have an impact on aging.

“I think this is a blockbuster study,” said Barry Franklin, a physiologist at William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, Mich.

Telomeres are like the biological clocks of cells, said Franklin, who was not a part of the study.

He said the study may help explain why exercise reduces the risk of so many diseases.

To read the rest of this very interesting article please visit:

http://www.jsonline.com/features/health/78162577.html

Molti proprietari di animali domestici si pongono in merito alla copertura assicurativa in genetica animale piani specificamente fare queste assicuratori coprono condizioni genetiche.

Mentre alcuni pet piani di coprire il ricovero, esami diagnostici, Chirurgia, il trattamento del cancro, cure dentarie e prescrizione di farmaci, alcuni coprono trattamenti alternativi quali gli adeguamenti idroterapia e chiropratica.

Veniamo al tema di genetica in questi giorni con tutti gli studi che si fanno sui geni, è ora colpito come gli assicuratoriVisualizza il fattore di "predisposizione" nelle loro politiche. Diversi piani sono predisposti per i loro limiti annuali come 8.000 dollari. Oo per un piano,

$ 12,000.00 per un altro tipo, ma prendere in considerazione la tua parte deducibili o co-porzioni di assicurazione che si paga per ogni richiesta.

Costi di Dog trattamenti della malattia:

Costi vari andare ad un veterinario per le condizioni quali: Parovirus per un Pit Bull può eseguire fino a € 9.500,00, o infezioni dell'orecchio a circa $ 5,000.00 per un barboncino. Tutti noi possiamoAccetto questi costi sono astronomici per una famiglia media. Una gamba rotta può costare per un Golden Retriever fino a € 4.000,00. Per non parlare di malattie da batteri, intossicazioni alimentari, o le malattie dal nostro ambiente come l'asma. Il costo in materia di assicurazione su questi aumenti preoccupazioni per la salute per il tipo di copertura che si cercano, e dipende dalla razza, e ciò che la copertura si può ottenere da parte degli assicuratori. Se siete in cerca di assicurazione sanitaria del cane, che comprende la copertura genetica è necessario includerela formulazione che coprirà la copertura genetica nel piano che si desidera scegliere.

Condizioni genetiche:

La definizione di una patologia genetica o condizione è una condizione che è causata da anomalie nei geni alla nascita. Difetti genetici possono anche essere ereditate dai genitori in modo da poter vedere la necessità di acquistare un cane, dove si può effettivamente vedere i genitori e ottenere un rapporto mediale dal loro veterinario.

Alcune compagnie di assicurazione non coprirà per "genetica, ereditaria o" condizioni ecroniche o in corso nella mia ricerca delle condizioni di salute del cane.

Ma si può avere una condizione permanente che non è su base genetica in modo da poter vedere tutti i suoi fino a come la vostra compagnia di assicurazione interpreta questi termini. E 'tutto in generale la stampa fine, e ci sono modi per negare il pagamento di un credito tramite l'uso di questi termini interpretato in senso ampio. Il veterinario può ottenere una approvazione prima di qualsiasi impresa di iniziare la cura molto simile dentisti che fare con l'assicurazione dentale.

Purtroppo Assicurazioniimprese nella mia ricerca sulla salute del cane non sempre dispongono di ferro rivestito di accordi per iscritto le politiche e le molte persone sono rimaste senza copertura a tutti e questo è dovuto al fatto alcune malattie rientrano in diverse categorie.

Condizioni genetiche sono in genere ciò che il cane è nato con il suo tipo di razza, ad esempio, grande cane razze come il pastore tedesco o alani sono suscettibili di disfasia dell'anca che è una "malattia ereditaria" che si è ereditato alla nascita. Un Cocker IngleseSpaniel è suscettibile di Nefropatia familiare che è evidente a sei mesi per i primi due anni di vita e chiude i reni.

Se il vostro piano di salute del cane non riguarda le "malattie ereditarie", devi avere un tempo difficile convincere il tuo assicuratore che non lo sapeva e se leggere la stampa fine non può essere oggetto di eventuali crediti associati a questa malattia.

Condizioni genetiche in Labrador Retriever:

Questa razza più popolare è tutta una serie di geneticacondizioni quali: artrite, Displasia, Developmental Bone and Joint malattia, l'epatite, Cuore Displasia della valvola tricuspide, e altri. Questo non significa che il vostro cane riceverà queste malattie non significa solo il tuo cane può essere incline o predisposti a sviluppare queste particolari patologie animali da compagnia.

Consigli di assicurazione:

1) Prendi una politica con un limite annuo non limiti di durata.

2) assicurazione sulla vita vera è per il momento la vita della compagnia che è la cosa migliore.

3) Il tuo detrazione deve essere un importo in dollarinon una percentuale del credito.

4) Guarda le clausole sulla ereditaria, genetica, condizioni pre-esistenti
sul tuo contratto prima di entrare in un accordo vincolante.

5) Negoziare ogni piano con ciascuna impresa di assicurazione, niente è scritto nella pietra.

Molti proprietari di animali che stanno iniziando il proprio risparmio ad alto rendimento del conto per tali costi e risparmiare per il futuro solo nel caso che è quello che l'assicurazione è tutto, nel caso.

Se si sceglie un piano di compagnia di assicurazione sanitariao di un piano di risparmio il motivo per cui ho creato questo sito è quello di promuovere la prevenzione. È possibile prevenire la malattia e le malattie che aiuteranno il vostro animale domestico è più sano e vivere più a lungo. Prevenzione ti farà risparmiare somme enorme di denaro per le bollette veterinario durante la vita del vostro cane.

Related : Faucet Filter Faucet Filter Revolution Helmets Elidaslokes Talk

Today a group of 6 of us presented our role — Genetic Counselor — to the rest of the class during Intro to Nursing.  We performed a skit wherein I portrayed a dimwitted, clueless, arrogant, semi-sexually charged Southern gentleman with his own talk show in the vein of Ali G.

This meant I got to/had to/proceeded to:

1. Act.
2. Ham it up.
3. Take on a Southern accent.
4. Pretend to hit on a woman in the audience.
5. Wear a suit with a pink shirt and a pink tie.
6. Put half a gallon of gel in my hair.

Gawl dang, I do like me some nursing school sometimes!

P.S.  Anyone who knows me realizes that #4 above was definitely not so suave and smooth.

Courtesy by: khaleejtimes.com

DUBAI — Thalassemia is a major public health issue in the UAE, which affects so many families at social, medical and psychological levels, says Dr Erol Baysal, head of Molecular Genetics Unit at the Genetic and Thalassemia Centre 
in Dubai.

One in 12 persons in the UAE is said to be thalassemia carrier. And the centre is the only facility in the country that conducts highly specialised tests to detect traits of thalassemia and offer counselling services to patients and their physicians to deal with the emerging results of the tests.

A total of 10,000 people have undergone premarital tests at the centre since the launch of the service in 2005.

When the UAE government made premarital tests mandatory for legalisation of marriages in the country in 2006, health officials said the main aim of the legislation was to protect the country from having children with different types of hereditary diseases, especially thalassemia which has a high prevalence among UAE nationals due to consanguineous marriages.

Dr Baysal feels the numbers of tests carried out are not to be underestimated. “The premarital screening programme is the most important part of our preventive campaign against thalassemia and these tests entail couples, most of whom are young nationals planning to get married,” he said.

“You cannot have a successful preventive programme without prenatal diagnosis which is the new approach to identify the genetic makeup of a foetus and its chances of being a thalassemia carrier or patient.”

As in the case of every autosomal disease, there is a 25 per cent chance for the child of thalassemia carrier parents to become affected. Another 50 per cent of them could be carriers and the rest could be unaffected, normal children.

This principle has been largely found to be correct in the number of cases diagnosed through prenatal tests, as 28 positive cases have been detected in the 115 cases, said Dr Mahmoud Taleb Al Ali, director of the Genetic Centre.

“The benefit of the test lies not only in early detection of the disease in 25 per cent of cases and helping to initiate early treatment,” said Dr Al Ali.

“It also helps 75 per cent of mothers to have social and financial relief by knowing that they will not have an affected child. Once the test is done, those women do not have to basically suffer for nine months thinking that their babies would be affected. That trauma can also be avoided,” he pointed out.

“If the genetic finding tells us that the baby may not require blood transfusion, you are also saving a life from blood transfusion and related complications,” noted Dr Baysal.

Three specialised labs at the centre – one for DNA analysis, another for cytogenetic tests and the third for analysing patients according to their metabolic features – are run by highly trained experts who conduct genetic tests by examining the sub-atomic levels of genes that cause hereditary diseases.

The genotype analysis, which finds out the genetic mutation that causes a disorder and its physical manifestation among patients, helps in determining the specific type of mutations for different types of thalassemia.

Dr Al Ali said the centre is the only facility in the GCC that carries out prenatal genetic test. “We also have the unique distinction of delivering test results on the same day. There are a very few labs in the world which release reports in 24 hours.”

He said the lab results and genetic information passed on to the treating physicians help the latter take a better and speedy decision regarding patient’s treatment.

The doctors said the government could save millions of dirhams by conducting the prenatal tests locally.

“One will have to spend at least Dh100,000 for getting this test done abroad. This can only go high if there are any associated complications. In that case, when you consider the fact that 50 per cent of our patients are UAE nationals, we can say that the government could save at least Dh6 million in two years by offering the service here in Dubai,” said Dr Al Ali.

Dr Baysal said the centre’s goal is to provide the service to every expecting mother who is at risk of delivering a child with thalassemia.

So today I decided, instead of going out and shrieking in horror at the irrepressible hordes of inconsiderate Black Friday folks starting my Christmas shopping, I would sit inside and get some stuff done that I’ve been meaning to get done (ie, putting little twinkly lights in my fake ficus tree; dusting the tops of the cable box and DVD player; watering the plants; watching the concerts I’ve DVR-ed lately [KT Tunstall is amazing]).  W and E2 are coming over in a few minutes, and we have very lofty plans to … play video games.  E2 is indefatigable and kicks our butts up and down the street in Star Wars: Episode III.  She plays a terrifying Lord Vader.

In other news, had a good day with the Mother and the G-parents yesterday (Hi, Grandma and Grandpa!  Thanks again for dinner!).  Train ride back into the city was much better than the train ride home on Wednesday (where your friendly blogger had to stand from Market East all the way to Ambler before a seat opened up).

Have to give a presentation on what a genetic counselor does for our Intro to Nursing course tomorrow — we have a little something fun cooked up for the class; I’ll let you know how it goes.  So now the big decision for the afternoon is:

1. Should I play General Grievous or Obi-Wan?
2. Pizza or Royal Tavern for dinner tonight with W and E2?

Hope you all are having a great Thanksgiving weekend!