Between The Sexes (Intersex Children)

Time Magazine ^ | 02.27.04 | Christine Gorman and Wendy Cole

[VxH]

>> You have nothing (and there is nothing) to support your position that there is a genetic bias towards chimerism

 

Really? 

Another possibility for the coexistence of the XX males and true hermaphrodites within the same family may be explained on the basis of inheritance of genes that predispose to chimerism. Many cases of sporadic true hermaphroditism have been shown to be on the basis of chimerism of 46,XX and 46,XY zygotes. In one pedigree, a mosaic 46,XX/XY hermaphrodite had a 46,XX brother (pedigree 2–15) (48). The proportion of 46,XY-bearing cells in the gonad may have been so great that the gonad of the 46,XX male was a testis. Gonadal mosaicism can be implied for the pedigree where two brothers are 46,XX true hermaphrodites with male phenotype, one carrying a paternally transmitted marker, possibly of Y chromosomal origin and the other not (pedigree 2–16) (49).

 

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/2/483

 

 

[ahayes]

I applaud you. You actually have some grounds for the suggestion. But this is proposed by the authors just as an untested hypothesis and in my earlier search I found nothing regarding a genetic predisposition.

At any rate as these cases are so rare and in most cases siblings of a chimeric person are normal and so is that person's offspring, there is no excuse to try to keep them from propagating.

I think you greatly underestimate environmental effects in placing so much importance on genetics. Many birth defects result from environmental causes such as illness of the mother (rubella), absence of necessary nutrients (spina bifida), or presence of foreign chemicals (thalidomide).

[optimistically_conservative]

Not if it can't reproduce.

Well, that only keeps it from becoming a trait of the species, but the genetic mutation and drift keeps the diversity alive.

[VxH]

>>earlier search I found nothing regarding a genetic predisposition.

Think about Transplant rejection. A successful bone-marrow transplant results in chimerism. But many transplants are rejected. How does the immune system know what to reject?

Think about T-Cell receptors. Receptors are proteins.

Proteins are assembled according to the "Instructions" in DNA.

What's the primary method of DNA inheritance?

Genetics.

[BikerNYC]

Gender is determined by Chromosomes.

Really? If that's the case, I wonder how they determined the gender of George Washington at the time, since they had no access to his chromosomes.

We determine gender based upon things other than chromosomes, no?

[TaxRelief]

Matthew 19:12
For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage[ 19:12 Or have made themselves eunuchs] because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."

[Paul C. Jesup]

But what about the hormones...

[VxH]

>>But what about the hormones...

In short, Hormones are specialized chemical substances that are assembled by enzymes per the information that is encoded within the DNA.

Without DNA there is no Hormone production.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Nice try, but a lot of those hormones are produced by the mother.

[VxH]

>> a lot of those hormones are produced by the mother.

And by what mechanism are they produced in the mother, Paul?


They are still "specialized chemical substances that are assembled by enzymes per the information that is encoded within the mother's DNA".

Without DNA there is no Hormone production.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Don't forget the XO, XXY, XYY, XXX, XXXX, XXXXX, especially in comparison to those with either 1 extra or 1 fewer autosome (generallly these spontaneously abort) except for Patau, Edwards, and Downs syndromes.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Should genetic defects be subsidized?

Not according to the eugeics movement

[VxH]

>>eugeics movement

Define "eugeics movement"?

[Paul C. Jesup]

Without DNA there is no Hormone production.

Without either, their cannot be complex multi-celled life.

Also, if you want to ask me a question, next time post to me. Anyway, do you even understand the endocrine system develops and works. Hormones are produced by various glands in the mother's body and the baby's placenta to send instuctions on how the baby is to be developed.

[VxH]

Ok, Paul, let's look at your original statement:

 

        But the RNA/hormones are the ones that actually build the body

        while the DNA is only the blueprints.

 

You can not expect your audience  to grok your rationalization if you do not articulate it completely.

 

1. Where, exactly, did you mention mothers' hormones?

 

2. The "Hormonal Condition" you refer to in other posts/threads is NOT, as the above quoted statement implies, independent of DNA.

 

That "Hormonal Condition" would be an EXPRESSION of DNA.

 

 

 

[ahayes]

It's interesting that you completely ignored the previous example I gave of several environmental factors that lead to birth defects which you seem to believe are invariably genetic. At any rate, your argument that hormonal effects can be lumped together with "genetics" simply because genes code for protein expression is a vast oversimplification. Environmental cues are what trigger the upregulation and downregulation of genes, resulting in more or less of a certain protein being produced. The effect of environmental stimuli on gene expression cause all of the birth defects that I listed before. Since they are caused by a irregularity in gene expression, does this mean that they are heritable and the affected person's genes are somehow deficient? No.

For another example, in an interesting new technique for gene silencing, small segments of RNA matching in sequence to RNA coding for the protein to be silenced are injected into a cell. The cell recognizes these RNAs as possible viral RNA and procedes to degrade the introduced RNA and the normal RNA with the same sequence. The result is the silencing of gene expression for that protein. If this protein is vital, the cell dies. Since the cell death was related to gene expression, does that mean it was genetic? No--again, environmental.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Like Ahayes said, you are over simplifing your theories. And you refuse to listen to anything said towards you.

[Mr. Bird]

I agree with everything you say. I thought the questioner was asking whether such "defective" members of the gene pool should be prohibited from procreating. I responded in the negative. Essentially, procreating is an activity that no institution of man should be able to limit. Now, if He chooses to limit it...

[VxH]

>>And you refuse to listen to anything said towards you.

No, I listen to lots of people.

I'm just not buying *your* obfuscated, self-rationalizing, pseudo-scientific bovine fecal material.

[Paul C. Jesup]

You are one to talk.