Using androgens to prevent sexual orientational development disorders.

Please read and review the peer reviewed citations as well as entire post before commenting. No ideologues please.

Abstract:
Here there will be evidence presented to show that sexual orientation is not a mental disorder but in fact is determined while a fetus is developing in the womb.This will furthermore clinical procedures that will prevent such congenital disorders Based on this evidence there will be the classification of sexual development disorders. Objectivity is based on peer reviewed cases studies, clinical analysis, mathamatical modeling, subsequent hypothesized test results. It is important to note that although fetal development is a key factor, social and environmental variables are likely to impact to some degrees this section but this will only look at observed biological, chemical and development factors.

Findings/studies
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Here we see that the brain structure of homosexual men and women are different from their hetrosexual counterparts. In effect a homosexual mans brain is more like that of a hetrosexual women and vise versa for homosexual women is more like straight men.

jamescantor.com...
Here we see that others orientational disorders also has brain structure differences.

When brain structure is physically shown to be different from controls it is conclusive that there is biological development basis for sexual orientation disorders. This disorder and homosexuality can now be considered congenital disorders. Now that evidence for a predisposed orientation disorders is shown hypothesis and tests can be made to explain such differences

www.jstor.org...

Here this study of mathamatical modeling based on observations of sexual orientation disorders is explained by erroneous epi-markers caused by over or under exposure to parental androgens. This pertains to the cause of such disorders and how each disorder can be different based on amounts of over or under exposures.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

This study supports that sexual orientation disorders are once more predisposed but can not be genetic. This study uses the models of twins and looks at what factors are required to have twins with similar dna develop differently.

Now we will shift to another development disorder based on the same hypothesis of erroneous androgens levels.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Here we see that not only the brain can be effected by predisposed traits but the body as well. This study is to sets up the next point of the process in testing the hypothesis presented in the last point.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Here we see clinical results supporting the previous points through testing. This study looks at using androgens to prevent ambiguous genitalia (another development of biological errors with respect to sexual orientation/development disorders).

Building on and furthering that study is this one.

www.researchgate.net...

Subsequently when preventing CAH researchers found that homosexuality was also prevented. The implications of preventing multiple sexual orientations with simply bringing parental androgens levels to normal, leads to the conclusion that most all sexual orientation development disorders can be prevented but not exclusively each orientation disorder.

Conclusions and questions:
-Sexual orientations are predisposed.
In the past such disorders were /is incorrectly listed as a mental illness.
Sexual orientation and others biological disorders are all related to erroneous epi-markers that can be prevented.

Given history with the AMA, APA, NAMBLA and LGBT the whole world crashes around some folks when the medical community calls sexual orientation disorders something to be prevented… even when the facts are on the side of prevention,it ruins the whole day of people who have sepnt their entire lives trying to get the rest of us to believe it’s ‘normal’ only to find the assertion was not true.

Should we hide from such facts based on hurting someone’s feelings?

By supporting the prevention of the one congenital disorder you by default support preventing all other sexual orientation disorders including homosexuality.

No I did not read the post, because it is the same as the other two that you have posted, both of which were closed.

Take the hint and move on.

a reply to: alphastrike101

Great info. It's just too bad it'll be taken down again once the LGBT activists come in here and start screaming at everyone.

Did you see the "Jesus was gay" thread?

Sexual orientation and others biological disorders are all related to erroneous epi-markers that can be prevented.

Seriously. Are you that homophobic? Thread after thread, stating sexual orientation is a disease to be cured. We get it. You hate/fear gay people. Give it a rest.

a reply to: alphastrike101

Let's for the sake of argument, accept the factual basis of what you are presenting. In isolation, some effects are created by introducing chemicals to the prenatal environment. These effects, considered in isolation, may alter gender development.

Medical Dr.s would be highly arrogant and ignorant of history to believe they fully understand a developing fetus and full cause/effect of external chemistry.

Medical Dr's are highly arrogant and ignorant of history.

Side effects may include rectal bleeding and sudden death. Scary. Better make it mandatory. Better fast track it. Better pay politicians, shills and media to create the illusion of health and normalcy. What's next?

a reply to: Bone75



Great info? did you read it, or just wanting to throw some shade on the "activist"?

a reply to: Bone75

It's not great info, it is drawing a false conclusion based in small sample sizes...

a reply to: DAVID64

Well I don't hate/fear gay people and I still think parents should have the option of a prenatal treatment to prevent sexual attraction disorders.

Nice of you to paint someone as a bigot for presenting information on the subject.

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

I mean, let’s consider this; Why should it NOT be considered a congenital disorders, based on what we now know? Is it simply because sexual behavior is involved?

If there is a chance to prevent pedophilia we should we should at least give it a try. But if the only way to prevent that orientational disorder includes preventing all such disorders like using antibiotics on an unknown infection suddenly it is not longer an option.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Apparently the AMA disagrees because it has refuted dr. drangers claims and has given dr. New approval to moved on to large scale clinical trials.

Someone this homophobic usually resides in a cozy closet......self hate is a powerful force.

a reply to: DAVID64

Congenital disorders and it is to be prevented.

Your hamfisted attempt to demonized recent scientific findings and subsequent remedial action is ideological based. Not facts based.

a reply to: Bone75

So, you are Ok with someone curing Heterosexuality?

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: Bone75

Great info? did you read it, or just wanting to throw some shade on the "activist"?

Of course I read it, was there something in there you wanted to refute, or are you just here to scream homophobe at the OP like everyone else?

originally posted by: alphastrike101
Given history with the AMA, APA, NAMBLA and LGBT the whole world crashes around some folks when the medical community calls sexual orientation disorders something to be prevented… even when the facts are on the side of prevention,it ruins the whole day of people who have sepnt their entire lives trying to get the rest of us to believe it’s ‘normal’ only to find the assertion was not true.

Homosexuality is "normal" like left-handedness is "normal". Could they be prevented? Perhaps. But should we prevent them? I don't think so. Preventing all harmless "disorders" only serves to make us more homogeneous, and I quite prefer the diversity.

Should we hide from such facts based on hurting someone’s feelings?

No.

By supporting the prevention of the one congenital disorder you by default support preventing all other sexual orientation disorders including homosexuality.

Not true. If it's a harmless "disorder" (like left-handedness, baldness, big nose, or homosexuality), I don't see why we should push to prevent, control, or otherwise manipulate genes to try to make us all more alike... Sounds pretty boring... 'Cause I love me some bald men!

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: Bone75

So, you are Ok with someone curing Heterosexuality?

And wiping out the human race? ummm no.

Gonna get bashed for his but oh well. Species' use 2 sexes to reproduce and continue the species. Homosexual people are not a natural production of the human species. Does that mean we should go in and alter the cause if there is one? No. Does it make homosexual people any less entitled to rights as humans? No. There is a reason that nature has decided to take this course with us as a species and we need to accept that. This isn't a new development. There have been homosexual members of society since the inception.

a reply to: Bone75

"sexual attraction disorder" Pretty much says it all doesn't it? You think being gay is a disease. If parents should have the choice to choose their child's sexual orientation, then gay couples should have the right to "tweak" their child too, right? Or is this just a choice for straight people?

Why is it so terrifying to have a child that may grow up to be gay?

originally posted by: In4ormant
Homosexual people are not a natural production of the human species.

ALL homosexuals are naturally produced by the human species.

Other than this one sentence, I agree with your points.