Posted on 03/31/2017 3:11:21 AM PDT by markomalley
Nearly 600 health experts have signed onto a letter condemning a 143-page report issued last year by two distinguished scholars at Johns Hopkins University that argued there isn't enough scientific evidence to suggest that people are born with a certain sexual orientation or gender identity.
As previously reported, Paul McHugh, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Johns Hopkins, and Johns Hopkins scholar-in-residence Lawrence Mayer authored a report on sexuality and gender published in The New Atlantis last August that, among other things, refuted claims that sexual orientation and gender dysphoria are caused by natural traits and innate behavior.
Although McHugh and Mayer's report was not peer-reviewed, it cited many other peer-reviewed studies to help progress its arguments. The report also professes to be a "careful summary and an up-to-date explanation of research — from the biological, psychological, and social sciences — related to sexual orientation and gender identity."
The report has been cited in a Supreme Court amicus brief filed by the conservative Liberty Counsel in support of a Virginia school district being sued by a transgender student for the right to use the bathrooms and locker rooms consistent with the student's gender identity. The bill has also been cited by opponents of the proposed transgender bathroom non-discrimination legislation introduced in New Hampshire.
In light of the report being cited for justification to oppose proposed laws and judicial action, Lauren Beach, the the director of LGBTI Research at Vanderbilt University, released a letter signed by hundreds of scholars that criticizes The New Atlantis report because it is not peer-reviewed.
The letter claims that the report "misleads readers" and its "conclusions do not reflect current scientific or medical consensus about sexual orientation or gender identity research findings or clinical care recommendations."
In an interview with The Christian Post on Tuesday, the 85-year-old McHugh said that "this is not a serious letter" because the objection that the signatories have to the report is not made clear.
"This letter is a very difficult letter to answer because the main point about this letter is that they just don't like us," McHugh said. "That's all there is about this matter. I'm sorry they don't like us but if they disagree with something specific, they should say so. They should make the specific objection clear to us. After all, we said in the article that we expected there to be ongoing discussion about our views, interpretation or even what the data should signify. Now, we expect something more than just saying, 'We don't agree with them and lots of other people don't agree with them too.'"
The four-paragraph letter, which was finalized last Wednesday, was first reported on by The Daily Beast. Signatories include scholars and experts from Harvard Medical School, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, medical institutions, medical associations and various doctors and health professionals.
The letter reads:
"Dr. Paul McHugh and Dr. Lawrence Mayer's Fall 2016 report, 'Sexuality and Gender: New Findings from the Biological, Psychological and Social Sciences,' published in the 50th issue of the non-peer reviewed bioethics magazine The New Atlantis, misleads readers about the state of scientific research and evidence-based clinical practice guidelines addressing the health of people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ).
As researchers with expertise in gender and sexuality, and/or as clinicians who serve LGBTQ people, we are called to correct the record. A substantial body of research points to stigma and its consequences as contributing to the mental and physical health disparities among LGBTQ people. Based on scientific consensus, many major medical associations have issued guidelines and policy statements calling for clinicians to affirm and support the sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression of their patients as part of a standard, evidence-based approach to high quality, patient-centered healthcare.
Although the 'Sexuality and Gender' report cites many peer-reviewed scientific articles, the interpretation, analysis, and summary of the scientific evidence in the report has not been peer reviewed. As scientific and medical experts, we affirm that the report's conclusions do not reflect current scientific or medical consensus about sexual orientation or gender identity research findings or clinical care recommendations. As such, the report's conclusions should not be viewed as a source of scientific or medical justification to support any legislation, judicial action, policymaking or clinical decision-making affecting the lives of LGBTQ people or their families.
In summary, as researchers and clinicians with expertise in gender and sexuality, we affirm that the "Sexuality and Gender" report does not represent prevailing expert consensus opinion about sexual orientation or gender identity related research or clinical care."
McHugh contended that the letter is just "an attempt to silence us and it won't succeed."
"That's what it is. Left, right, center, what have you, I am disappointed that 600 people don't like me," he said. "But I would like them to explain what exactly in that article we got wrong and where the information is that we should have put in. We are not against anybody. We are a group of doctors talking about the treatment of patients."
Beach told The Daily Beast that the purpose of the letter is to persuade lawmakers and the public to question the reliability of McHugh and Mayer's report.
"We are writing to the public at large as experts in this area of LGBTI health and we want to send a strong message that peer-review is essential for scientific integrity," Beach said. "We want to clearly state the New Atlantis article is not peer-reviewed and that — as experts — we disagree with the conclusions expressed in the report. They're scientifically and medically unfounded."
McHugh told CP that since the report is merely his and Mayer's take on the findings from other peer-reviewed articles, it shouldn't need to be peer reviewed.
"If they object to an article written in a non-peer-reviewed journal, do they object to an article on science written in The Atlantic or The New Yorker, which happen all the time?" McHugh asked.
"We aren't saying something new in this, which requires peer review. We are saying 'This is how we read the science today.' That's what the public is interested in."
The end of the letter lists references to studies and policy statements from a number of major medical associations, including the American Medical Association and the American Psychological Association.
Beach told The Daily Beast that many of the signatories of her letter felt that McHugh and Mayer misrepresented their research in their report and "felt it was critically important that their work be framed in line with the scientific conclusions that it supports."
"I don't know which ones they say are misrepresented and how they should have been represented. They didn't tell us in the letter, did they?" McHugh stated.
While some Left-leaning watchdogs have tried to discredit McHugh by claiming that he has a "history of peddling anti-LGBT junk science," CP spoke with Mayer last August and asked him about McHugh's reputation and the impact it might have had on the report.
"Every line in this [report] I either wrote or approved of," Mayer said at the time. "There is no bias either way. The bias is just towards science."
CP reached out to Mayer Tuesday for comment on last Wednesday's letter but received no response by press time.
There is a genetic component to homosexuality, in my opinion. I believe homosexuality is akin to obesity and alcoholism: there are genetic predispositions; then, psychology, enviornment, etc come into play.
In any case, you are right: if scientists identify a gene indicating a predisposition to homosexuality, prenatal testing won’t be far behind. Same with an obesity gene. In twenty years, let’s see how many gay, fat babies make it out of the womb.
I have a degree in psychology and have continued in neuroscience studies for over twenty five years. What I have stated above is easily explained and demonstrated.
Interesting things that I have discovered in this research include:
Exact location where all memories or past experiences since conception are stored for an individual.
How to find and release the specific emotions that cause PTSD and other traumatic responses. (In a few minutes)
Consciousness characteristics of autism & Asperger’s syndrome and what causes it. (Also MS)
Causes of learning disabilities in many children.
Impact of childhood events on immune system suppression as adults.
Identification of specific life events that predispose a person to illnesses and or psychological and personality disorders. (Even when they were a child in their mother’s womb and remember the mother’s experience as their own)
The cause of “chemistry” and attraction in relationships.
The causes of the personality and behavioral attributes associated with being gay or lesbian.
How mind control and manipulation techniques such as hypnosis work and are used in cults and many group dynamics.
Why the world’s religions teach what they do. (I am Christian)
Many... Many things more as I have been done testing on thousands of people, including gays & lesbians.
I’m just now putting this in a book for publishing, coauthored with a MD psychiatrist on the faculty of a major US medical school for over twenty five years.
I am different therefore I am more special than you."
There is much more to it than that...
I've even identified the perceptual programming events occurring in childhood that generates the desire for men to cheat on their spouses. It is really easy to explain and demonstrate.
I actually presented and demonstrated my research at the Johns Hopkins Wellness Center to several hundred people.
The question is not really about the DNA, but what causes the RNA to select a specific sequence of DNA for transcription. This opens the BIG DOOR in the field of epigenetics.
Consensus is a happy median.
>>Gender studies is science. The problem is scientists do not know how to study it.
>>I can explain and demonstrate what causes gender identity.
Good, please explain using science.
>>It is the consciousness or soul in which the physical body exists. Sexual attraction is not caused by the physical bodies, but by the complimentary aspects of feminine and masculine consciousness needing to counter balance each other with their compliment in order to become whole.
>>Stereo-typically, men have a dominant left spinning aspect of consciousness while women have a dominant right spinning aspect. Memories are stored at the intersection of the two aspects as holograms and can be retrieved by either aspect.
Consciousness, soul, spinning aspects of consciousness?? That’s sounds more like New Age mysticism than science.
Johns Hopkins was the first, I believe, to promote the idea that boys who thought they were little girls should be turned into little girls. They promoted that idea and may have done operations - I forget. They have since refuted their own idea and have been working for decades now to debunk the myth of gender reassignment. So some good does come out of Maryland.
If there was a homosexual gene, it could be eradicated.
Boy, if there ever was an apt quote, it would be that one, you are right.
If there were a homosexuality or transgender gene, and if their “god” oh Natural Selection (evolution ) were all that designed the universe, then homosexuality would be bred out of the gene pool. Instead, it MUST be recruited and converted anew for every generation of new perverts
And how do they explain bisexuals? Are they born that way?
Your questions definitely need addressing.
Think of that guy Sam, the first openly gay football player.
He has a petite boyfriend. In his mind, he is acting normal. A small body submits to his powerful body.
I think it starts at a young age, when hormones kick in. There is confusion that kicks in during a raging dose of hormones. Maybe complete rejection by the opposite sex, yet desperation to have sex. Then two boys service each other. That’s it. Maybe a mother who is not affectionate. Maybe it’s too intense to think of a woman, and a willing guy is just easier. Something is missing.
When boys are about 12 years old, the light switch turn on. The shape of a woman’s butt becomes an extreme attraction. For gays, it must happen too. But then the cultural stuff kicks in, and any butt will fill a raging need.
this sounds like a fairly major work.
what is your account of “transgenderism”?
something like, the memories/consciousness of the female line of one’s lineage getting too much air time? (I know that’s very imprecise language...).
to the extent you can elaborate, that would be great...I find your posts fascinating, and not unlike things that I have thought
Since the funding for global warming is drying up, these people need another gig to soak up massive amounts of grants and tax monies and to control laws and the hoi polloi.
I think epigenetics is a big deal....my own personal theories on this would place a huge amount of influence there. but I stress, I am only a philosopher (of sorts...). not a scientist...
Maybe complete rejection by the opposite sex”
I have observed that, in fact, in some gay men honest enough to admit/give an account of why they are the way they are.
then once a sex act happens, all of a sudden, things start to get hard wired.
of course, trauma is also very often present, tragically.
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.