Group recommends removing sexual orientation-related disorders from the ICD

Group recommends removing sexual orientation-related disorders from the ICD
Susan Cochran, PhD. Credit: UCLA

A working group evaluating sexual orientation-related disorders listed in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), a publication of the World Health Organization (WHO), has recommended the disorders be deleted, a move that will make getting health care easier for gays and others who may have gender atypicality.

The WHO is the world body charged with deciding what is a disease and more than 170 countries, including the United States, follow their recommendations. The organization is currently revising the 10th edition of the ICD for release of the 11th edition in 2017.

Susan D. Cochran, a professor at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health and a member of the working group, said the recommendation, if adopted, resolves "a human rights issue."

"In California, gay people may have the right to marry, but in most of the world, being gay can be dangerous. There are at least six countries that criminalize homosexuality with a possible death sentence," said Cochran, who is a clinical psychologist and epidemiologist. "This recommendation, to remove diagnoses that have no scientific basis, is a way of cleansing our public health apparatus of the social animus directed at a group of people for reasons that have no health justification."

The recommendation must survive several layers of approval, the final being a vote by the member countries.

In 1974, the American Psychiatric Association decreed that homosexuality would no longer be considered a mental illness, though it created a new disorder, ego-dystonic homosexuality, as a political compromise. That disorder was later dropped as a diagnosis, and in the last iteration of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the last reference to sexual orientation being associated with a mental disorder was eliminated.

In 1990, the ICD made the same declaration, but retained several purported disorders, Cochran said. For example, if a person was married and woke one day and decided that they were gay and wanted a divorce, the current ICD considers that a mental disorder. Or if a teenager was unsure if they were gay, straight or bisexual and were distressed about that, that also is considered . Or if a person were gay, and for whatever reason wished not to be, that also is a disorder.

"It doesn't make any sense. If a person were short and wished they weren't, that is not a disorder. Or if someone was a lousy singer and wished they weren't, that is not a disorder," Cochran said. "In other words, the ICD takes content that is sexual orientation–related and attaches a diagnosis to it in ways that it does not do for other aspects of people."

If the recommendation is adopted it will have an immediate and important impact on access to , she said. Every health care event and every doctor visit has an ICD code attached to it. These codes that are used for insurance billing, for public health surveillance and for medical records.

By removing these codes related to sexual orientation, the health care that gay people receive will be improved, Cochran said. For example, if a gay man is depressed and seeks care he is vulnerable to being mistreated by the health system. Currently, he could be diagnosed with ego-dystonic homosexuality if he says he is upset about how he is being treated as a gay man and wishes he were straight. There are discredited treatments, such as conversion therapy, that have been deemed unethical but sometimes are justified by this diagnosis. With the codes removed, it will be more likely that his complaints will result in a proper diagnosis of depression and treatments for that depression.

"This means that gay people can feel free to seek care, to share their concerns and not fear that they will diagnosed with a mental illness simply because the content is about homosexuality or gender atypicality," Cochran said. "It would mean an end to the medicalization of homosexuality."

An article published in the latest issue of the Bulletin of World Health Organization outlined the scientific basis for the recommendation to delete the sexual orientation-related disorders from the ICD.

"It is not justifiable from a clinical, or research perspective for a diagnostic classification to be based on ," the article states.

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

It's not easy being gay

Aug 13, 2009

Members of 'sexual minorities' are around twice as likely as heterosexuals to seek help for mental health issues or substance abuse treatment. A model of treatment-seeking behavior, described in the open access journal BMC Ps ...

Health inequalities seen in gays and lesbians

Feb 12, 2014

Gay, lesbian and bisexual people face several health disparities relative to their heterosexual peers, finds a new study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

Recommended for you

Gender disparities in cognition will not diminish

15 hours ago

The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, investigated the extent to which improvements in living conditions and educational opportunities over a person's life affect cognitive abilities and th ...

Facial features are the key to first impressions

16 hours ago

A new study by researchers in the Department of Psychology at the University of York shows that it is possible to accurately predict first impressions using measurements of physical features in everyday images of faces, such ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jun 25, 2014
A number of studies suggest that various issues with glutamate expression and other chemicals in the brain can result in certain forms of autism and also homosexuality, or at least Same Sex Attraction. This has been shown both in Gender-blind fruitflies (glutamate expression) and in mice (serotonin suppression) in a recent scientific study in China.

If it is even possible that this situation translates over to apes and even to Homo Sapiens Sapiens in further studies, it might not be prudent to remove these categories from the ICD just yet. Take these categories out now and you will only have to add them back again if the science actually holds up this time.
alfie_null
5 / 5 (1) Jun 25, 2014
Take these categories out now and you will only have to add them back again if the science actually holds up this time.

So, add them back in when there is compelling evidence. Until there is compelling evidence, they should be removed. Or did you find no value in any of the arguments for removal presented in the article?

Your linking autism and homosexuality sounds like an attempt at FUD. What is your definition of a disorder? If we discover chemicals or temperature or whatever determine sex, would you consider being male a disorder?
freethinking
1 / 5 (1) Jun 25, 2014
Homosexuality is not normal mentally or physically.

But then again to those that want to promote the Gay Agenda, truth doesn't matter.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jun 26, 2014
...
Your linking autism and homosexuality sounds like an attempt at FUD. What is your definition of a disorder? If we discover chemicals or temperature or whatever determine sex, would you consider being male a disorder?

Not at all. There has been some recent evidence found that connects some forms of autism to glutamate expression, causing damage to the synapses or neurons in the brain. If the science holds up, it could well be a prenatal condition that could one day be preventable and/or treatable.

See, among others, the following:

http://www.scienc...0642.htm

http://sfari.org/...n-autism

The side effect to treatment, however, might be elimination of homosexuality as well. Only time will tell. Believe or disbelieve. It makes little difference to me one way or the other. I'm waiting on the science.
julianpenrod
1 / 5 (1) Jun 28, 2014
So it's admitted that the American Psychiatric Association offered "ego-dystonic homosexuality" as a "political compromise". Shills for homosexuality describe the removal of homosexuality form the DSM as final and absolute the result of definitive and valid analysis. "The American Psychiatric Association would never do something as a political move!" But, consider, what political interests were served by the including of homosexuality as a mental disorder? As opposed to the atmosphere since the Sixties in which every minority group was automatically depicted as "disadvantaged" and "mistreated" and used as an escalator to power and money by political conniver after political conniver! In fact, it is removing homosexuality as a mental disease that looks like the politically motivated measure! They certainly admit that the APA is capable of it. They try to make it look like including homosexuality was insincere, but they just prove that removing it was evidently political.
ekim
3 / 5 (2) Jun 30, 2014
Homosexuality is not normal mentally or physically.

But then again to those that want to promote the Gay Agenda, truth doesn't matter.

Do you know what is not normal? Drinking milk. Other animals engage in homosexual acts, but none drink the milk of other animals. Many people are made sick because they drink milk. The truth doesn't matter to those promoting the Milk Agenda.
freethinking
1 / 5 (1) Jun 30, 2014
ekim, I understand that you think that sticking a penis into a rectum is normal, however do you also think having hundreds of casual sexual partners is normal? Do you think sticking a fist into someone is normal? Do you think ingesting feces is normal? If you want to compare drinking milk with eating another mans feces (or any other "normal" and common homosexual acts), to prove that homosexuality is normal, you are either very ignorant or nothing more than a propagandist.
ekim
5 / 5 (1) Jun 30, 2014
ekim, I understand that you think that sticking a penis into a rectum is normal, however do you also think having hundreds of casual sexual partners is normal? Do you think sticking a fist into someone is normal? Do you think ingesting feces is normal? If you want to compare drinking milk with eating another mans feces (or any other "normal" and common homosexual acts), to prove that homosexuality is normal, you are either very ignorant or nothing more than a propagandist.

Actually eating feces is quite common throughout the animal kingdom. Haven't you ever owned a dog?
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
Actually eating feces is quite common throughout the animal kingdom. Haven't you ever owned a dog?


That sort of behavior typically has a biological disorder/malnutrition element underlying it. Not a good analogy if you want to say that homosexuality isn't a biological disorder of one kind or another. Just saying...
ekim
5 / 5 (1) Jul 01, 2014
That sort of behavior typically has a biological disorder/malnutrition element underlying it.

The same could be said of drinking milk.
Skepticus_Rex
5 / 5 (1) Jul 01, 2014
That sort of behavior typically has a biological disorder/malnutrition element underlying it.

The same could be said of drinking milk.

No, not really.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
That sort of behavior typically has a biological disorder/malnutrition element underlying it.

The same could be said of drinking milk.

No, not really.

It's a biological disorder than only a segment of the population has. Normal people can't digest lactose. This disorder leads to the sexual molestation of cattle for their milk.
Skepticus_Rex
5 / 5 (1) Jul 01, 2014
False. Mankind have so crossbred and re-crossbred cattle over thousands of years that they end up in severe pain if they aren't milked. Normal people can digest lactose. Those lacking the gene (or those having a gene that is defective when they do have one) for lactase cannot digest lactose.

And, cattle don't have breasts. You seem to have a fondness for mentioning sexual molestation and related disorders when disagreeing with people who do not see eye to eye with you. Perhaps you should seek help for your condition before it manifests in physical activity.

Besides, milk can be a useful commodity. Not only is it high in potassium, calcium, and other nutrients, it also contains a compound that works as an anticancer drug targeted to gastric cancer.

Now, consider the fact that gastric cancer is among the most common causes of mortality in Asian countries that don't drink cow's milk.

http://www.scienc...s-124094
ekim
3 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2014
False. Mankind have so crossbred and re-crossbred cattle over thousands of years that they end up in severe pain if they aren't milked.

And that is considered normal to you? How horrible. Besides The majority of the population doesn't have this lactose loving genetic mutation. The supposed benefits are nothing more than propaganda by those pushing their Milk agenda.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
False. Mankind have so crossbred and re-crossbred cattle over thousands of years that they end up in severe pain if they aren't milked.

And that is considered normal to you? How horrible. Besides The majority of the population doesn't have this lactose loving genetic mutation. The supposed benefits are nothing more than propaganda by those pushing their Milk agenda.

That's the thing. Humans created the cow as we know it today, over a period of thousands of years. It can't really be undone now except by complete extermination of the species. Would you prefer that?

And, it isn't a lactose-loving mutation, as you put it. Rather, it is an adaptation that exists in many humans that allows continued consumption of milk and other dairy without issues.

By the way, the numbers were called into question in the same year that the claim you hold dear was put forth, not long afterward. Most all young humans can drink it but the gene inactivates after weaning if milk isn't drunk.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
That's the thing. Humans created the cow as we know it today, over a period of thousands of years. It can't really be undone now except by complete extermination of the species. Would you prefer that?

This could be genetically corrected as could the drinking of milk into adulthood. It is a condition that could one day be preventable and/or treatable.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
This could be genetically corrected as could the drinking of milk into adulthood. It is a condition that could one day be preventable and/or treatable.


We are nowhere near that level of technology, yet. Most modifications introduced in complex life revert within six months and have to be redone over and over again. These begin to become useless within a year or so due to the immune system rendering the delivery system inoperable.

And, frankly, there are elements in milk that can come from no other sources (such as anti-cancer properties of milk peptides, high levels of potassium, magnesium in drinkable, natural form, and so forth), so I have no intention of not drinking it so long as I can.

I actually tried going all-vegetarian and cutting out all dairy once in my life. I ended up losing lots of hair and felt like I was going to die. I gave it up after about a month of that garbage, went back to my regular diet (including milk), and ended up feeling much better.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
So, what exactly are you suggesting? That we make the entire world lactose intolerant? How would that work out for infants? Goodness me! We need to race for the cure for your condition, ASAP.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 01, 2014
So, what exactly are you suggesting? That we make the entire world lactose intolerant? How would that work out for infants? Goodness me! We need to race for the cure for your condition, ASAP.

Whole cow's milk contains too little iron, retinol, vitamin E, vitamin C, vitamin D, unsaturated fats or essential fatty acids for human babies. Whole cow's milk also contains too much protein, sodium, potassium, phosphorus and chloride which may put a strain on an infant's immature kidneys. In addition, the proteins, fats and calcium in whole cow's milk are more difficult for an infant to digest and absorb than the ones in breast milk. The drinking of cow's milk is an abomination that goes against nature.
freethinking
not rated yet Jul 02, 2014
ekim, are you ultimately saying that the homosexual lifestyle where it is normal and common to to ingest humans feces, having a person stick their fist into themselves, having hundreds of anonymous sexual partners, is healthier and more normal than drinking milk?
freethinking
not rated yet Jul 02, 2014
ekim, here is some truth about homosexuality if you are just ignorant. http://spiderpam....lsehoods

ekim
not rated yet Jul 02, 2014
You know that pigs eat their own feces as well. That's why normal people don't eat them. Something should be done about the ingestion of pork too.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 02, 2014
So, what exactly are you suggesting? That we make the entire world lactose intolerant? How would that work out for infants? Goodness me! We need to race for the cure for your condition, ASAP.

Whole cow's milk contains too little iron, retinol, vitamin E, vitamin C, vitamin D, unsaturated fats or essential fatty acids for human babies. Whole cow's milk also contains too much protein, sodium, potassium, phosphorus and chloride which may put a strain on an infant's immature kidneys. In addition, the proteins, fats and calcium in whole cow's milk are more difficult for an infant to digest and absorb than the ones in breast milk. The drinking of cow's milk is an abomination that goes against nature.

If you make the world lactose intolerant, you make infants unable to process their own mothers' milk. Lactose isn't exclusively contained in cow's milk, ignoramus. All humans, except a very few, can process lactose after birth, and must if they are to be able to breastfeed.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 02, 2014
If you make the world lactose intolerant, you make infants unable to process their own mothers' milk. Lactose isn't exclusively contained in cow's milk, ignoramus. All humans, except a very few, can process lactose after birth, and must if they are to be able to breastfeed.

A genetic mutation causes the lactase-production gene to be permanently in the "on" position. This can be corrected to make people more normal.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 03, 2014
If you make the world lactose intolerant, you make infants unable to process their own mothers' milk. Lactose isn't exclusively contained in cow's milk, ignoramus. All humans, except a very few, can process lactose after birth, and must if they are to be able to breastfeed.

A genetic mutation causes the lactase-production gene to be permanently in the "on" position. This can be corrected to make people more normal.

Good luck with that. Switching off that gene could result in all genes associated to switch off. It's an idiot's position to even attempt something like that. Of course, you are probably one of those kinds of people who would rather see millions of babies in third-world countries die of starvation, aren't you?

And, those people with that gene switched on are normal. On the other hand, it is a violation of the programmed, evolutionary purpose of reproduction to go after the wrong sex, and that isn't normal. That is a genetic aberration.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 03, 2014
A number of studies suggest that various issues with glutamate expression and other chemicals in the brain can result in certain forms of autism and also homosexuality, or at least Same Sex Attraction.

If the science holds up, it could well be a prenatal condition that could one day be preventable and/or treatable.

Good luck with that. Switching off that gene could result in all genes associated to switch off. It's an idiot's position to even attempt something like that.

And, those people with that gene switched on are normal.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 03, 2014
So far, it isn't a gene that is causing glutamate expression problems. None have been isolated so far in humans. Normal is doing what evolution "intended" for reproduction. Homosexuality tends toward destruction of a species as the numbers increase. That is counterproductive to evolution, unlike genes coding for lactose persistence.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 03, 2014
Normal is doing what evolution "intended" for reproduction.

That statement shows how little you understand about evolution. Evolution doesn't "intend" ,it is a series of trade offs. The strongest doesn't always survive, the fittest does. If breeding were the only factor we would all be tribbles by now. Autism is a spectrum, not a singular thing, which is why we also have high functioning autistic people and those with aspergers. I suggest you do a quick search of historical figures with aspergers or asperger like symptoms. To try and "fix" a percentage of the population will also cause unintended consequences in other parts of the population. Would you really be willing to eliminate San Francisco (high population of homosexuals) if it also meant losing Silicone Valley (high population of aspergers). Good luck with the whole not going extinct if your brightest minds are gone.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 03, 2014
It would be a prenatal fix. Existing homosexuals will continue to engage in their practices for years to come (unless rumors I have heard about a nasal-spray cure being developed turn out to be true). There just wouldn't be any more 'questioning' to recruit.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 03, 2014
It would be a prenatal fix. Existing homosexuals will continue to engage in their practices for years to come (unless rumors I have heard about a nasal-spray cure being developed turn out to be true). There just wouldn't be any more 'questioning' to recruit.

And you would fix all future Alexander Graham Bell`s, Alan Turing`s, Emily Dickinson`s, Thomas Jefferson`s to name a few. By trying to prenatally adjust glutamate expression, you negate any evolutionary benefits. A normal brain is just that, normal. As you stated, this glutamate expression is linked to autism, which is also linked to genius.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 04, 2014
And what happens when we see a decrease in IQ of the population and a jump in the number of serial killers? What, do you think that brain chemicals only serve one purpose? Most genes have several purposes and exist because they give the species an advantage. You have no idea of the role of these genes and even less of a clue of what would happen if you decide to alter them.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 04, 2014
Many people are geniuses without autism spectrum disorders. Modifying glutamate expression so that it no longer burns the synapses won't decrease IQ. It will give these people a fighting chance to get further ahead and integrate into society more easily.

Imagine Einstein if he hadn't flunked out of school and failed to learn to tie his shoes until adulthood? Imagine how much more he could have shone in science and how much sooner had it not been for the label of "retarded" he had to hear as a youth. Imagine how much more ahead in science he would have been and we would have been had it not been for so long delays in the development of his amazing abilities.

So far as it looks at this point, no alteration of genes might be necessary at this point. Altering glutamate expression prenatally could be enough to prevent damage to the synapses without altering genes by direct genetic splicing/repair. There's just that pesky little other side effect don't want to take a chance on.... :-)
ekim
not rated yet Jul 04, 2014
There's just that pesky little other side effect don't want to take a chance on.... :-)

Seems like there would be many other side effects as well.
Why have certain traits been favored while others forgotten. Intuitively all mammals should be able to process lactose into later childhood at least. It would be an advantage. Yet weaning occurs because an older sibling would be a threat to a younger siblings through competition. The survival of genes not only depends on an individual but that individuals siblings surviving as well. A benefit to the whole family outweighs an individuals needs. Genes survive by making sacrifices. Not having offspring that reproduce seems counterproductive to individuals but it does benefit the whole. If it didn't, it would not be so prevalent and would have been eliminated long ago. Nature doesn't favor useless adaptations. Yet here are humans trying to come up with a better plan than the one that has been working for so long.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 04, 2014
prevent damage to the synapses

You know who else has damage to synapses? Football players, boxers, soldiers, people with brain cancer, etc... I don't hear a lot about these people suddenly becoming gay. Trying to alter brain development and trying to pass it off as fixing brain damage seems unscientific and criminal. Typically development of a fetus involves a great deal of creation and destruction, especially in the brain. What you view as damage is probably a normal tearing down of pathways. Much like gill slits or the tail that all fetuses eventual lose during development.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 04, 2014
Modifying glutamate expression so that it no longer burns the synapses won't decrease IQ.

Your understanding of autism is flawed. People with autism spectrum disorder don't have damaged synapses but an over abundance of short-range connections. They have the same brain but wired differently. This is the reason for greater focus on some tasks, over stimulation from certain environments and less cross talk between different regions of the brain. Autistic persons could actually benefit from greater "pruning" of these neural pathways. Any attempt to reduce this pruning would worsen symptoms.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 05, 2014
Nope. The newest data shows that glutamate expression may indeed be to blame for autism. By changing the amounts of glutamate expression in autism analogue mice, they reversed the condition. Do some research. Here are a few links to get you started:

http://www.nature...761.html

http://www.ncbi.n...21974935

http://www.cbsnew...y-shows/

This is just the beginning, ekim. Prepare for it.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 05, 2014
Oh, and here are a couple other articles for your consideration, ekim.

"Molecular regulation of sexual preference revealed by genetic studies of 5-HT in the brains of male mice"
http://www.nature...822.html

"In Fruit Flies, Homosexuality Is Biological But Not Hard-wired, Study Shows"
http://www.scienc...4541.htm
ekim
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
Oh, and here are a couple other articles for your consideration, ekim.

"Molecular regulation of sexual preference revealed by genetic studies of 5-HT in the brains of male mice"
http://www.nature...822.html

And many of these articles about changing sexual preference seem to come from China. China with their forced abortions and an over population issues. Why would China want to change a persons sexual preference? Good to hear about that cure for autism though, even though it has side effects. I'm sure it will sell like hot cakes regardless of the side effects though.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
They do not want to change sexual preference, per se, but rather to understand it. This data, however, probably will lead to treatments for those who want them. Before my forced retirement, I had heard rumors about two corporations in the US working secretly on a nasal spray that stops same sex attraction in its tracks. How true that is remains to be seen. But, if treatments work that points to disorder. And, if it is a disorder it should remain on the books but perhaps have the names changed in some cases.

As to the autism treatment, potential side effects are unknown but one potential side effect might well be normal sexual orientation because altering glutamate expression also appears to end homosexual tendencies in subjects tested so far. Many more studies need to be done, however. Only time, experiments with simians, and clinical trials in humans, will tell.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
I had heard rumors about two corporations in the US working secretly on a nasal spray that stops same sex attraction in its tracks.

If you can stop same sex attraction, you can stop all sexual attraction. Also, where did they find so many homosexual rats? To conduct a study, scientists would need test subjects.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
I had heard rumors about two corporations in the US working secretly on a nasal spray that stops same sex attraction in its tracks.

If you can stop same sex attraction, you can stop all sexual attraction. Also, where did they find so many homosexual rats? To conduct a study, scientists would need test subjects.

It seems that stopping same sex attraction is far easier than stopping all sex attraction. That has been made self-evident from the studies conducted so far. The methodologies involved in the studies thus far have only stopped same sex attraction but not sex attraction itself.

They made the homosexual mice first by knocking out the gene responsible for normal sexual preference. All the mice born to that group selected fellow males for sex. Then, by reintroducing the correct chemical in wild variety mice that normally selected females for mating, all of the homosexual mice returned to normal sexuality with females. Didn't you actually read the articles?
ekim
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
They made the homosexual mice first by knocking out the gene responsible for normal sexual preference. All the mice born to that group selected fellow males for sex. Then, by reintroducing the correct chemical in wild variety mice that normally selected females for mating, all of the homosexual mice returned to normal sexuality with females. Didn't you actually read the articles?

So fixing the problem of overpopulation could simply be a matter of prenatally knocking out a gene to cause homosexuality? That sounds better than the alternative which is forced abortions. Also the changes induced would be reversible if the need arrived.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 06, 2014
You cannot easily knock out a gene prenatally. It needs to be done to stem cells first. You then attempt to transfect the normal organism with the stem cells. If the transfected stem cells take and get into reproductive cells, there is the real risk of transmitting the changed genes to progeny.

You can fix and/or treat defective gene function prenatally, however. Besides, the idea is to fix abnormal, defective genes, not damage working, normal genes. To do otherwise would be like making everybody schizophrenic or bipolar. That is the sort of thing that leads to species destruction. Humanity has enough problems as it is with all the genetic diseases out there spreading around the globe. And, in humans serotonin deprivation leads to psychotic episodes or worse. To do as you suggest would fill the world with psychotic people. Wouldn't that be a fun world to live in?
ekim
not rated yet Jul 07, 2014
If the science holds up, it could well be a prenatal condition that could one day be preventable and/or treatable.

You cannot easily knock out a gene prenatally. It needs to be done to stem cells first. You then attempt to transfect the normal organism with the stem cells. If the transfected stem cells take and get into reproductive cells, there is the real risk of transmitting the changed genes to progeny.

That is the sort of thing that leads to species destruction. Humanity has enough problems as it is with all the genetic diseases out there spreading around the globe.

To do as you suggest would fill the world with psychotic people. Wouldn't that be a fun world to live in?
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 07, 2014
You didn't post anything other than regurgitating my own words out of context. I am not suggesting breaking anything. I am suggesting repairing the disorder (like repairing schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, fragile x and other disorders) and keeping disorders in the books until the science is ironed out. Fixing the genetic anomalies won't cause Serotonin deprivation like your idea of giving them to everybody else would.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 07, 2014
You didn't post anything other than regurgitating my own words out of context. I am not suggesting breaking anything. I am suggesting repairing the disorder (like repairing schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, fragile x and other disorders) and keeping disorders in the books until the science is ironed out. Fixing the genetic anomalies won't cause Serotonin deprivation like your idea of giving them to everybody else would.

And don't forget the broken gene that fails to turn off lactase after childhood.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 08, 2014
And don't forget the broken gene that fails to turn off lactase after childhood.


Believe it or not, that gene isn't broken. And, the gene doesn't turn off after childhood. It switches off AFTER WEANING or, in other words, when mothers stop feeding children breast milk. It is not an immediate switch-off, either. In societies where milk products are eaten (cheese, yogurt, etc.) it never switches off. Over time this finds its way into the gene pool.

That is very different from defective genes, defective glutamate expression, and defective 5-HT expression and serotonin regulation, all of which actually are detrimental to the organism. Lactose persistence, on the other hand, isn't harmful to the organism and actually increases survivability by increasing the number of available foodstuffs that can be consumed for survival.

The cures to the real genetic and other problems are coming. They'll then become things to add to the March of Dimes list and be curable and/or preventable.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 08, 2014
That is very different from defective genes, defective glutamate expression, and defective 5-HT expression and serotonin regulation, all of which actually are detrimental to the organism.

Your understanding of autism and nature are flawed. Nature doesn't plan ahead. Nature doesn't invest in a single commodity. To do so would result in trilobites again. Instead nature creates multiple variations in the hope that some will survive. To program the human brain with the same operating system is like programming every computer with windows.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 08, 2014
"Two girls one cup".
Those four words have entered your visual cortex, proceeded to your language centers and then accessed your long term memory. From there, depending on if you observed or were told about, the neurons in your visual and/or auditory cortex fire creating a mental image. That mental image proceeds to your emotional center of your brain activating mirror neurons. Mirror neurons cause you to envision yourself engaging in the act and produce an appropriate response. You are now disgusted. You have been programed to feel this.
A person with autism wouldn't have this programed response because to amount of cross talk in the brain required to reach this emotional response. Not that they don't feel disgust, it just requires more than four words.
Not thinking like everybody else has advantages.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 08, 2014
Time to update your science, ekim. The cause of autism now is known. This can be and should be repaired, especially considering that autism is on the rise and this rise in the number of cases per capita may have resulted because of additives/deficiencies to diet. If this can be fixed (and the science suggests that it can be) it should be. And, fixing the issues with glutamate expression in autism doesn't result in programming all brains with the same code, contrary to your false analogy. It only fixes the error condition without altering the uniqueness of individuals. The error should be fixed. The other potential benefits to society as a whole would be ancillary.
ekim
not rated yet Jul 08, 2014
Time to update your science, ekim. The cause of autism now is known. This can be and should be repaired, especially considering that autism is on the rise and this rise in the number of cases per capita may have resulted because of additives/deficiencies to diet. If this can be fixed (and the science suggests that it can be) it should be. And, fixing the issues with glutamate expression in autism doesn't result in programming all brains with the same code, contrary to your false analogy. It only fixes the error condition without altering the uniqueness of individuals. The error should be fixed. The other potential benefits to society as a whole would be ancillary.

You should update your science. Autism spectrum disorder would be a start. Any perceived rise is due to better diagnostic tools and definitions. The idiosyncrasies of people make them unique. Are you aware of anybody who doesn't have idiosyncrasies?
ekim
not rated yet Jul 08, 2014
Time to update your science, ekim. The cause of autism now is known. This can be and should be repaired, especially considering that autism is on the rise and this rise in the number of cases per capita may have resulted because of additives/deficiencies to diet. If this can be fixed (and the science suggests that it can be) it should be. And, fixing the issues with glutamate expression in autism doesn't result in programming all brains with the same code, contrary to your false analogy. It only fixes the error condition without altering the uniqueness of individuals. The error should be fixed. The other potential benefits to society as a whole would be ancillary.

You should up date your science starting with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Any rise is due to better diagnostic tools and definition. Autistic people have idiosyncrasies as do people with aspergers, as do most neural typical people. The number of idiosyncrasies decides the diagnosis.
Skepticus_Rex
not rated yet Jul 09, 2014
And, most all of the spectrum is about to see cures in coming decades, along with a lot of other disorders. It's coming, and the future will be a good one. Looking forward to it.