Phthalates Threat: Less Boy, More Girl

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Interesting post, I would like to share some thing important about penis health.
"Treat Your Penis As If It Were an Athlete"
Peppino, the spokes-penis, says that your penis, just like an athlete, needs vitamins, supplements and minerals in order to provide peak performance and always to be in top shape. Hear what Peppino has to say about which penis-specific vitamins are necessary to maintain penis health and keep your sexual performance at a winning competitive level. See and hear Peppino at http://www.man1health.com

Peppino P of CA 10:26AM February 09, 2010

While I agree that hormone-acting chemicals in food or carpets should be prohibited, I wonder from what a strange place this article comes. It equals so called "non-gender-comforming" behaviour (? A woman reparing a car? A man feeding an infant?) or homosexuality with illness.
Did the author ever wonder who made up a strange inventory that places different activities on a male-female scale? Playing with insects? Playing with cars? (In monkeys??)
A female child that is taught to imitate the behaviour of her mother will learn that the mother is afraid of spiders- no hormones needed for that. And why should male monkeys, who have no objects with wheels in their natural environment show a gender bias towards cars? Seriously! The evolution of gender behaviour in monkeys happened a long time before the invention of the wheel- there is no biological reason for male monkeys to feel a strange attraction to cars-- only of course if they are emulating the gender behaviour of their human guardians, which is something that monkeys are well known to do. Why is it that these studies of "gender" seem to bring to a halt all logical thinking?
I recently read in a scientific text that the gender behaviour of monkeys is differently caused than that of primates- monkey behaviour has strong biological causes, but primate behaviour and especially human behaviour isn't as biologically imprinted in the brain as that. The brains are *very* different, as anyone should notice who compared a monkey and a human skull.
I have a friend who is a doctor of biology who told me that many of these studies on the organic roots of gender are highly contested. Ususally there are other studies around that prove the exact opposite, but they don't get hyped in the media.
Common readers and journalists often have no idea how "science" works and that scientists are only human beings who might not always work as scientifically as they should. They are often far from producing "truth". Do some research.
Aditionally there seem to be people who have a strong interest in making readers believe all that "biological gender" weirdness . Remember studies of the "biological" differences of the so called races? They were uncontested scientific "knowledge" for a long time too. How did that come about with nobody noticing? Interestingly, these studies might be scientifically accepted in the US, but often aren't as accepted in Europe.
(For those who still don't know- it was all rubbish with no biological foundation whatsoever. People wanted to "prove" that race segregation was "natural" and racism was ok: "Negroes" have thicker skins and are more stupid? Well that proves that we were right all along in beating them and keeping them away from schools. These gender studies eerily sound like "race" studies of the last century)

anon 3:40AM January 27, 2010

The author keeps confounding gender style, gender identity, and sexual orientation. These are independent characteristics. A male can prefer socially feminine typed activities, be attracted to females, and be macho/butch in their gender style. No one knows how the children in this study will turn out in terms of their sexual orientation. The author also stated that there is no research on how children who scored on this rating scale turned out as adults - undoubtedly that's true - the rating scale has only been available for a few years. But surely there have been similar ratings of children 20 or 30 years ago. I wish the author had dug more deeply.

Jill Davidson of WA 3:28AM January 24, 2010

This might just add to the fact that male breast cancer might be genetically predisposed to the unborn who are subjected to abnormal and synthetic estrogen compounds found in hard plastics.

Mike 8:31PM December 04, 2009

It is my hypothesis that low maternal DHEA produces homosexuality
(http://www.anthropogeny.com/Etiology%20of%20Male%20Homosexuality%20and%20Current%20Rise%20of%20Male%20Homo.htm
). An article was recently published that says: "These data, although
based on a small sample, suggest that prenatal exposure to antiandrogenic
phthalates may be associated with less male-typical play behaviour in boys."
(International Journal of Andrology 2009: "Prenatal phthalate exposure and
reduced masculine play in boys," Swan, et al.). The usual explanation is
that phthalates reduce testosterone.
As I just said, I think low maternal DHEA is the cause. It is known that
phthalates inhibit sulfotransferase, therefore reducing conversion of the
precursor, DHEAS, to the active molecule, DHEA (Environ Health Perspect.
2007 Dec;115 Suppl 1:51-4). Reducing conversion of DHEAS to DHEA produces
low DHEA. I suggest the foregoing supports my explanation of how
homosexuality forms.

James Michael Howard of AR 1:03PM November 22, 2009

I wonder if PET scans can't used to delineate male play from female play-you would think there would be some sort of difference if it is chemical.

penny of VA 9:56PM November 19, 2009

It seems to me by searching on Google with the search term 'Men with long index fingers' that men whether or not it concerns body mass or brain size, it seems that men with long index fingers are more generally right brained and more spacial skilled on the right hemisphere of the brain while most jocks also called dumbbells are also right-brained although the I.Q is lower.

Mike 8:26PM November 19, 2009

Of course we don't need any more pollutants in our gene pool. Of course we don't need toxins in our water, blah, blah, and again blah! But...scientific evidence is mounting that gay/lesbian behavior is a result of insufficient proteins absorbed "in utero". This means, if true, that these unfortunate folks are genetically challenged, NOT equal, but a sad biological DEAD END. Give them civil union rights, but NOT marriage, and NO public monies for their deficient lifestyles.PS. Most heteros do not fear them, the homophobic mantra is simply Leftist politics, we are sorry for them, period.

ChristmasTree of NY 8:05PM November 18, 2009

This article is mixed - on one hand the title infers that feminine boys are bad - it also subtly says that gender identity is not a choice - but has biological basis. Finally!
Also, males that are more feminine are not necessarily "homosexual." It is a common myth to think this though.
Being transgender is not a choice.

Zoë of CA 6:58PM November 18, 2009

How ironic. The anti-gay pro-business conservatives have always accused the environmentalists of being scare-mongers about the effects of pollution. Now corporate and industrial plastic production results in pollution that alters the developmental endocrine balances and, poof!, more homosexual males. Not only proving the biological basis of homosexuality but affecting those who poo-poo'd the 'natural' lifestyle.

thebob.bob of KY 4:53PM November 17, 2009