- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: One step closer to tying homosexuality to the human genome
Posted on 11/20/14 at 11:51 am to FT
Posted on 11/20/14 at 11:51 am to FT
quote:Agreed.
Seriously, though, frick the Chantry and Templars. Allistair was alright, and Leliana is a goddess, but you can't just lock up all the mages. #TEAMAPOSTATES
Wherever this story leads though, I'm choosing Leliana over all of the mages, unless the choice involves Morrigan.
Morrigan > All
This post was edited on 11/20/14 at 11:58 am
1
Posted on 11/20/14 at 11:54 am to DonChowder
quote:
quote:
You are going to feel the heat of Christ on that azz if you keep pushing homosexuality as normal to kids.
When money changers sold goods in Christ Father's house / Temple, Christ got angry and ran them all out.
When you have an idiot, citing ignorant studies that say God created men as homosexuals, then you are mocking God who says homosexuality is an abominable.
God created zero homosexuals, they are homosexuals because they love evil.
You keep advocating for these perverts and you will be answering for your stupidity.
You're almost like a cartoon character. Sometimes I wonder if you're actually an alter of one our liberal posters.
I really believe he's Harvey Updyke, the guy that poisoned the AU trees.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 11:57 am to Scruffy
quote:This. Playing through as a female character on DA:O and having her bang Allistair was weird.
Morrigan > All
I also think I must be a little gay for bothering with the Allistair romance quest.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:01 pm to the808bass
quote:
11% concordance rate. That doesn't seem "much more likely" to me.
Care to sight which study you are getting 11% from? I did a quick search and see numbers ranging from 20-50%.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:15 pm to WeeWee
quote:
I am not following you posts very carefully
Obviously not. I will try to break this down for you as simply as I can.
A study has been cited in OP that claims there is a specific X linkage seen in brothers who are both homosexual. There are describing a specific locus here, not a random mutation. 808 then asked
quote:
Could the genomes be influenced by the environment and behavior rather than vice versa?
Which I responded with:
quote:
Can you give me an example of a behavior that reliably leads to a specific re-coding of DNA at a specific place in the genome?
Highlighted for emphasis. A behavior leading to a consistent mutation at a specific locus. If this exists I am not aware of it, and would love to look at that paper.
Anyways, 808 responded with smoking, which doesn't work at all (I think he thought he caught me in something
) in which I responded with: quote:
Smoking isn't just a behavior, but a consistent introduction of toxins into the body. It is these toxins that cause endothelial dysfunction and resultant errors in DNA regulation/replication. However, I also said a specific place in the genome, and smoking doesn't cause that as much as it causes global abnormalities.
Again, highlighted for emphasis. Theres a reason that smoking causes an increase in pretty much all cancers (with a couple exceptions) and that is because it causes global dysregulation. Obviously lung cancer in particular because alveoli and lung parenchyma get a direct hit and higher concentrations than other organs.
Your responses of...
quote:
Researchers sequenced the DNA of tumour samples taken from lung cancer patients to determine the number of mutations present. These sequences were compared to those in normal tissue samples from these patients. More than 23,000 mutations were found in the cancer genome – approximately one for every 15 cigarettes smoked.
...underlines my point. 1) You have more mutations in the lung because these cells are "hardest hit" by smoke inhalation and 2) these mutations are global and not at a specific locus or chromosome (according to what you posted), and instead numerous at 28,000 and not clustered around a single location.
Thats about as simple as I can break it down. You're in med school, you should be able to follow that.
This post was edited on 11/20/14 at 6:30 pm
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:26 pm to Green Chili Tiger
Very interesting stuff, but even if this is ever conclusively shown to be the case an entire field of pseudoscience will be created to refute it. It's what always happens when science makes discoveries that challenge deeply held worldviews of a portion of the populace.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:30 pm to onmymedicalgrind
To be fair, you first reasonded with "nope, doesn't change." You basically took a stab at it the first time, adjusted your answer with every response from me and then pretend I'm the one playing gotcha.
Secondly:
So there are common mutations for smoking.
LINK
What do you think of the rate of concordance for MZ twins, Dz twins and siblings for alcoholism?
Secondly:
quote:
Transcript:“Smoking gun” K-ras and p53 are the two genes most frequently mutated in smoking-related lung cancers. One tar component, benzo[a]pyrene, is specifically linked to known mutations in these genes – providing the equivalent of a "smoking gun" at a murder scene. Within a
So there are common mutations for smoking.
LINK
What do you think of the rate of concordance for MZ twins, Dz twins and siblings for alcoholism?
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:32 pm to the808bass
quote:
Does anyone doubt homosexuality has a genetic component?
A LOT of people do. Perhaps not among those actually qualified to speak intelligently on the matter, but among the general population there are millions of people who would never even consider homosexuality being genetic in any way.
It is the most grotesque of natural perversions to many people and to admit that it has a genetic component would be to admit that there was the potential for straight people to have been gay under different circumstances, perhaps even themselves.
Can you even fathom the meltdown if a "gay gene" were discovered and say, a preacher somehow discovered he had it? Or a priest? Or the Pope? It would be a theological nightmare.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:36 pm to Roger Klarvin
I'm trying to keep an open mind but there have been studies of identical twins where one is gay and the other is not.
Wouldn't this tend to at least show that some do choose?
Wouldn't this tend to at least show that some do choose?
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:37 pm to Scruffy
quote:
To play devil's advocate, why do you believe that?
Whether or not something is an illness has to do with it's impact on the individual, not the biology or genetics involved.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:38 pm to Roger Klarvin
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 8:54 am
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:40 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
I'm trying to keep an open mind but there have been studies of identical twins where one is gay and the other is not.
Wouldn't this tend to at least show that some do choose?
Quit the opposite actually. Twin studies reveal that when one of the twins is gay, the other has a higher chance of also being gay when compared to the general population.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:40 pm to ctiger69
quote:
behaviors such as Pedoiphiles, homosexuality, and beastility.
Do you really not see a fundamental difference between these?
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:40 pm to Roger Klarvin
Would you consider this to be more a possibility of being a birth defect? Not meaning that in a condemning way but such as Down syndrome. Something that just happens to some babies.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:41 pm to the808bass
quote:
To be fair, you first reasonded with "nope, doesn't change." You basically took a stab at it the first time, adjusted your answer with every response from me and then pretend I'm the one playing gotcha.
I said nope to what?
quote:
So there are common mutations for smoking.
Ok, its obvious that you don't really understand and you are just googling and pasting. I will try again to illustrate my point as simply as possible. If you still don't get it, I can't help you because I got stuff to do tonight.
From your quote:
quote:
“Smoking gun” K-ras and p53 are the two genes most frequently mutated in smoking-related lung cancers.
What I bolded is key, and is why your statement that:
quote:
So there are common mutations for smoking.
...is incorrect. For those who have a particular phenotype of "smoking related cancer" their are similarities in genetic mutations. But that does not mean smoking doesn't cause global genomic issues. Its just that IF smoking hits p53 and k-ras--two KEY enzymes in protecting the integrity of the genome--than one is more likely to have increased DNA replication mutations globally, leading to the phenotype of cancer. When smoking causes mutations at other "less important" sites--which it invariably does--one does not get cancer. But I repeat--that doesn't mean smoking goes straight to p53 and kras and leaves everything else alone. I understand how that can be confusing for you if you are simply googling and don't have much understanding of genetic processes.
This is one explanation as to why alot of people who have smoked for decades have never had cancer--the smoking did not lead to mutation of the right key genes. It did lead to other mutations, I can promise you that.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:42 pm to ctiger69
quote:
It really does not matter even though science is no where close on identifying a gay gene. If a gay gene is truly is identified it does NOT make homosexuslity normal.
You have to discredit anybody in these discussions if they use that term.
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:43 pm to cwill
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 8:54 am
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:44 pm to ctiger69
quote:
Do people with down syndrome really care that a down syndrome gene has been found?
A Down Syndrome gene?!?
You must still be in middle school. Even that, IDK....
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:45 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 8:54 am
Posted on 11/20/14 at 6:46 pm to ctiger69
quote:
ctiger69
Can you tell me more about this Down Syndrome gene though?? I am fascinated!
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News