Experiments that claim to ‘cure’ homosexual rams spark anger

[kirisutogomen]

Science told: hands off gay sheep

Isabel Oakeshott and Chris Gourlay
London Times
Sunday, December 31, 2006

Experiments that claim to ‘cure’ homosexual rams spark anger

SCIENTISTS are conducting experiments to change the sexuality of “gay” sheep in a programme that critics fear could pave the way for breeding out homosexuality in humans.

The technique being developed by American researchers adjusts the hormonal balance in the brains of homosexual rams so that they are more inclined to mate with ewes.

It raises the prospect that pregnant women could one day be offered a treatment to reduce or eliminate the chance that their offspring will be homosexual. Experts say that, in theory, the “straightening” procedure on humans could be as simple as a hormone supplement for mothers-to-be, worn on the skin like an anti-smoking nicotine patch.

The research, at Oregon State University in the city of Corvallis and at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, has caused an outcry. Martina Navratilova, the lesbian tennis player who won Wimbledon nine times, and scientists and gay rights campaigners in Britain have called for the project to be abandoned.

Navratilova defended the “right” of sheep to be gay. She said: “How can it be that in the year 2006 a major university would host such homophobic and cruel experiments?” She said gay men and lesbians would be “deeply offended” by the social implications of the tests.

But the researchers argue that the work is valid, shedding light on the “broad question” of what determines sexual orientation. They insist the work is not aimed at “curing” homosexuality.

Approximately one ram in 10 prefers to mount other rams rather than mate with ewes, reducing its value to a farmer. Initially, the publicly funded project aimed to improve the productivity of herds.

The scientists have been able to pinpoint the mechanisms influencing the desires of “male-oriented” rams by studying their brains. The animals’ skulls are cut open and electronic sensors are attached to their brains.

By varying the hormone levels, mainly by injecting hormones into the brain, they have had “considerable success” in altering the rams’ sexuality, with some previously gay animals becoming attracted to ewes.

Professor Charles Roselli, the Health and Science University biologist leading the research, defended the project.

He said: “In general, sexuality has been under-studied because of political concerns. People don’t want science looking into what determines sexuality.

“It’s a touchy issue. In fact, several studies have shown that people who believe homosexuality is biologically based are less homophobic than people who think that this orientation is acquired.”

The research is being peer-reviewed by a panel of scientists in America, demonstrating that it is being taken seriously by the academic community.

Potentially, the techniques could one day be adapted for human use, with doctors perhaps being able to offer parents pre-natal tests to determine the likely sexuality of offspring or a hormonal treatment to change the orientation of a child.

Roselli has said he would be “uncomfortable” about parents choosing sexuality, but argues that it is up to policy makers to legislate on questions of ethics.

Michael Bailey, a neurology professor at Northwestern University near Chicago, said: “Allowing parents to select their children’s sexual orientation would further a parent’s freedom to raise the sort of children they want to raise.”

Critics fear the findings could be abused.

Udo Schuklenk, Professor of Bioethics at Glasgow Caledonian University, who has written to the researchers pressing them to stop, said: “I don’t believe the motives of the study are homophobic, but their work brings the terrible possibility of exploitation by homophobic societies. Imagine this technology in the hands of Iran, for example.

“It is typical of the US to ignore the global context in which this is taking place.”

Peter Tatchell, the gay rights campaigner, said: “These experiments echo Nazi research in the early 1940s which aimed at eradicating homosexuality. They stink of eugenics. There is a danger that extreme homophobic regimes may try to use these experimental results to change the orientation of gay people.”

He said that the techniques being developed in sheep could in future allow parents to “play God”.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the pressure group, condemned the study as “a needless slaughter of animals, an affront to human dignity and a colossal waste of precious research funds”.

The tests on gay sheep are the latest in a long line of experiments seeking to alter the sexuality of humans and animals.

Günther Dorner, a scientist in the former East Berlin, carried out hormone-altering tests on rodents in the 1960s in the hope of finding a way to eradicate homosexuality.

In 2002, Simon LeVay, an American neurologist, claimed to have discovered that homosexual and heterosexual men had physically different brains. His tests on the corpses of gay men who had died of AIDS were widely criticised.

You won't find the original article on the London Times website. That may be because it's saturated with errors. If it had been any more wrong, mistake crystals would have precipitated out of your screen.

The animals’ skulls are cut open and electronic sensors are attached to their brains. No. The skulls were not cut open, no electronic sensors were used. The actual procedure was looking at the sheep and seeing which other sheep they chose as mates.

By varying the hormone levels, mainly by injecting hormones into the brain, they have had “considerable success” in altering the rams’ sexuality, with some previously gay animals becoming attracted to ewes. No. The reason Roselli uses sheep, as opposed to rats or fruit flies or zebrafish, is because in sheep, unlike rats or fruit flies or zebrafish, some males are known to exhibit exclusively same sex attraction. The scientists can study naturally occurring exclusive same sex attraction in male sheep, but have to artificially induce it in other model organisms.

Admittedly, this same group of researchers did a different study a few years ago in which they tried to induce same sex attraction in animals that had previously only demonstrated heterosexual attraction. That's the opposite direction from that claimed by the London Times, and besides, the experiment produced negative results.

Initially, the publicly funded project aimed to improve the productivity of herds. No. That's ridiculous. It's on an NIH grant, and besides, can you think of a dumber way to increase the number of sheep in the world? (OK, cloning would be stupider.)

The first sentence of the article: SCIENTISTS are conducting experiments to change the sexuality of “gay” sheep in a programme that critics fear could pave the way for breeding out homosexuality in humans. Actually, Lysenkoism has been discredited for some time now. Even if they were conducting experiments to change the sexuality of "gay" sheep, which they aren't, that wouldn't affect any hypothetical genes associated with sexual orientation, just like you reading this article won't make your grandchildren stupider.

Actually, if we did somehow find a way to make gay sheep act straight, that would just increase the reproductive rate of any sheep carrying a hypothetical gay gene. Doing that to humans would quickly lead to the gayest world since Gay came to Gaytown.

And yes, this was the London Times.

Comments

[billmarrs.livejournal.com]

"...just like you reading this article won't make your grandchildren stupider."

I recently watched a Nova on Epigenetics that seemed to show that what your grandparents do may well have a significant effect on you.

This leaves open the possibility that reading stupid articles may well affect generations of our offspring, thus making the need for this all the more pressing.

[kirisutogomen.livejournal.com]

Epigenetics is very cool stuff, and we're just starting to learn about it. Randy Jirtle has done some of the most important recent epigenetics research, and his work is first-rate, but that Q&A sounds like a guy trying to get funding. A bunch of questions of the form "Could epigenetics be used to prevent tailgating/acne/talk radio?" get answers like "We can't say for sure, but it's possible."

StupidFilter sounds pretty useful, but the reason I decided to highlight this particular story was because it's exactly the sort of thing that would escape such a filter. The grammar is excellent, it doesn't include any "zomg lol," it's in a highly prestigious mainstream newspaper, and it quotes scientists in several fields from several major universities.

[dpolicar]

That thumping noise was my head smashing against my desk.

[kirisutogomen.livejournal.com]

It raises the prospect that pregnant women could one day be offered a treatment to reduce or eliminate the chance that their offspring will be homosexual. Experts say that, in theory, the “straightening” procedure on humans could be as simple as a hormone supplement for mothers-to-be, worn on the skin like an anti-smoking nicotine patch.

It turns out that the "experts" aren't actually expert scientists, but experts in Pokemon identification.

[dpolicar]

To be fair, I do approve of the general idea of thinking about the social/ethical implications of this sort of thing before the technology actually exists.

Which is importantly different from writing what purports to be a news article claiming that the technology exists when it doesn't.

[kirisutogomen.livejournal.com]

Oh, absolutely. I was mostly commenting on the use of "Experts say that, in theory," which is a common journalistic device for spouting nonsense. If you're going to babble about hormone supplementation patches, you should at least mention the name of the lunatic who gave you the idea, rather than make it vaguely sound like it might be a consensus view.

It's a good idea to think about the social implications of a technology before it exists, but we should really limit ourselves to technologies that could plausibly exist in the near future. An article on quantum teleportation won't be improved by "Experts say that, in theory, quantum teleportation could be used by terrorists to deliver nuclear weapons to elementary schools."

[dpolicar]

Well, it would be funnier.
But yeah, that's not the kind of improvement most people have in mind.

[kirisutogomen.livejournal.com]

I hope your desk is OK. You should let us know if any concussion you suffered affected your sexual orientation.

[dpolicar]

Well, I was in a hotel room at the time, so it was "my desk" only in the most transient of senses; I don't know what its current state is. Near as I can tell I've been neither straightened nor bent by the experience, though.