ritastrakosha

On 2/21/2018 at 10:28 PM, John Cuthber said:

The fact that they even mention the MMR vaccine is a big red flag.

It doesn't get better when you read the actual report

"fewer children with ASD vs. non-ASD children use acetaminophen as a “first choice” compared to “never use”"

Read that through a few times.

Yep, they say that fewer autistic kids use acetaminophen and then the conclude that acetaminophen may be a cause of autism.

They go on to say 

"We found significantly more children with ASD vs. non- ASD children change to the use of ibuprofen when acetaminophen is not effective at reducing fever (p = 0.033) and theorize this change in use is due to endocannabinoid system dysfunction. ".

I have a different hypothesis.

Parents of kids with ASD are frazzled.

If their child- who is already hard to deal with- gets a fever and is thus even more  challenging, they are more likely to try another  drug than the less frazzled parents of kids without ASD.

 

To follow that they say "We also found that children with ASD vs. non-ASD children are significantly more likely to show an increase in sociability when they have a fever (p = 0.037) " 

Well, just for a start, how objective is a measure of "an increase in sociability"?

But even more tellingly- what they are saying is that kids who are - as a baseline- not very sociable are more likely to become more sociable than kids who were sociable to start with.

 

I'm not sure that a journal called "autism open access" is an entirely unbiased source.

Fewer older autistic kids used acetaminophen because they changed to the use of ibuprofen.  Did the parents who usually used ibuprofen as first choice change to acetaminophen at the same rate as the parents who used acetaminophen as first choice? If the answer is yes, than you would be right that it is rather the anxiety of the parents that is making them change between medications. If the answer is no, than the culprit would be acetaminophen. 

The increase of sociability is as objective as the sociability term itself is, as objective as psychiatry/psychology can get. 

There is this interesting study from Stephen Schultz and Georgianna Gould "Acetaminophen Use for Fever in Children Associated with Autism Spectrum Disorder", published in 2016:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5044872/

Conclusion of the study:

"In summary, we have presented evidence for the association of acetaminophen use with ASD. Our theory of how this may occur can be explained in the following illustration. Suppose a susceptible young boy has a fever due to a viral infection or after the MMR vaccination. His parents give him acetaminophen which increases endocannabinoid stimulation in his brain making him feel better and bringing down his fever. But the increased activation of the endocannabinoid system also decreases immune system function which prolongs the illness and leads to even more acetaminophen use. Eventually, the boy recovers but his endocannabinoid system has been dysregulated to a lower level to compensate for the prolonged over-activation. Now the neurons in his brain are not getting the proper guidance for their growth through CB1 receptors and further suffer from increased inflammation due to lack of CB2 regulation in immune system cells. The boy develops ASD. When the boy gets a fever, his parents again give him acetaminophen but it no longer works well since his endocannabinoid tone is at a low level, and his parents switch to ibuprofen. Also, when he gets a fever, the increased anandamide levels briefly increase endocannabinoid tone and improve his sociability. After the fever, the endocannabinoid tone again drops back to low levels and his sociability decreases again. His condition, however, may be reversible with new cannabinoid medications to increase endocannabinoid system activation and allow his brain to slowly recover. Research needs to be conducted to see if PEA, cannabidiol, or other cannabinoids will be effective treatments for ASD."

Acetaminophen has also been associated with increased risk for food allergies, asthma.

A paper titled “Mast Cells in the Developing Brain Determine Adult Sexual Behavior” by Kathrin Lenz et al.,  was published recently in http://www.biorxiv.org. The paper, through experiments with rats, reveals that mast cell activation in the brain pre-optical area (POA) during the prenatal period masculinizes sexual behavior of females and de-masculinizes the sexual behavior of males. As I read the study, it is saying that prenatal inflammation in the brain center responsible for the thrusting heterosexual movements may cause homosexuality.

According to the study the male POA during the sexual differentiation stage has more mast cells than the female POA. A  gestational allergic challenge significantly increased the number of mast cells in the female POA to male-typical levels . Prenatal allergic challenge also increased the proportion of degranulated mast cells.   The females born to allergic challenged dams when adults, under treatment with testosterone, mounted more quickly and more often than control females, such that their overall performance was equivalent to males. They also trended towards a preference for olfactory investigation of female versus male soiled bedding. Males gestated in an allergic challenged dam showed the opposite, a loss of female partner preference, suggesting demasculinization.

The authors of the study propose that there may be an optimal threshold for inflammatory signaling in the male brain, beyond which there is dysregulated sociosexual development.

In the experiment the inflammation was induced prenatally, during the period of sexual differentiation of the brain. In humans, the brain pre-optical area continues to sexually differentiate during adolescence, hence it is possible that inflammation in the POA during adolescence could also affect its sexual differentiation and contribute to homosexuality.

According to a recent study "Infanrix hexa and sudden death: a review of the periodic safety update reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency" by Puliyel J. an Sathyamala C, GlaxoSmithKline has submitted vaccine safety reports with some deaths missing.  

The abstract of the study:

There have been a number of spontaneous reports of sudden unexpected death soon after the administration of Infanrix hexa (combined diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, hepatitis B, inactivated poliomyelitis and Haemophilus influenza type B vaccine). The manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), submits confidential periodic safety update reports (PSURs) on Infanrix hexa to the European Medicines Agency (EMA). The latest is the PSUR 19. Each PSUR contains an analysis of observed/expected sudden deaths, which shows that the number of observed deaths soon after immunisation is lower than that expected by chance. This commentary focuses on that aspect of the PSUR which has a bearing on policy decisions. We analysed the data provided in the PSURs. It is apparent that the deaths acknowledged in the PSUR 16 were deleted from the PSUR 19. The number of observed deaths soon after vaccination among children older than one year was significantly higher than that expected by chance once the deleted deaths were restored and included in the analysis. The manufacturer must explain the figures that have been submitted to the regulatory authorities. The procedures undertaken by the EMA to evaluate the manufacturer's claims in the PSUR need to be reviewed. The Drugs Controller General of India nearly automatically accepts drugs and vaccines approved by the EMA. There is a need to reappraise the reliance on due diligence by the EMA.

On 8/16/2017 at 9:42 PM, Moreno said:

There exist a speculations to explain a physiological need of sleep by claiming that brain is cleaned of toxins during the sleep time. However it is not explained exactly why this toxins cleansing can't happen gradually during waking time and why there is a need to disconnect the full consciousness for this reason.

But beside physiology in my perception there is a purely psychological need of sleep. Because sleep gives a person a mind-refreshing effect. If a person doesn't sleep too much and doesn't even need a lot of sleep for a physiological reasons he/she starts experience an unbearable "boredom" of surrounding reality which starts to surround him with and squeezes his mind. And after sleep person feels refreshing perception of surrounding reality like he is a "newborn" and the agonizing monotony of surrounding reality steps back for another day. This wonderful "refreshing" capability makes me interested a lot. There is a common scientific theories which are trying to tie sleep process with processing of data gathered by brain during the day and importance of dreams for this reason, but still it doesn't explain why this data processing can't happen somewhere in the subconscious during the state of wakefulness and we need to disconnect our full conciousness. It is known that many animals have either decreased need of sleep or anomalous type of sleep. For example giraffes sleep only 1 hour a day/night and many animals including see mammals, birds and reptiles have mono-hemispheric sleep (they never loose full awareness completely). Quite interesting that in my own perception (and that of other people) sleep has this wondering reality perception refreshing capability even it is hardly associated with any dreams. For example it happens rarely that person goes to sleep and wake ups "instantly", but in reality many hours have passed. I think it is an indication for lack of dreams, but wonderfully, people feel very refreshed after that type of sleep. I wonder, what could be done or how human brain have to be organized, at least theoretically, in order to have perception of reality always fresh like he just woke up after a good sleep and in this way we would have no psychological need of sleep.

Is it all explained by dreams or there is some other explanation? In reality dreams aren't too different from a common reality that surrounds us. People see in dreams themselves walking on the streets, visiting buildings and known places, talking to other people. So, why do they make such a strong effect on our perception of reality when we wake up (if they do)?

It makes me fascinated when I think about possibility to have a fresh perception of reality always and need no sleep for this. Any ideas how could it happen?

 

 

 

You can do Uberman sleep (a kind of polyphasic sleep): sleep every 4 hours for 20 minutes. In total you will sleep 2 hours/24 hours.  You need to be very strict with the schedule to be successful. There are online communities of polyphasic sleepers.  A frequent problem with polyphasic sleep is that the immune system gets weakened and one can get pneumonia, or a bad influenza bout. It is almost impossible to stick to the schedule.

When people do not sleep for months on end, they die. See Fatal Familial Insomnia to see how one dies without sleep. 

14 minutes ago, Area54 said:

You overlook the means by which (successful) reproduction is achieved by humans. Since humans are a social species individuals who are not capable of, or interested in reproduction can assist directly or indirectly in raising children, help provide the nutrition required or even, (if we adopt for a  moment a stereotypical view of male homosexuals) provide a pleasing ambience for the environment in which they excrete.

Even if I were to concede, for sake of argument, that it is a dysfunction why would you wish to correct it if the individual "suffering" from it is quite happy with their condition?

Ego-dystonic homosexuals ask for correction. They would be offered therapy. There are also political implications for it being accepted as a dysfunction. 

1 minute ago, DrP said:

would you say the same about using a condom?

If someone always uses that condom so as to never have children and he is stressed by this behavior (like ego-dystonic homosexuals), that could be considered disordered behavior (otherwise not specified .... in DSM5). Therapy could be offered to him. If he is not stressed by the behavior, therapy is not offered. Similarly to some paraphilias.  

1 minute ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

I have warned you once already. You need to be backing up your claims. Peer-reviewed literature is preferred.

 

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

Sex can also be used to decrease conflict and increase group cohesion, much like we see in bonobos. It's silly to assume sex is only for reproduction. I, for one, enjoy it very much and sometimes even more when it doesn't result in any new children. 

Sex is not only for reproduction, but when all the sex one does is not capable of reproduction (like in exclusive homosexuality) that brings dysfunction. 

3 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

"The long term effect could be a change in sexual partner preference"

Given how many people are on a diet at any given time , we would have noticed if their preferences changed.

"Fasting is used to treat chronic diseases in alternative medicine"

If a "treatment" in alternative medicine worked, it wouldn't be "alternative"; it would be medicine.

It seems that, on the misguided basis that homosexuality is a "problem", you are putting forward a "solution" which is knpown not to work.

 

Did you not realise that this was a science website?

And the experiment  was pointless.

"At the time of Pottenger's Study the amino acid taurine had been discovered but had not yet been identified as an essential amino acid for cats. "

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_M._Pottenger,_Jr.

Single individuals and certain doctors have noticed a change in sexual orientation with changed diet. Many of the ex-gays who claim to have changed their sexual orientation through the help of religious groups have experienced the change while also giving up alcohol, drugs (and probably fasting?).  The most fluidity in sexuality is during puberty. So a good survey would be with adolescents. A % of gay identified adolescents grow up to become heterosexuals, while another % remains gay or becomes even more so. Is there any lifestyle difference between them? 

I see bad diet as a stress source and stress as the main factor in homosexuality. Other sources of stress are alcohol, drugs, sleep deprivation etc. These all combined give a stress load that can bring dysfunction. 

2 hours ago, Area54 said:

So you maintain that homosexuality is a dysfunction? That there is "something wrong" with homosexuals? I just wish to be clear as to your position.

Yes. The main functions of a living organism are: growth, movement, reproduction, respiration, nutrition and excretion. Exclusive homosexuals totally lack the function of reproduction. There are several body organs involved in the function of reproduction: the sexual organs and the brain. In the case of exclusive homosexuals the dysfunction is in the brain and in the reproductive function. The person may function totally normally in all other aspects. There is this consensus among American professionals that homosexuality is not a dysfunction, but I do not see how they can circumvent these logical steps and come to that conclusion.

Even if homosexuality is not considered a dysfunction, but just a different behavior from the norm, it can still be subject to therapy. Psychologists do therapy with mentally healthy people as well to improve and develop their potentials. Especially in psychiatry the line between health and disease is very blurry. 

On 9/6/2017 at 7:45 AM, Damateur said:

     You'd do a better job of determining if diet has any effect on homosexuality by first surveying people to determine if there is any commonalities between the foods that all homosexuals eat and contrast that with the foods that all heterosexuals eat. However, I speculate that you'd quickly find there is no such commonality or contrast; that diet has utterly no affect on sexuality.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

   I'd think sausages would be the 'wurst' thing to use if you were trying to curb homosexuality.

 

There has been an experiment on hundreds of cats with different diets, by Francis Pottenger. He noticed an increase in abnormal sexual behavior among cats eating a less optimal diet. Others have observed that persons eating raw foods with aging do not loose the gender typical body features as fast as the persons eating the mainstream diet. 

On 9/5/2017 at 10:59 PM, Area54 said:

Dictionary definitions explain how words are used. They are not appropriate for scientific or medical usage.

Now "disease" implies abnormality. There is nothing abnormal about homosexuality. It is common in many species beside humans. It is quite possibly present in the majority of mammals. Something that is normal cannot be considered a disease. Indonesia and Malaysia are strongly influenced by the religious intolerance of Islam towards homosexuality, so there is no surprise their state run institutions reflect that.

Astrology has been practiced for hundreds of years and it is unfounded nonsense whose main "benefit" is to provide income for charlatans.

Since fasting limits one's energy it is likely to suppress all forms of sexual desire. If one views sexual desire as a problem then, by all means fast.

22% of the world population has nearsightedness. It is normal in the sense that it is frequent in the population, but it is a dysfunction.

Fasting could have a short term and a long term effect on sexuality. The short term effect is a lessening of sexual desire, but the long term effect could be a change in sexual partner preference.  Fasting is used to treat chronic diseases in alternative medicine and it has long term effects on health. 

21 minutes ago, Area54 said:

Interesting perspectives on how messed up many people were in the past. Are you arguing that these views should be taken seriously today? But, perhaps the first question for you to answer is this - do you view homosexuality as a disorder that needs to be cured?

Some bisexuals/homosexuals deem homosexual attractions unwanted (for practical reasons, like being unable to have children without medical intervention) and ask for help from science and the medical profession. They should be helped, like it is the case with other persons who ask for fertility treatment for other reasons. If it needs or not to be treated, it is decided by the person himself. 

There is a definition of disease in the dictionary and I think that exclusive homosexuality fulfills the criteria: the persons' brain has lost the function of sexual reproduction, one of the defining functions of life. Several psychiatric associations in the world, caring for hundreds of millions of persons (like in Indonesia, Malaysia), continue to consider it a disorder. 

This is history of sexology. Medieval medicine was mixed with religion. The argument I would like to raise is that fasting has been used for hundreds of years probably because it must have worked. They noticed the connection between nutrition and sexuality. They did not do surveys or proper experiments, but they may have had enough cases to draw rough conclusions. Religions explain religious rituals, orders with God, but most of the time there are practical reasons behind them. 

In several cultures, during medieval and modern times, fasting has been used for homosexuality. Fasting is defined as “a willing abstinence or reduction from some or all food, drink, or both, for a period of time”, so it is similar to keeping a diet. Fasting has also been used since antiquity as a healing tool for many diseases.

According to historian Caroline Bynum, “Many patristic [early Christian, from c. AD 100 to either AD 451 or to the 8-th century] writers associated food with lust and urged abstinence as a method of curbing sexual desire. John Cassian, writing for monks in the early fifth century, said: ‘It is impossible to extinguish the fires of concupiscence (strong sexual desire) without restraining the desires of the stomach.’ ”

Tertullian (c. 155 – c. 240 AD), Christian author from Carthage, saw a close connection between lust and gluttony:

Lust without voracity would certainly be considered a monstrous phenomenon; since these two are so united and concrete, that, had there been any possibility of disjoining them, the pudenda would not have been affixed to the belly itself rather than elsewhere… First, the belly; and then immediately the materials of all other species of lasciviousness are laid subordinately to daintiness: through love of eating, love of impurity finds passage.

The Penitential of Cummean (c. 650), an Irish penitential, which was much circulated in Europe during the eighth and ninth centuries, described different penances (punishments) for sexual misconduct, including homosexuality. The Penitential calls the penances “medicine for the salvation of the soul”. It begins with a chapter on gluttony, followed by a chapter on fornication. For those who committed sodomy it ordered a penance of 7 years. It does not detail the penance, but in the previous paragraphs it describes the penance for fornication by a priest who has taken the vow of a monk:

He shall ask pardon every hour and shall perform a special fast every week except in the fifty days from Easter to Pentecost. After the special fast he shall have bread without limit and a tidbit smeared with some butter (that is to say a quarter measure) and he shall live like this on Sundays, while on other days he shall have a portion of dry bread (made from a twelve-potentae vessel of flour) and a meal enriched with a little fat, garden vegetables, a few eggs, British cheese, a Roman half-pint (equal to twelve hen’s eggs) of milk on account of the frailty of the body in this age, a Roman pint of whey or buttermilk (equal to twelve hen’s eggs) for his thirst and some water if he does physical hard work. His bed shall be made of only a little straw. During the three forty-day periods he shall increase his penance as far as his strength allows.

The penitential of Columban which dates to around the year 600, says, “But if one commits fornication as the Sodomites did, he shall do penance for ten years, the first three on bread and water; but in the other seven years he shall abstain from wine and meat, and [he shall] not be housed with another person forever.”

John The Faster, Patriarch of Constantinople (582-595 A.D.) in his canon XVIII excludes the sodomist from communion for three years, with the additional penance of fasting and toward evening xerophagy. Xerophagy is a kind of Christian fast in which only bread, salt, water, vegetables may be eaten and meat, fish, milk, cheese, butter, oil, wine, and all seasonings or spices are excluded.

According to Stephen Morris, author of the book When Brothers Dwell in Unity: Byzantine Christianity and Homosexuality,  penance (epitimia in greek) in Byzantine Christianity was considered a therapeutic or medicinal tool-similar to surgery-that might be painful in the short term but was aimed at restoring the (spiritual) health of the patient.

Fasting has also been used in other non-Christian cultures. The Laws of Manu, the most popular Hindu law book of medieval and ancient India, prescribed  food restriction for homosexual acts: “If a man has shed his semen in non-human females, in a man, in a menstruating woman, in something other than a vagina, or in water, he should carry out the ‘painful heating’ vow.” The Painful Heating vow is described as follows, “If one lives one day on cow’s urine, one day on cow-dung, one day on milk, one day on sour milk, one day on clarified butter, one day on a decoction of Kuśa grass, and during one day and night, on air.”

An early medical text where diet is mentioned as a remedy for homosexuality is a medieval medical treatise on passive homosexuality, Treatise on the hidden Illness, attributed to Abū Bakr Muhammad ibn Zakariyyā al-Rāzī  (854 CE – 925 CE), a Persian polymath. Among other treatments for homosexuality he mentions fasting and a special diet:

The treatments mentioned by me are right for young and the affluent people. In connection with others, your aim in treating them should be to make them loose weight and diminish the blood. Thus they should be ordered to fast, to give up drinking wine, to use vinegar for seasoning…..They should also stick to foods such as qaris, masus, hulam, hisrimiyah, with gourds and lentils, drink constantly oxymel…

Avicenna (980-1037), another Persian polymath, wrote regarding homosexuality, “Things that break the desire, such as worries, hunger, vigils, detention, and beatings, constitute useful treatment.”

In China, sodomy was first punished in 1790 by the Qing Code. Sodomy with consent was penalized with one month in the cangue and 100 heavy blows. A cangue was a device used for corporal punishment and the person wearing the cangue could not eat, unless he was helped by others.

Fasting seems to continue to be used in different clinics around the world, like in Ecuadorand in China.

Today, https://orthodoxwiki.org (a free-content encyclopedia for Orthodox Christianity) mentions fasting as one of the “spiritual weapons” that should be used for homosexuality. The foods that are not eaten during a fast in Orthodox Christianity include: meat, dairy products, eggs, olive oil (especially where olive oil is not a major part of the diet, the rule is sometimes taken to include all vegetable oils, as well as oil products such as margarine), wine and other alcoholic drink.

George Ohsawa (1893-1966), born in Japan, the founder of Macrobiotic diet, thought that bad diet could cause homosexuality:

Everyone eats, but few know how to eat. Only a person who eats in such a way as to achieve a normal human balance lives a happy life. Misfortune strikes those whose body and minds are not healthy. Such people often evidence sexual deviation as one among their many symptoms. In point of fact, homosexuality is quite common in the West, perhaps a thousand times more so than in the East…You can cure sexual deviation with macrobiotics.

According to Ohsawa (as cited by Michael Barker):

The healthy man is yang, active and strong, while the healthy woman is yin and should be passive in sexual life. If man is too yin, which arises from eating too much yin food (e.g., sugar and fruit) “he will be very unhappy”; if a women is too yang from digesting too much yang food (animal products), unhappiness will result… Women are singled out for a special warning: if you happen to “detest a man’s sexual desire,” then you must have eaten too much yang food, which if not remedied will lead a woman to “become homosexual or love animals to an extreme degree.”

Some other modern time professionals who see a link between diet and homosexuality are Lawrence Wilson, Joel Wallach, Genetiker, Jim McAfee, Delia Maceda-Patawaran, George Malkmus.  

 

Medicine assists in "natural" reproduction too. Imagine the child and mother mortality rates otherwise.

 

If medical intervention is your criterium for excluding reproductions as "non-assisted", then you should exclude most pregnancies and births and reproductions in most developed countries. What about medical help with subfertility or infertility? This still applies to heterosexuals, too, and is an assisted form of reproduction. I suggest you exclude all reproductions in which medical help is involved to any degree, end up with only a few reproductions, and check what the mortality rates are there.

 

It is impossible to exclude medicine from modern reproduction. Reproduction is no longer equal to the old-fashioned image you may have of it, we are way ahead ot that. We do no longer live in the ancient times you recall without medical help, without assisted reproductions, and without homosexual reproductions.

 

Additionally, do you have arguments against surrogacy? That's quite "natural" (in your definition) and can still be the product of love between 2 homosexuals and the natural help of a third. Would that be unnatural?

 

Your attempts to blackguard homosexuality in the evolutionary sense keeps failing in my opinion. I'm sure there will be others here totally agreeing with you, but your thoughts prove a certain lack of progressiveness, which is essential in a science forum.

 

There's this critical question, stating that if homosexuality has nothing but disadvantages in an evolutionary sense, then why wasn't it eradicated over the last millions of years? If it wasn't present from the beginning, why would it randomly occur and persist to occur from a certain point on, if it were so unnatural and disadvantageous to evolution? I'm asking you to give me a convincing answer to that question, staying loyal to the ideals you have made clear before.

Homosexuality continues because of 2 main reasons:

-As a byproduct of high sexual willingness: Several studies show that in promiscuous species homosexuality is more frequent. The same gene that makes one relative promiscuous, with several partners and a lot of children, makes the other relative homosexual. While a non-promiscuous species would respond to stress by shutting down reproduction, the promiscuous species would respond to stress by accelerating reproduction, intensifying sexual response, lowering the threshold to orgasm and responding more quickly and more randomly to stimuli.

-The other kind of homosexuality is that related to gender non-conformity. A highly masculine father and a highly feminine mother are very successful individuals. When these traits are inherited to the opposite sex child they make for a gender non-conform child and when inherited to a same sex child they make for a very successful one. The successful child continues to procreate and inherit the gene, while the gender non-conform child becomes homosexual. Stress and diet increases gender non-conformity by sending hormones to their extremes.

So the genetic predisposition to homosexuality is inherited from generation to generation because it confers advantages to some individuals and disadvantages to others. It is similar to other diseases. For example, the gene responsible for thalasemia protects against malaria, the genes responsible for obesity protect against starvation during famine etc.

Regarding the unassisted reproduction: In Afghanistan, where there is almost no medical assistance during pregnancy and after, the death rate during childbirth is only 1 in 100 births.

Yes, many reproductions are assisted. Medicine identifies the situations when it needs to intervene as diseases, disorders and the patient accepts that she/he has that disorder and asks for help. While homosexuals consider themselves totally healthy and still ask for help from medicine (or from other individuals like surrogates) for reproduction.

 

Heterosexual sex is no prerequisite for reproduction. Above all, lots of heterosexuals do not reproduce, whereas a fair amount of homosexuals do reproduce, albeit mostly not in a manner involving sexual intercourse.

 

Sex is no requirement for reproduction and we have luckily enough evolved to a situation where this thought pattern can be eradicated. I hope you will follow and leave behind your - forgive me - narrow-minded thoughts.

 

Above all, and more important, we, as self-conscious human beings, have evolved into organisms able to fill in the meaning of life and its goals ourselves, not letting them be dictated by others or so-called evolutionary postulations. If we decided for ourselves that indeed, our only main goal would be reproduction and conservation of our species, then we should ask ourselves what the general purpose of that would be. If we have no other meaning than reproduction and conservation, we could all hang ourselves because our intrinsic life would have no purpose.

Heterosexual sex is a prerequisite for non-assisted reproduction. Medicine can assist reproduction artificially, like it does for many other dysfunctions, but it has a health and financial cost for the persons involved and it may not be possible in poor countries. Reproduction is not necessary to have a meaningful life, but it makes a good life even better. That's why many homosexuals adopt children or have biological children through artificial means.

 

You say that choice is involved in the development of sexual orientation. My dear friend, it is not. If it were, I'd choose to be attracted to women. For a multitude of reasons.

 

 

 

"Reparative therapy", pardon me? Nothing is broken, nothing has to be repaired. Trust me, the examples you give are whatsoever destructive for the mental well-being of the homosexual. They do not inherently 'want' to become heterosexual, they think they do because they are forced into believing they must. These lines of thought are no natural thought patterns and are mere results of public opinion and its religious influences on sexual orientation and are - plain wrong.

"Nothing is broken"? One of the main functions of every living organism is reproduction and the brain of persons unable to have heterosexual sex is missing this function . At the population level it does not create problems as long as it is isolated to a few members.

 

It would be unethical of providing these "markets" with research data allowing the mto influence the outcome of sexual orientation of their progeny.

 

Egodystonic homosexuals are not to be taught how to "solve" the origin of their 'egodystonia' (which would then be their homosexuality); this would only force them into things they believe would be healthy, slowly destroying their mental well-being without them even knowing it on long term. The environment, society, in which egodystonic homosexuals grow up are, as far as I'm concerned, the true cause of the dystonia. That problem should be addressed. Not the 'cause' of their sexual orientation.

Some homosexuals want to become heterosexual because society discriminates them, but others may want to become heterosexual because they want to have biological children the natural way. As long as artificial reproduction methods are ethical, reparative therapy should be so either. It is a different way of achieving fertility.

It can have side effects, like any other therapy. The benefit has to exceed the costs for it to be ethical.

 

It's a vicious circle.

 

But you don't answer my question. You state that it's a multifactorial being. Dependent of environment, that is. There is no reason to believe that other cultures have less homosexuals than more developed, progressive cultures, unless you have data to show so (which would be, however, strongly biased: statistics in arab countries will be lower due to possible prosecutions and kafkian feelings). If this is true (which cannot be proven), then there is no reason believing that homosexuality is multifactorial.

 

It is therefore impossible to state that homosexuality is, or isn't, environmentally influenced.

 

To me, it's not.

There have been 2 cross-cultural studies on homosexuality and its presence in different cultures:

Barthes J, Crochet PA, Raymond M. Male Homosexual Preference: Where, When, Why? PLoS One. 2015;10:e0134817.

Kyle R. What Accounts for Cross-Cultural Variation in Homosexuality. Chrestomathy: Annual Review of Undergraduate Research, School of Humanities and. 2009;8:99-114 Available from: http://chrestomathy.cofc.edu/documents/vol8/kyle.pdf

The first study states that the probability of observing homosexuality was 0.28, 0.75 and 0.91 for non-stratified, moderately stratified and strongly stratified societies, respectively, in a sample of 89 societies.

The second study observes that the number of societies with homosexuality present increases with the intensity of agriculture.

There may be an overlap in the cultures studied by both studies.

I think it's interesting (pure scientific) to know that modern diet can increase (or decrease) the chance of homosexuality via prenatal stress. But it indeed doesn't really matter. Homosexuality is not a negative effect. There are lot of negative effects caused by modern diet+lifestyle.

As long as there are ego-dystonic homosexuals, and homosexuality averse cultures, there is a market for this research.

 

 

 

 

Not only how silly question would be but because even if it was true how do you define stress, what kind of stress, how long the stress, what level of stress, than do same for foods what foods are lacking in your diet, how much food you need, what type food having too much of, what hormones and preserves are being put in foods, what food you must eat and food you must not eat, so on for the study.

 

So many variables where do you start to do such study. Than you have people complaining of GMO foods and preserves and chemicals in food.

As a start, stress level could be measured by sleep quality: the more sleep deprived the person, the more stressed. Diet could be measured by the amount of calories intake from processed foods: refined sugars (sugar, corn syrup, honey etc.) and fats (vegetable oils, animal fat).

Each person has his own environment, with unique stressors. In practice he would need to lower the total stress load to the point where he achieves therapeutic change. I think that the total stress load is what matters, not each individual stress source.

There is no reliable data for "ancient" (as opposed to modern) incidence of homosexuality.

 

It is entirely possible that there were more gay people around in the past than there are now.

 

 

That makes this whole tread absurd.

It is true- as Itoero has said that ""Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality." - as long as you interpret the word "cause" as meaning "might be a factor in favour of"

 

It is exactly equally true that "Modern diet and stress Prevent homosexuality." with a similar caveat.

 

However, if you use the word "cause" in the way which the dictionary defines it then- as I pointed out- it is clearly and unequivocally untrue to say that "Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality."

 

So, if you misuse the word, it's meaningless, and if you don't then it's simply wrong.

 

Was this thread just a trolling exercise?

The "Modern diet....cause..." is a hypothesis. A hypothesis is according to the dictionary "a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation." This hypothesis would be true if upon decrease of stress and modification of diet in a population, homosexuality rates would drop considerably.

I apologise for mis-attributing the quote.

What you said was "It depends on the kind of stress and the modern diet can be a factor".

How is that different from "Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality." - as long as you interpret the word "cause" as meaning "might be a factor in favour of""?

 

Anyway, the point stands

We have no idea of what the incidence of homosexuality was like in ancient times- so we can not possibly know if it is higehr or lower today.

So we can't say whether modern life has made any difference- and we certainly can't say which direction it might have influenced it.

There are pre-industrial cultures living in ancient like conditions today. They have been studied with regard to homosexuality and the studies are referenced in the work.

If you don't know what they are, then there's no way you can attribute things to them.

you have just summarised the utter pointlessness of this thread.

Modern diet=rich in highly processed food, mainly refined sugars and fat. The pre-industrial diet takes most of its calories from whole foods.

 

I dare you to state that the homosexuality genes in strict muslim countries is stronger than those in more progressive countries, given the strict anti-gay mentality in let's say the whole community there and probable punishes, also given the contradictory prevalence of homosexuality, there.

 

Gay people do exist in those countries, probably as much as here, and let's be honest: the environment there is not in favour of homosexuality. Which, according to your statement, must mean that the genetic predisposition for homosexuality there and here should be different. Which is, imo, most obviously not the case.

 

Gay people may be oppressed there and may force themselves in fake straight partnerships to evade prosecution.

 

Can you please provide an article (peer-reviewed), backing-up your statement?

I do not have statistics for the arabs, but I live in a culture with some similarities to the arab countries. Before the 90's we lived in very poor conditions, with little electricity. I had never seen or heard of a homosexual, transgender until I was 15 years old. I learned it from the western media.

In my opinion, homosexuality is oppressed in the arab countries because it is rare, not vice versa. When a behavior is rare, and is not beneficial, it is frowned upon, why not oppressed.

 

 

That isn't what the OP said (which is what John was responding to).

 

The claim was: "Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality." In which case, most people would be homosexual.

 

It is entirely possible (but it sounds implausible) that diet or stress may have some sort of small influence one way or another. But that would need supporting evidence.

Genes interact with modern diet and stress to cause homosexuality. I refer to this in the study and explain that by changing the "environment" the person can change his partner preference, although his genes (hence inclination for homosexuality), will not change. It is well known in medicine that phenotype is a result of the interaction of genes with the environment.

I think yes. There is a subtle difference in the sexual behavior of homosexuals compared to heterosexuals: the sexual movements during sex. Thrusting movements during heterosexual sex are stereotypical, almost reflexive movements that appear upon sexual arousal. They are regulated by the sexually dimorphic nucleus in the medial preoptic area (SDN-POA). In heterosexual females there are vaginal muscle movements, which manifest with the urge to grasp and engulf. Homosexuals (both males and females) have issues with this reflex. I think that the reason is diet and stress, which affect the development or functioning of the SDN-POA.

I began to study the issue as part of my masters thesis on the effect of sleep on mental disorders, but later did a thorough study with the intent to publish. Given that the topic is taboo in the medical profession and that I am not a career researcher, I published it on my website and you can find it attached. modern-diet-and-stress-cause-homosexuality.pdf