Posted on 10/09/2015 5:23:01 PM PDT by Rockitz
Scientists claim they can predict whether someone is gay or straight with up to 70 per cent accuracy by looking at their DNA.
It has long been believed that sexuality has a biological basis – with certain genes linked to being gay.
But the claim sexual behaviour can be predicted by such a high degree was described as 'bold' by British scientists.
Researchers found distinct patterns of molecules which attach to DNA to switch genes on and off were associated with homosexuality. They claim to be able to predict whether someone is gay (illustrated) or straight with 70 per cent accuracy
Researchers found distinct patterns of molecules which attach to DNA to switch genes on and off were associated with homosexuality. They claim to be able to predict whether someone is gay (illustrated) or straight with 70 per cent accuracy
The findings do not show whether a test would show whether a child would grow up to be gay or not – as the research was carried out on adults.
While our genes are determined at birth – tags on the genes which affect how they work can change over time because of factors in the environment, or in the womb.
Dr Tuck Ngun, from the University of California at Los Angeles said: 'To our knowledge, this is the first example of a predictive model for sexual orientation based on molecular markers.'
Identical twins usually – but not always – have the same sexuality. This finding has led scientists to believe there is a genetic component to being gay.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
It will be interesting to see what percentage of those claiming to be gay would test positive in such a DNA test.
So, they have found the insanity gene?!
Spermatozoa in the saliva?
Possibly, he’s had a few things tucked in his Ngun? ;o)
In an environment that is sufficiently temptation laden, it is possible in theory that a genetic test could correlate fairly well with outcome.
But genetic tests can tell you who is susceptible to alcohol abuse too. Doesn’t mean the person is going to turn out to be a souse.
What they didn’t tell you is that these are the same scientists that have already proven AGW.
A bit more info in post #8.
Considering there is no “gay gene”, the research and announcement is suspect automatically.
If it can be identified and changed, will there be research on how to cure people of it?
Queers are terrified of this; they fear they’ll be exterminated in the womb (so the current crop has no young ones to chase around). Remember, we’re supposed to pretend that they contribute something positive to the larger society...
And we wouldn’t rush out to buy those susceptible to alcohol a drink either.
Watch how fast liberal couples will abort gay children. Only the ones already afflicted are interested in raising non-productive offspring.
This is exactly what will happen. Imagine families in places like China or other similar developing nations where it’s nothing to have an abortion and everything to have viable offspring to care for you when you’re older.
Gil McVean, professor of statistical genetics at Oxford University, said: 'Without validation of the result in an independent data set it is not really possible to know whether there is any substance in this claim.'
Dr Christopher Gregg, Assistant Professor of Neurobiology & Anatomy and Human Genetics, University of Utah said:
'Overall, the importance of these findings will hinge on how reproducible they are in future studies that include larger groups of heterosexual and homosexual individuals.'
Gay and human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said: ‘This research claims to be able to predict sexual orientation with 'up to' 70 per cent accuracy. This doesn't sound entirely convincing or reliable.
Scientists claim a lot of things. It takes actual science to sort out which of them provide a more workable picture of the world.
Epigenetics ping...
The other 30% are people choosing to be “gay” because it’s trendy and PC
In this case their sampling was 47 sets of twins. In 37 sets on was homosexual. In the other 10 sets, both were gay. This is certainly not a representative sampling of the general public.
This will fall into obscurity in short order. When the try a sampling of the general population, it will not prove their thesis. This is bad science, if it is science at all.
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.
