Resposta De Geneticista a Silas Malafaia [cc - Eng] [biologist refutes preacher on homosexuality]

Hello, Silas Malafaia, how are you doing? My name is Eli Vieira I am a biologist with a Master's degree in Genetics and I am a PhD student in Genetics here in Cambridge, United Kingdom I heard you are interested in my research area And that you want to talk genetics So... Let's talk genetics? It will be my pleasure. Nobody is born gay. Homosexuality is a behavior. It is hard to know what you mean with "it is not" "from birth" "it is behavioral" because we are not born with many patterns of behavior. A baby... How does it behave? It cries and it eats. These are basically the only behaviors a baby can express. It can also grip its mother's hand. But there is not much more behavior-wise that comes from birth in this sense. What I think you have meant is whether there is a contribution of biologically inherited traits for this behavior, that is, *** orientation and in this sense, I can guarantee you based on extensive scientific literature, that there does exist genetic contribution in the manifestation of *** orientation This just cannot be denied anymore there have been many studies I am asking for a geneticist. Who can tell whether someone is born gay or not? It is not psychology, it is genetics. OK, perfect. Let us see what genetics says keeping in mind we are not talking about innate traits, but of development and that different genes are related to different stages of human development. Let us see what genetics has to say about this Take a look at this table right here These are studies since the 50's Among all of them, we are able to see the concordance between MZ twins that is, monozygotic twins, which are genetically identical. Their concordance is always, in every study that has been made, greater than the concordance of dizygotic twins, which are twins that have as much genetic similarity as pairs of siblings that are not twins which is why these are also known as "fraternal" twins So as we can see here genetics is saying that when a twin is homosexual, the other one is too and the probability of this happening increases as their level of genetic kinship increases, that is, as their genetic similarity increases So how is it that genetics has nothing to do with *** orientation Malafaia You do know that in recent research, people have been mapping the genes of some folks - And they found nothing! - Yes, they have! What do you mean, "they found nothing"? The journalist knows more than the psychologist pastor neuroscientists have investigated the brains of heterosexual and homosexual people, and they have already shown that, specifically in brain regions related to *** pleasure and emotional connection, that is the limbic system homosexual men show brain similarities to heterosexual women and homosexual women show brain similarity to heterosexual men therefore, Marília Gabriela, is completely right and you have not read the studies, but you are giving your opinion, saying that they found nothing. Why haven't they found anything? According to whom? According to what arguments? Show us, please. Nobody is born gay. There is no homosexual Chromosome Order there is no homosexual gene. There are Chromosome Orders for male and female. What gender "Order"? In mammals, what happens in that the heterogametic gender, that is, the gender with two different *** chromosomes is the male one, so the male is XY, the female is XX. But in butterflies and birds, it is the other way around: the female is ZW and the male is ZZ. In some reptiles, for example, gender is determined by the egg temperature so, nature is not rigid like that when determining what is a female and what is a male. Let alone human beings, who besides having contribution from biological factors, have also contribution from their culture and the environment and etc. So, I will cite this, one of the most recent studies regarding sex determination. And this is what they say: that sex differences in brain and behavior are an endpoint of sex determination. That is, we cannot ignore differences in brain and in *** orientation, which, as I have already show, is also related to brain and genes and this cannot be ignored when we characterize what is male or what is female or what is gender, what is a man, what is a woman, in human beings, who are such complicated beings vary so much and most of this variation is natural and there does not always need to be a moral judgment on this. Homosexuality, a man or a woman through genetic determination and homosexual though learned or imposed preference... This is a completely inadequate way of seeing how genes contribute as resources to the manifestation of a given behavior. This is genetic determinism. It seems that Malafaia thinks... That you think, Malafaia, that genetics only exists in its deterministic version from the beginning of the 20th century And I'm sorry to show you wrong on this one, but we have evolved. We have progressed. And today, we know that behavior is a phenotype that is influenced by an infinity of genes. And the human genome has about 20 thousand genes that code for proteins and a couple or hundreds or thousands of these influence the development of brain, including the regions of the brain that influence the *** orientation and this does not set aside the cultural environmental influences and there is a dissociation between gender identity "I am a man" or "I am a woman" and *** orientation "I feel attracted to women", or "I feel attracted to men" and out of every other possibility, all that we expect is that, in some frequency, we find all combinations of gender identities in the human population, as well as all *** orientations. Because that is a dissociation between feeling like one belongs to a gender and feeling attracted to people from a given gender. There are some genetic bases that influence the formation of gender identity... There are some genetic bases that influence the formation of the body's biological sex... There are genetic bases that influence the formation of *** orientation. And these genetic bases are not identical in each of these cases. There may have common factors, but they are not identical. Look what the great Brazilian geneticist Nilton Freire-Maia told the Super Interessante magazine in 1993: (unfortunately, he has since passed away) He said: genes and the medium in which one lives are equally important. Previously, some scientists believed in Innatism, that is, people were born destined to express a given personality. Other scientists defended the Behaviorism, that is everything would be determined by the environment. This disagreement, which was common at the end of last century, does not exist anymore. And it doesn't exist anymore because now we know that things like height, skin color, and behavior are influenced by both genetics and the environment. And, in the case of behavior, part of the environmental influence is even cultural in human beings. Now let us look at the research 46% of the homosexuals were violated abused when they were children or teenagers. What do you mean born? 46%. 54% chose to be gay. So, for starters, homosexualism is a behavior. I was very intrigued by these statistics from Malafaia. I initially thought that they were 46% from a given paper, which he did not cite and 54% from some other paper, which did not cite either. But what he seems to have done is, he took the "46%" from a single paper and the "54%" is the complement. And this paper, which I have found, it is this one here does not say that 54% of the homosexuals chose to be homosexuals. Malafaia made this up during the interview. This paper he is citing does not say anywhere that the *** abuse during their childhood was the cause of the homosexuality of these people. Actually this paper cites another one which says that 59% of the male prisoners were abused by an adult woman when they were children. Therefore, dear listeners, if we are to follow Malafaia's logic, the cause for 59% of the crime are women that abuse children. Does not sound reasonable. OK, let us turn to genetics. Identical twins I am talking genetics. Identical twins, that is, the same embryo splits up this is called genetically identical, or "homozygotic". (It's "MONOzygotic"). They are identical twins. So, what should happen? If a twin is straight, the other one should also be straight, if a twin is homosexual, the other one should be too. OK, so. 35% of the cases where a twin is a homosexual the other one is straight in 65% of the cases [?]. So, how can they be identical? I have already answered this one, but, again: 50 years 10 studies Average concordance where, in monozygotic twins, if one is gay, the other one is too: 47% of the cases. Let us take a look at other twins, dizygotic ones, in which there is less genetic similarity: concordance one is gay, the other one too, 13% of the cases. Therefore, given more genetic similarity, there is more probability of both being gay. So, There does exist a genetic basis for *** orientation. It's that simple. I am talking about birth being born homosexual, I am talking genetics. No, you are not talking genetics, you are talking innatism which is something that, as I have shown, Nilton Freire-Maia has studied the genetics of homosexuality and said that this is a dead concept in genetics. So, nobody is born left-handed, however, "left-handedness" does also have genetic basis. There is no SINGLE source in genetics... There is no SINGLE source... I have found more that 90 studies. More than 90 sources in genetics. Generally, abused by whom? - Abused by relatives, abused by neighbors... - Homosexual people? - No, no... You have not answered Marília Gabriela's question. If an adult feels attracted to a child of the same gender, that makes them, besides a ***, also homosexual. These are VERY distinct things. What's more, the majority of pedophiles are heterosexual. So where does the homosexuality of the abusers come from, huh, Malafaia? Why are animals -- and we are just another one in nature -- why do animals have sex... They are not born homosexual. ... have sex with ... with many animals, with animals of the same sex, and are not bothered in the other sexuality? It is not... The animals... This is not considered a homosexual practice... We know of more than 1500 species of animals that manifest homosexual behavior. And the reason for that is about the same as for humans. There is variation in nature, And in some individuals, this variation manifests itself in this way. And the human being is an animal like any other, so this also happens with us. What is science? - It needs observation. - You want to talk about observation, Malafaia? OK, I have talked about the observation regarding monozygotic and dizygotic twins, now let us talk about some other observations: There is a molecule, which contributes to male odor, it is called Androstenone. And a study has shown that homosexual men are more responsive to this smell than heterosexual men. So how is it that homosexuals, that have chosen to be homosexual, have also chosen even how their brain reacts to the smell of other men? (This is in the case of male homosexuals, of course). Another observation: studies with mice have shown that lowering the amount of serotonin in the central nervous system changes the *** behavior. The mice would start to mount both male and female. The male would become bisexual, in a way. So it seems that serotonin contributes to *** orientation. Another study, a more recent one, indicates that marks that exist around the DNA which we call "epigenetic", can also contribute to the manifestation of *** orientation. So, observations are copious. All the while, you have only been able to cite a single study and it does not affirm -- YOU are the one affirming that *** abuse during the childhood causes homosexuality. So, you want to talk about the observation? Let us talk about the observation. Why is evolution a theory? Because you cannot verify it with observation. Look, I do not want to change the subject, but if you are going to deny a theory that is accepted by the overwhelming majority of the professionals in the area who WORK on biology, I think I am allowed to doubt your ability to look at the problem of the contribution of genetics to *** orientation, and I think I will doubt your impartiality, Malafaia. And... I will also doubt your formation, and even your respect for scientific information and scientific sources. Google "15 evolutionary gems" and you will have food for thought. This video ends here, it will have no moral lessons, because, differently from you, pastor Silas Malafaia, I do not confuse my facts as a geneticist biologist with my moral or ethics. As for the facts, I just accept them.