Announcement

Collapse

Health Science 101 Guidelines

Greetings! Welcome to Health Science.

Here's where we talk about the latest fad diets, the advantages of vegetarianism, the joy of exercise and good health. Like everywhere else at Tweb our decorum rules apply.

This is a place to exchange ideas and network with other health conscience folks, this isn't a forum for heated debate.
See more
See less

Survey finds excess health problems in lesbians, gays, bisexuals

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Survey finds excess health problems in lesbians, gays, bisexuals

    https://ca.news.yahoo.com/survey-fin...224741845.html

    I was just thinking about the previous discussions we've had where transexuals seemed to have greater problems, including suicide, and wasn't even looking for this, but here it is.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

  • #2
    The behaviors mentioned--heavy drinking and smoking--are often done as coping mechanisms for psychological stress, and many of the physical health problems that were mentioned--cancer, hypertension, coronary heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma--are caused/worsened by heavy drinking and smoking.

    In other words, this study seems to just be reiterating what's already been known: that LGBT folks report experiencing more psychological stress than heterosexual folks. The causes of that psychological stress, of course, are still debated.

    The average age (46.8 years old) is interesting. As the data was taken in 2013, many of the respondents would've been born around the late 60s/early 70s--meaning that they would've been teenagers when gay people were demonized for the AIDS crisis in the 80s (even though we now know that anyone can get and spread AIDS). I can't imagine that undergoing one's turbulent teenage years and gradually realizing one's sexual orientation while much of society feared and hated people with that sexual orientation could've been positive for one's mental health.

    I also found it interesting that respondents who identified as bisexual apparently were worse off than people who simply identified as gay or lesbian. Apparently it's healthier to be attracted exclusively to the same-sex than to be attracted to both sexes?
    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

    Comment


    • #3
      Yup. For various good reasons, the medical profession thinks a major cause of the poor health that this group experiences is the social discrimination it experiences. This is what has led to medical and psychiatric organisations around the world submitting briefings to courts and legislative bodies in support of gay rights.

      People who are stigmatized, excluded, and discriminated against in societies suffer a wide variety of negative health consequences. One of the key aspects of Jesus' work in the gospels was reaching out to oppressed and ostracized people and giving them a community group in which they could feel welcomed and accepted.
      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
        Yup. For various good reasons, the medical profession thinks a major cause of the poor health that this group experiences is the social discrimination it experiences.
        While that certainly may be a factor, it's obvious it's the "go to" answer for liberals.

        This is what has led to medical and psychiatric organisations around the world submitting briefings to courts and legislative bodies in support of gay rights.

        People who are stigmatized, excluded, and discriminated against in societies suffer a wide variety of negative health consequences. One of the key aspects of Jesus' work in the gospels was reaching out to oppressed and ostracized people and giving them a community group in which they could feel welcomed and accepted.
        Sure, but that doesn't mean there aren't other factors at work here, too.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Starlight
          One of the key aspects of Jesus' work in the gospels was reaching out to oppressed and ostracized people and giving them a community group in which they could feel welcomed and accepted
          But He didn't condone or tolerate their sin.


          Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mossrose View Post
            But He didn't condone or tolerate their sin.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by mossrose View Post
              But He didn't condone or tolerate their sin.
              There's not really widespread agreement on that topic. E.P. Sanders, for example, argues extensively that if Jesus was successfully causing bad people to stop sinning and turn their lives around, then the Pharisees would have praised him for it. He argues that Jesus must have been endorsing the acceptance of sinners into society while they were still sinners.

              One passage that speaks directly to the topic - the woman caught in adultery - appears to have been added to the gospel accounts much later. But in it, Jesus appears pretty tolerant of past sins, but discourages future ones: "Woman, where are your accusers? Has no one condemned you?” “No one, Lord.” she answered. “Neither I do condemn you." Jesus declared. “Now go and sin no more." (John 8:10-11)

              While Jesus often has harsh words for the religious authorities and the rich in the gospels, he never seems to have harsh words for the oppressed, the suffering, the outcasts, or those that religious people have labelled "sinners". He does not go around calling out the sin of these people. He doesn't go around denouncing and informing them of their sins, or making sure they realize they're sinners.

              In the gospels, those who don't "condone or tolerate" the sins of others are: The pharisees, the man who objected to the speck in his brother's eye while having a plank in his own, and the man who prayed loudly thanking God that he was not a terrible sinner like the tax collector. None of those are portrayed as good examples by Jesus in the gospels. I see you people who insist on the importance of calling out what you see as the sins of others as being just like those pharisees and hypocrites.
              Last edited by Starlight; 06-29-2016, 10:14 PM.
              "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
              "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
              "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                While that certainly may be a factor, it's obvious it's the "go to" answer for liberals.
                Other contributing factors are not within our control to change. So they are irrelevant in practice because we can't do anything about them.

                For example, it's thought a possible cause of homosexuality in some people is exposure in the womb to unusual levels of hormones or exposure to unusual chemicals which lead to unusual brain development. Thus in a male fetus the part of their brain responsible for sexual attraction might develop in a more female-typical way. But at the same time, the unusual hormonal conditions might cause other mental and physical developmental changes that could lead to things like depression, schizophrenia, heart abnormalities etc. Basically, the same factors responsible for one unusual development (homosexuality) could cause other unusual developments in the fetus.

                We can't really do anything much about that. It could potentially always be the case that people born gay might be naturally more susceptible to other unusual mental and physical outcomes because of the same causes. So we might always end up seeing a wider variation in mental function amongst gay people: The greatest scientists, intellectuals, musicians, artists, cooks, sportspeople, clothing designers, military commanders, businessmen etc might be disproportionately gay, while at the other end of the spectrum, those committed to mental institutions with serious mental illnesses might disproportionately be gay as well. Gay people would have a higher variance in mental and physical outcomes than would non-gay people on average.

                But what is within our society's ability to control is the level of discrimination and prejudice experienced by gay people. Survey data consistently tells us that gay people feel very badly ostracized, and discriminated against, and they feel this causes them a great deal of stress and anxiety, and many say they have contemplated suicide as a result. Many say they took up drinking or smoking as forms of stress-relief. This is consistent with what we know from other situations about how demonized racial or religious minorities say they feel and act when they experience discrimination. The medical profession has also discovered how dangerous chronic stress is in general to people's mental and physical health, and the way ongoing stress in and of itself causes a cascade of negative biochemical reactions that lead to slower healing, strokes, heart attacks, mental illnesses etc.

                So, while we can theorize about the unproven possibility that gay people may be innately more predisposed to unusual mental and physical traits, we can't do much to change it. But what we do know is that it is very well evidenced that social discrimination and prejudice causes detrimental physical and mental health outcomes to minority groups. We know that gay people consistently report experiencing stress and anxiety as a result of perceived social discrimination, and consistently report that they feel these things have negatively impacted their mental health and suicidal tendencies. And we know this group experiences the negative health outcomes that are consistent with them being a stigmatized minority group. So we know something that can be done to reduce these negative outcomes: Reduce the discrimination and prejudice. And that is why not merely "liberals", but all major mental and physical health and medical organisations around the Western world have been consistently advocating for gay rights and an end to discrimination, on health grounds.
                "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                  I also found it interesting that respondents who identified as bisexual apparently were worse off than people who simply identified as gay or lesbian. Apparently it's healthier to be attracted exclusively to the same-sex than to be attracted to both sexes?
                  My understanding is that bisexuals have experienced additional pressures from homosexuals. I've read more than one account of bisexuals being pressured to commit to homosexuality, for example. I think that was more of an issue a decade or two ago when homosexuals were really pushing for recognition while bisexuality wasn't even really known to be a thing.
                  I'm not here anymore.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Carrikature View Post
                    My understanding is that bisexuals have experienced additional pressures from homosexuals.
                    I think that was even mentioned in the article.

                    I've read more than one account of bisexuals being pressured to commit to homosexuality, for example. I think that was more of an issue a decade or two ago when homosexuals were really pushing for recognition while bisexuality wasn't even really known to be a thing.
                    And I remember an article where homosexuals were getting a bit frustrated because their "cause" is getting less attention because it's not so "out there" anymore, as more attention is focused on transexuals.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                      Other contributing factors are not within our control to change. So they are irrelevant in practice because we can't do anything about them.

                      For example, it's thought a possible cause of homosexuality in some people is exposure in the womb to unusual levels of hormones or exposure to unusual chemicals which lead to unusual brain development. Thus in a male fetus the part of their brain responsible for sexual attraction might develop in a more female-typical way. But at the same time, the unusual hormonal conditions might cause other mental and physical developmental changes that could lead to things like depression, schizophrenia, heart abnormalities etc. Basically, the same factors responsible for one unusual development (homosexuality) could cause other unusual developments in the fetus.

                      We can't really do anything much about that.
                      Why not?
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Why not?
                        Because current medical science doesn't have a good understanding of the details of the processes involved, nor any good idea of how to alter them.

                        Maybe in the distant future we'll be able to monitor and control the brain development of babies in the womb, but it's a while away yet. Current technology seems to boil down to basic advice along the lines of "don't drink alcohol while pregnant" and "take folate tablets".
                        Last edited by Starlight; 06-30-2016, 06:47 AM.
                        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                          Because current medical science doesn't have a good understanding of the details of the processes involved, nor any good idea of how to alter them.
                          Ah, so don't even try... I mean - you claim there's a problem, but we shouldn't actually "work the problem", we should just get everybody to accept it as "normal".

                          Maybe in the distant future we'll be able to monitor and control the brain development of babies in the womb, but it's a while away yet. Current technology seems to boil down to basic advice along the lines of "don't drink alcohol while pregnant" and "take folate tablets".
                          Typical liberal social experimentation.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            Ah, so don't even try... I mean - you claim there's a problem
                            The problem is that religious conservatives are unwilling to accept any kind of personal responsibility for the effects of their actions.

                            So they go into 100 kinds of denial when medical experts tell them their discrimination and prejudice kills people. They don't want to believe they're responsible for the premature deaths of thousands of people per year. They want to believe that their religiously motivated discrimination and prejudice is holy and isn't hurting and killing people.

                            So they stick their heads in the sand. They prefer victim blaming. So, anything and everything bad that happens to gay people is rationalized away as being Definitely Not The Fault Of Religious People, and Probably The Fault Of Gay People. But they have no actual logical or rationale as to how gay people are at fault for bad things happening to them.

                            That's the problem.

                            I don't think unusual developmental processes in the womb are necessarily a problem if that is what you meant. Greater variability in developmental outcomes is neither good nor bad in and of itself.
                            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                              The problem is that religious conservatives are unwilling to accept any kind of personal responsibility for the effects of their actions.
                              Yeah, these "religious conservatives" are probaboy introducing these "unusual levels of hormones" and causing the "exposure to unusual chemicals which lead to unusual brain development" so that we can have people to call names.

                              I'm guessing you were exposed to unusual levels of hormones and unusual chemicals as a baby, which caused your unusual brain development.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X