A chemical in the brain controls sexual preference in mice, according to scientists in China.

Male mice bred without serotonin lose their preference for females, a report in Nature says.

The researchers say it is the first time that a neurotransmitter has been shown to play a role in sexual preference in mammals.

Experts have warned about the dangers of drawing conclusions about human sexuality.

The research team first bred male mice whose brains were not receptive to serotonin.

A series of experiments demonstrated that these mice had lost the preference for females shown by unmodified males.

When presented with a choice of partners, they showed no overall preference for either males or females.

When just a male was introduced into the cage, the modified males were far more likely to mount the male and emit a "mating call" normally given off when encountering females than unmodified males were.

Similar results were achieved when a different set of mice were bred. These lacked the tryptonphan hydroxylase 2 gene, which is needed to produce serotonin.

However, a preference for females could be "restored" by injecting serotonin into the brain.

The report concludes: "Serotonergic signalling is crucial for male sexual preference in mice. This is the first time, to our knowledge, that a neurotransmitter in the brain has been demonstrated to be important in mammalian sexual preference."

Humans
Sexual behaviour in mice is thought to be driven by their sense of smell.

Professor Keith Kendrick, a neuroscientist at the Babraham Institute in Cambridge, said: "In terms of having potential relevance to understanding human sexual preference/orientation, we are of course far less influenced by odour cues in this context than mice are.

"There is some very limited evidence for altered responses to selective serotonin uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the brains of homosexuals, but we have been using psychoactive drugs which either increase or decrease serotonin function for quite some time now, and while effects on sexual arousal, impulsivity and aggression have often been reported, no effects on sexual preference/orientation have.

"At this time therefore any potential links between serotonin and human sexual preferences must be considered somewhat tenuous."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12825688

If this is indeed true then I'd rather not call it a cure but a lifestyle drug/change.

interesting...hopefully this will generate more procreation in china!

lol MORE procreation in China?? I thought they have enough people!! :P But this article is very fascinating ! I would say that many people would say this isn't real but I can see it being somewhat reasonable to understand. The only thing is...serotonin can be lost or very low levels and I doubt people will switch sexual preference when they are low..but maybe it means when it is non existent.

i think there's nothin wrong with homos as long as they don't PDA

more homos = more girls for me

^^ Truth. Although I have no problem with them publicly displaying their affection.

The title is misleading or the TS is just ignorant. Homosexuality is not a disease, thus there is nothing to "cure". Moreover, in the article, there is no word about "healing homosexuality" as you mentioned in your title. Homosexuality is as "normal" as heterosexuality. Full stop.

Not really. It's a normal occurrence, as in it's very common in this day and age for a person to be homosexual. But this doesn't make it natural. Clearly nature tells us that men were made to go with women and vise versa. Therefore, someone who wants to go against that and be with their own sex (and not procreate) isn't natural - And things that aren't natural in the human body/mind usually have things to make them more natural, i.e. a cure. Such as medication and what not.

So yes. There probably is something to "cure" or more like regulate in homosexual men and lesbian women.

the title of the article is stupid but what's even dumber is that it first says that the mice did not have serotonin but then it says they were bred so that their brains does not respond to it (presumably because their brains either lacks the receptors or has faulty receptors). So which is it? Leave it to scientifically illiterate journalists to write stupid crap.

Well there are some species like whiptail lizards and sharks where males do not exist and reproduce through parthenogenesis, ie lesbian sex. I mean humans are not lizards or sharks but who knows, maybe we will evolve to reproduce through gay sex, just like sexuality came into existence through mutation. You are right, but I still would not use the whole natural/unnatural scale at all (even for heterosexuality).

so homosexual is caused by genetic?

Found a more credible source than BBC.

Is Homosexuality Based on a Brain Chemical?
Janelle Weaver, LiveScience ContributorDate: 25 March 2011 Time: 08:26 AM ET

A male mouse's desire to mate with either a male or a female is determined by the brain chemical serotonin, scientists report in a new study. The finding demonstrates for the first time that a neurotransmitter governs sexual preference in mammals.

Serotonin is known to regulate sexual behaviors, such as erection, ejaculation and orgasm, in both mice and men. The compound generally dampens sexual activity; for instance, antidepressants that increase the amount of serotonin in the brain sometimes decrease sex drive. [Top 10 Aphrodisiacs]

Neuroscientist Yi Rao of Peking University and the National Institute of Biological Sciences in Beijing, and his collaborators have now shown that serotonin also underlies a male's decision to woo a female or another male. They published their results in the March 24 issue of the journal Nature.

Rao and his team genetically engineered male mice to lack either serotonin-producing neurons or a protein that is crucial for making serotonin in the brain. Both types of altered mouse couldn't make serotonin.

Unlike typical males, mice deficient in the neurotransmitter showed no inclination to mount sexually receptive females more than males, nor did they prefer to smell females' genital odors or bedding. Instead, they climbed onto males and serenaded them with ultrasonic love songs more frequently than normal. Males emit these vocalizations when they encounter females to make them more receptive to mating.

While all of the males who possessed serotonin mounted females first, nearly half of the mice that lacked serotonin clambered onto males before females, and about 60 percent spent more time sniffing or hovering over the genital odors and bedding from males than from females.

When the researchers injected a compound into these mice to restore neurotransmitter levels, they found that the animals mounted females more than males. But too much serotonin reduced male-female mounting, suggesting that the amount of this chemical must stay within a certain range to foster heterosexual rather than homosexual behaviors.

"An unavoidable question raised by our findings is whether [serotonin] has a role in sexual preference in other animals," the authors wrote in the paper. But one of the co-authors, neuroscientist Zhou-Feng Chen of Washington University, cautioned against forming hasty conclusions about the potential influence of this neurotransmitter on human sexual orientation.

Elaine Hull, an expert in rodent sexual behavior at Florida State University who was not involved in the study, said that the findings "may have implications for homosexuality or bisexual behavior in humans," adding that the neurotransmitter could help to guide sexual development.


http://www.livescience.com/13408-brain-che...rientation.html

I don't think the cause of homosexuality is as simple as people often think. Some forms of homosexuality are caused by abnormal hormones whereas some are caused by the environment, and some are caused by a combination of both.

Natural is what is already there at the "beginning". It is proved that heterosexuality is as old as homosexuality. You are either gay or not since your birth. You can´t turn gay or hetero. Therefore, homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality. Even in the animal word, homosexuality exists.

People are born schizophrenic. People are born with a cleft palate. People are born with multiple things that are wrong and need fixing. It's not natural for someone to be schizophrenic or have a cleft palate. These are, if you will, mutations. Something went wrong and thus these people were born this way. Following your logic, if a baby was born with Tourette's, it's natural (since it was born with it) and doctors shouldn't try to help him/her? Homosexuality is the same. If someone is born that way that does not mean it's natural. It's an unnatural preference. Yes, it's been here since the dawn of time, and even animals can be homosexual. But all sorts of things have been here forever and animals too suffer from them, but that doesn't mean they are natural and don't need to be fixed.

I see.

This is an interesting viewpoint.

But I do not know whether we can equate homosexuality with cleft palate and schizophrenia.

What if homosexuality is more like creativity or diversity. Something that is different but not necessarily defective.
(other than not able to produce children naturally)

It depends on whether we see homosexuality as a defective aberration or as an acceptable aberration.

I think a good analogy would be personality disorders. There are many categorised psychological conditions but psychologists only call it a disorder if it causes distress to the patient and affects his life negatively. If homosexuality causes the said person distress in some way and wishes to be different of his own accord, then fine. But otherwise, they should do whatever they want as long as they do not hurt anybody and are willing participants. Sexuality itself was unnatural until natural selection made it widespread and it became natural.

I personally don't care if there are homo's in this world. I don't think they need to be "cured" if they dont want to be. If there is a "cure" or something medically that can be done to make a homo into a hetero then fine. I think it's great not because it's right or wrong but because it has shown that scientifically there is greater understanding of sexuality. It will be another tool medically to give people a choice. If a homosexual finds that they suffer with homosexuality and can with medical science become hetero then that should be an option on the table. I consider that progress. Pro gay folks shouldn't get too worried about their sexuality being threatened.

Gay mice. lol

Exactly right? I can't believe no one lulz at that.

If you ever read "The Forever war" you might agree that homosexuality will be better accepted in the distant future as a cure to an overpopulated Earth.

I personally have nothing against gay people but I always find gay jokes to be funny and always enjoy watching people act gay for entertainment. Does that mean I subconsciously discriminate against homosexual?

I think there are more serious disorders that deserve a cure, or at least regulation ...... ignorance, bigotry, selfrighteousness (case study above).

Gay mice? LOL
I have Russian Blue male cats who's favorite past time is PDAs with each other. I am sure Troy and Harold would love to do a taste test for us to see if it makes the mice any sweeter.

Awww Xigon did I made you discriminate against homosexual?

It means you have a stereotypical view of gays. Imagine if a white guy said this:


[quote name='XigonCongchua' date='Mar 30 2011, 08:10 AM' post='4742859']
I personally have nothing against asian people but I always find asian jokes to be funny and always enjoy watching people act asian for entertainment. Does that mean I subconsciously discriminate against asian?

Like I said, it's not hostile, but some will probably find it condescending. But then again, who cares?

^
Xigon is just scared of gays. Or maybe she is curious like many other people who is open minded about it.

It is a behavior characteristic. There is no need for any reserve. If you find it disgusting, then it is disgusting. I just hate how people are so easily swayed by liberal ideology, and keep equating hating a social trend or behavior to discrimination upon race/birth characteristic. It is two completely separate different things.

You would find people practicing bestiality completely disgusting. But if you apply the exact same argument, it is bigotry to find that behavior disgusting or repulsive. YOU SHOULD BE TOLERANT!! (BS...)

Oh and suppose you were gay for whatever reason, and being gay provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single couple is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that couple anyway.) Maintaining an anti-gay culture creates a higher net loss.


(Incidentally, I recently visited San Francisco but I didn't see any gays. I did find a lot of yuri and yaoi manga in their nihonmachi though it was going for almost double the price of what it would have been in Japan.)

they need to find a cure for homophobia

I dunno...most of my white friends are against gays..we cringed all the way through this part of the conversation..but we are TOTALLY not against lesbo and bi.

I guess I don't mind them, too, but just don't do anything infront of me, take it else where away from my sight and shave that bushie hairy face of yours before you kiss your mates!

Yeah, so long as you tolerate them they won't care if you find them disgusting or whatever. No one is trying to stick a penis in your ear and you shouldn't try to force them into being "cured" so everyone will be cool with each other.

I see no requirement for the society or anyone to convince themselves that this behavior is not repulsive, if they believe it is repulsive in the first place. Let's see how your argument work.

Oh and suppose you like incest for whatever reason, and being incestuous provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single sibling/parent/children pairing is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that pairing anyway.) Maintaining an anti-incest culture creates a higher net loss.

Oh and suppose you like having sex with dead corpse for whatever reason, and doing so provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single person/dead corpse pairing is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that pairing anyway.) Maintaining an anti-necrophilia culture creates a higher net loss.

Oh and suppose you practice bestiality for whatever reason, and fu-king animals provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single animal/human pairing is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that couple anyway.) Maintaining an anti-bestial culture creates a higher net loss.

Oh and suppose you like taking cocaine shots for whatever reason, and doing so provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable (think it is a bad influence). (In other words, the happiness gained by a single person is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up this arrangement anyway.) Maintaining an anti-drug culture creates a higher net loss. The society should encourage maximal net happiness and provide the drugs for free.

Oh and suppose you were infatuated with pubescent girls for whatever reason, and being a lolicon provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single couple is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that couple anyway.) Maintaining an anti-pedophilia culture creates a higher net loss.

Oh and suppose you like killing animals for whatever reason, and killing animals provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single person is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that couple anyway.) Maintaining an culture creates a higher net loss.

Oh and suppose you like seeing people die (the person dying through disease or suicide or self-consent) for whatever reason, and doing so provided you with pleasure? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that pleasure simply because it made them uncomfortable/morally-disgusted. (In other words, the happiness gained by a single person is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some will ostracize that person anyway.) Maintaining an anti-? culture creates a higher net loss.

Oh and suppose you want to commit suicide with a group of people for whatever reason, and doing so will provide you with pleasure or release? In that case it would be wrong for another person to compel you to give up that action simply because it made them uncomfortable. (In other words, the happiness gained by these group of people is greater than the harm imposed on the many, and yet some would try to break up that suicide pact anyway.) Maintaining an anti-suicidal culture creates a higher net loss.

(There is more, if you want more)

Unless you are the paragon of tolerance/liberalism and are willing to remove all your repulses, (whatever you dislike/hate, if it is possible to convince yourself that it does not affect you, then it should be criminalized to dislike it), I see no reason for me or anyone else who wish to maintain their views to change it, just because it is the CURRENT FASHION.

..