Connect with us

Opinion

Premier Scientific Journal Nature Takes on ‘Climate of Fear’ Surrounding Research on Sex and Genr

Published

8 minute read

From Heartland Daily News

“These articles are using phrases like ‘a person’s sex assigned at birth’. I find that phrase amusing. I don’t think sex is assigned at birth. Biological sex is a fact. It’s not assigned. It’s observed.”

Nature, one of the world’s premier scientific journals, has acknowledged the importance of studying sex and gender differences and officially denounced the “climate of fear and reticence” that is stymying research on the topic.

To that end, the journal in May launched “a collection of opinion articles” on the topic to be published over the coming months to foster honest and courageous discussions on a topic that many scientists shy away from due to fears of professional and personal repercussions.

“Some scientists have been warned off studying sex differences by colleagues. Others, who are already working on sex or gender-related topics, are hesitant to publish their views,” read the editorial introducing the series.

“…In time, we hope this collection will help to shape research, and provide a reference point for moderating often-intemperate debates.”

Headlines that kicked off the series include “Neglecting sex and gender in research is a public-health risk,” “Male–female comparisons are powerful in biomedical research” and “Heed lessons from past studies involving transgender people: first, do no harm.”

What the collection of articles represents and whether it will ease tensions surrounding this area of research remains to be seen.

Jeffrey Mogil, a neuroscientist and pain researcher at Mcgill University, as well as the co-author of one of the articles in Nature’s sex and gender series, told The College Fix there is an effort underway in biological research to do away with or minimize the importance of the concept of sex and sex as a binary variable.

This is problematic, Mogil said in a recent telephone interview, because sex in mammals is “either binary or it rounds to binary and in doing so it always has been useful and continues to be and any conception of it that isn’t binary would then impose practical difficulties on how science is done.”

Moreover, he noted, discarding the notion of binary sex in mammals would set back important advancements in how many biomedical researchers now do their work.

“There are sex differences in all kinds of traits that we’re interested in and where we didn’t know they existed,” Mogil said. “The reason we didn’t know they existed [is] because until extremely recently, essentially all biology pre-clinical experiments were done with males only.”

“Since regulatory agencies, funding agencies, have demanded that people start using both sexes [in research],” he said, “lo and behold, we’re finding sex differences.”

“We’re finding that what we thought was the biology of a thing was only the biology of the thing in males and the female biology is completely different,” he added.

“This is in our minds,” he said, “an incredible scientific advance and that advance is at risk of stopping and reverting if, you know, people start to believe…dividing animals into males and females is inappropriate.”

Although Mogil stated he did not know how Nature made editorial decisions regarding the selection of articles for their sex and gender collection, he said that he felt the article he and his co-authors wrote was intended to defend the status quo against those “advocating…either that gender is much more important than sex or that sex is more complicated than people have made it seem.”

The College Fix reached out to a senior communications manager from Springer Nature in early June regarding the selection process for the series, as well as how sex was presented in some of the other commentaries, but did not receive a response.

Daniel Barbash, a professor of molecular biology and genetics at Cornell University, was more skeptical than Mogil of Nature’s sex and gender op-ed collection when he spoke to The College Fix in a late-May phone interview.

Although he said he generally held a positive view of the article Mogil co-authored and appreciated that it explicitly stated “there are only two sex categories in mammals,” he noted that he also felt the authors of other commentaries in the series were to some extent “further conflating sex and gender.”

“There’s little things that sometimes give the game away,” he said. “These articles are using phrases like ‘a person’s sex assigned at birth’. I find that phrase amusing. I don’t think sex is assigned at birth. Biological sex is a fact. It’s not assigned. It’s observed.”

“[For] the vast majority of humans, from the moment they’re born,” he said, “there is zero ambiguity whether they’re a male or a female.”

Furthermore, the “overall tone” of the collection, Barbash said, was that “there needs to be more research on gender variation and that there is more complexity to biological sex than a binary.”

According to Barbash, neither of these notions are “universally accepted” among biologists.

He said he believes the series has “the potential to drive funding agencies and other agencies that are involved in the intersection between politics and research in a particular direction that I don’t think would always be helpful.”

“I don’t think any serious biologist would deny that sex is a hugely important factor in both basic research and in biomedical research,” said Barbash. “Of course, any study on the effect of drugs should be tested separately in males and females, otherwise it’s a hugely confounding factor if you ignore that.”

Yet, he said, “the notion that we need to do the same thing for gender…is really not supported,” and may not be very feasible.

“Half the population is male and half the population is female,” Barbash said. “We see all kinds of estimates for gender nonconforming and transgender individuals but, no doubt, they’re much less frequent than males and females.”

On account of this, he said, even if research questions regarding gender divergence and transgender individuals are worthwhile, “it would be problematic, for example, to necessitate that all NIH studies of humans include males, females and gender nonconforming individuals or transgender individuals.”

However, he said, he feared “this series of articles could have that kind of impact in influencing policy.”

Originally published by The College Fix. Republished with permission.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Crime

Older man arrested at Kirk shooting admits to protecting real gunman

Published on

MXM logo MxM News 

Quick Hit:

Chaos followed the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk when police first arrested a 71-year-old man who confessed he was only trying to distract them from the real shooter.

Key Details:

  • George Zinn, 71, was arrested after yelling, “I shot him, now shoot me!” but later admitted he was trying to mislead police.
  • The real suspect, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, was arrested Thursday night and identified publicly Friday morning.
  • Zinn was charged with obstruction of justice, a second-degree felony, while Robinson faces charges as the alleged assassin.

Diving Deeper:

Charlie Kirk, one of the most prominent young leaders in the conservative movement, was assassinated in a brazen political attack that shocked supporters nationwide. Instead of immediately capturing the real suspect, police initially detained George Zinn, a man with a long history of causing disruptions at political events and protests.

Video of Zinn being handcuffed quickly spread, leading many to believe the threat had been neutralized. But Zinn’s arrest was a diversion — one that he admitted to orchestrating in order to shield the real shooter. He told police he wanted to “draw attention from the real shooter,” an action that delayed accountability and nearly allowed a dangerous criminal to evade justice longer.

Zinn’s background only adds to the picture. As the Salt Lake Tribune noted, he has a history of disrupting events — from political speeches to cultural gatherings like the Sundance Film Festival. His disruptive activism fits a pattern of left-wing agitators who thrive on chaos, and in this case, he played a role in protecting an assassin.

Continue Reading

MAiD

Famous Canadian children’s author Robert Munsch says he plans to die by euthanasia

Published on

Illustration from Robert Munsch classic I Will Love You Forever

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Children’s writer Robert Munsch, diagnosed with dementia, has decided to end his life through euthanasia and has been approved to receive the lethal injection.

Famous Canadian author Robert Munsch has announced that he plans to end his life through euthanasia after being diagnosed with dementia.

In a September 14 interview with the New York Times, 80-year-old Canadian writer Robert Munsch revealed that he has been granted permission to be euthanized as his mind begins to deteriorate due to dementia.

“I’ve had a good life,” he reflected. “I’ve told my stories. Now I want to decide how it ends.”

Munsch is beloved to Canadians for his more than 70 children’s books, including The Paper Bag PrincessLove You Forever, Thomas’ Snowsuit, and Angela’s Airplane.

He has also received a Juno Award, induction into the Order of Canada, a star in Canada’s Walk of Fame, and has two public schools in Ontario named after him.

In 2021, Munsch was diagnosed with dementia, leading him to lose the ability to perform tasks such as riding a bike and driving. Munsch lamented that he wonders if in a year he lose all his mental facilities and become a “turnip” – a denigrating reference to the disabled.

Munsch noted that he can feel his creativity slipping “further and further away.” He added that he plans to end his life “when I start having real trouble talking and communicating. Then I’ll know.”

Sadly, Munsch is hardly the only Canadian to believe that ending his life through euthanasia is the only solution to suffering. In a recent podcast interview, Cardinal Timothy Dolan revealed that euthanasia is not only the “cheapening of human life,” but also removes the power of redemptive suffering.

He revealed that while his mother suffered for a long time in the hospital, she valued her life and would not have ended it prematurely.

The dangerous effects of a euthanasia culture are visible in Canada, where patients are waitlisted for health care but have ready access to euthanasia.

The most recent reports show that euthanasia is the sixth-highest cause of death in Canada. However, it was not listed as such in Statistics Canada’s top 10 leading causes of death from 2019 to 2022.

 

According to Health Canada, in 2022, 13,241 Canadians died by euthanasia lethal injections. This accounts for 4.1 percent of all deaths in the country for that year, a 31.2 percent increase from 2021.

Continue Reading

Trending

X