SCIENCEDIRECT.COM Posted on 02/26/2019 7:32:16 AM PST by SeekAndFind
SCIENCEDIRECT.COM
A mid-2000’s study linking anti-gay prejudice to shorter lifespans for lesbians, gays, and bisexual individuals has been retracted on grounds that it was an “erroneous” finding.
The study “Structural stigma and all-cause mortality in sexual minority populations” was conducted by researchers from Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health and was published by the peer-reviewed academic journal Social Science & Medicine in February 2014.
The study purported to have found that lesbian, gay, and bisexual people who live in communities with high levels of anti-gay sentiment tend to die earlier than lesbians, gays and bisexuals who live in communities that are more tolerant of their lifestyles.
The report suggested that lesbians, gays and bisexuals living in communities with a “high prejudice” to their lifestyles lived an average 12 years less than those living in more tolerant communities.
The study stated that analysis of specific causes of death revealed that suicide, homicide and cardiovascular diseases “were substantially elevated among sexual minorities in high-prejudice communities.”
The researchers, led by sociomedical sciences professor Mark Hatzenbuehler, indicated that an added stress that accompanies living in areas of lesser tolerance to LGBT lifestyles can cause earlier deaths.
The study had been promoted by institutions such as the National LGBT Health Education Center and was covered in a number of news outlets such as Reuters and ThinkProgress.
However, the University of Texas at Austin sociology professor and author Mark Regnerus voiced concern with the study. In 2017, the same peer-reviewed journal that published the study published a piece by Regnerus detailing his attempts to run his own analysis of the data.
Regnerus used 10 different approaches and could not replicate the results shown in the original study.
“Ten different approaches to multiple imputations of missing data yielded none in which the effect of structural stigma on the mortality of sexual minorities was statistically significant,” the conclusion of Regnerus’ paper reads. “Minimally, the original study's structural stigma variable (and hence its key result) is so sensitive to subjective measurement decisions as to be rendered unreliable.”
Hatzenbuehler told ThinkProgress in response to Regnerus’ report that he and his colleagues would stand by their results and work on a “detailed response” to Regnerus’ to submit for peer review. The ThinkProgress article also describes Regnerus as an "anti-gay researcher" driven by political bias.
This month, the publication officially retracted Hatzenbuehler’s study.
“The reason for the retraction is that the authors discovered an error in the study, which, once corrected, rendered the association between structural stigma and mortality risk no longer statistically significant in the sample of 914 sexual minorities,” an explanation on the publication’s website reads. “The authors published a Corrigendum … pending a re-analysis of the data. Re-analysis confirmed that the original finding was erroneous and the authors wish to fully retract their original study accordingly.”
Robert P. George, a conservative law professor at Princeton University, took to social media to claim that the retraction was somewhat of a vindication for Regnerus.
“If the name ‘Mark Regnerus’ rings a bell, it's likely because his own ‘New Family Structures’ study comparing outcomes for children of various family or household forms was viciously attacked for politically motivated reasons,” George wrote. “Those who didn't like what his study reported pressured the professional journal in which it was published to retract it. They had no case, and the journal editors stood firmly behind the study.”
“Regnerus' critics tried everything to wreck his career, but fortunately they failed,” George added. “He was promoted to the rank of full professor and continues to do outstanding work — like his work in exposing the unreplicability of the Hatzenbuehler study.”
In December, a systematic review and analysis of 2.5 million adolescents published in JAMA Pediatrics found that youths” who identify as homosexual, bisexual and transgender “have a significantly higher risk of life-threatening behavior compared with their heterosexual peers.”
EVERY SINGLE Democrat talking point is based on this lie, including ads and legislature arguments that forced through “anti-discrimination” laws. Will those be “retracted” now too?
Snort, guffaw...
On the other hand, they do die at an increased rate if they live in a community where street drugs are cheap and available at any hour.
Fake Science has been around since the days of the shamans.
Well, I give them credit for their honesty in admitting the mistake and retracting their study. I don’t often see that in academia.
ROTFL. Nice try though. It’s a wacky world out there. “Make
America Wacky Again” ‘RAT slogan 2020.
And logic dictates that in locations where their perversion is accepted there is likely to be more risky activity, thus a higher probability of dying from it.
Imagine that - publish some incendiary click-bait studies then get people to pass legislation to assuage their guilt.
Tale as old as time
“....was conducted by researchers from Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health and was published by the peer-reviewed academic journal Social Science & Medicine...”
Columbia - strike one
Social Science & Medicine - strikes two and three.
You’re out.
Yeah, I'd like to see some research into that.
It’s based on faith.
When you believe in God based on faith it’s BAD.
Every and anything else, it’s good enough!!
The empirical data speaks for itself.
Dallas has a very “gay-friendly” area of town with a very supportive environment for “gay” life. Yet, the Turtle Creek Chorale’s website (”gay” men’s chorus) had a “member memorial” web page full of death notices and rememberences for members dying in their 40’s on average. When they didn’t list the cause of death as AIDS, they simply said the member “passed away quietly at home.” We know what that means.
And male homosexuals in particular, have high rates of various sexually transmitted diseases, which will affect lifespans.
Though if they avoid the voluntary risky behavior which spread such diseases, their outlook undoubtedly improves.
But it was settled science!
Bravo for Dr. Regnerus. Poetic Justice.
He did to the fake “study” what the deviants couldn’t do to his valid study.
In this case, I don't think they had a choice. Continuing to bluff once your cards are on the table doesn't play well.
Cue Gomer Pyle.
Just because I can't spot & rescue a dude overdosing from the lethal dose of crystal meth that his boyfriend lovingly shoved up his @ss, doesn't make it my fault.
How did they determine the area had a “high prejudice” rate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.