Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]


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


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

armed forces

Trudeau pledges another $500 million to Ukraine as Canadian military suffers

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Despite the nation’s own armed forces grappling with an alarming recruitment crisis, Justin Trudeau and his government have poured over $13.3 billion into Ukraine.

More Canadians tax dollars are being sent overseas as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has promised an additional $500 million in military aid to Ukraine. 

During a July 10 meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trudeau announced that he would send another $500 million to Ukraine as it continues its war against Russia, despite an ongoing decline in Canada’s military recruitment.  

“We’re happy to offer we’re announcing today $500 million more military aid this year for Ukraine, to help through this very difficult situation,” Trudeau said. 

In addition to the $500 million, Canada will also provide much of Ukraine’s fighter jet pilot training as Ukraine receives its first F-16s. 

Trudeau’s statement comes after Canada has been under fire for failing to meet NATO’s mandate that all members commit at least two percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) to the military alliance. 

According to his 2024 budget, Trudeau plans to spend $8.1 billion over five years, starting in 2024-25, and $73.0 billion over 20 years on the Department of National Defence.   

Interestingly, $8.1 billion divided equally over five years is $1,620,000 each year for the Canadian military. Therefore, Trudeau’s pledge of $500 million means he is spending just under a third on Ukraine compared to what he plans to spend on Canadians.  

Indeed, Trudeau seems reluctant to spend money on the Canadian military, as evidenced when Canadian troops in Latvia were forced to purchase their own helmets and food when the Trudeau government failed to provide proper supplies.  

Weeks later, Trudeau lectured the same troops on “climate change” and disinformation.       

However, at the same time, Trudeau readily sends Canadian tax dollars overseas to Ukraine. Since the Russia-Ukraine war began in 2022, Canada has given Ukraine over $13.3 billion, including $4 billion in direct military assistance.    

In May, Trudeau’s office announced $3.02 billion in funding for Ukraine, including millions of taxpayer dollars to promote “gender-inclusive demining.”  

Trudeau’s ongoing funding for Ukraine comes as many Canadians are struggling to pay for basics such as food, shelter, and heating. According to a recent government report, fast-rising food costs in Canada have led to many people feeling a sense of “hopelessness and desperation” with nowhere to turn for help.  

Continue Reading


Viktor Orbán’s peace tour includes visits with Zelensky, Putin, Xi Jinping, and Trump

Published on

Viktor Orbán and Donald Trump 

From LifeSiteNews

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has been traveling the globe to set up the baseline for a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. However, the U.S. intelligence community is not happy about this strategy at all.

During the NATO summit in D.C. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said, “At today’s NATO Summit, I will reaffirm that Hungary will not participate in the NATO-Ukraine mission, but we will continue to meet our objectives in the development of Hungarian defense capabilities, thus strengthening our Alliance.”

Orbán has been traveling the globe, establishing a coalition of partners and setting up the baseline for a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine. However, the U.S. intelligence community and all those downstream politicians who work at the behest of the global crisis agents are not happy about the peace strategy at all.

PM Orbán went to Ukraine to speak to President Zelensky, then went to Russia to speak to President Putin, then went to China to speak to Chairman Xi, then headed to Washington, D.C. to meet with President Biden, then Thursday night went to see the key that would bring it all together, President Donald Trump.

Orbán then tweeted a video saying, “We continued the peace mission in Mar-a-Lago. President @realDonaldTrump has proved during his presidency that he is a man of peace. He will do it again!” The collective uniparty inside Washington, D.C. is having absolute fits about it.

READ: Viktor Orbán announces his vision for a stable Europe that defends Christian values

It’s not just Joe Biden and the current administration who are apoplectic about Prime Minister Orbán’s peace effort. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is furious and vowing to stamp out the ideology of the Republican network who dares to challenge the current geopolitical efforts.

The Republican senator from Kentucky said defending the blood-soaked efforts of the New World Order is his priority:

‘This is going to be my top priority. No question about it,’ McConnell said in an interview this week. McConnell added that he might even start to hold court with reporters in the halls of the Senate. ‘This is the most important thing going on in the world right now,’ the Kentucky Republican said.

Mitch McConnell is furious about the efforts to bring about a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine, and he is vowing to confront any Republican who doesn’t acquiesce to the foreign policy program of the uniparty. McConnell’s intents are in full support of the U.S. intelligence community and the Biden administration. However, McConnell has an ally in Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson.

As noted, “Speaker Mike Johnson, who held up Ukraine aid for months despite public pressure from McConnell, is now starting to sound a lot like the Kentucky Republican when talking about national security, especially Ukraine.” For Speaker Johnson, Zelensky’s ability to maintain access to the U.S. treasury is a top priority. The money must keep flowing in order to keep the conflict alive.

Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers, and countless mercenaries sent by allies, have reportedly been killed in America’s European proxy province, and the D.C. benefactors of the conflict are prepared to fight to the last of them. Prime Minister Orbán’s pesky interference and talk of peace is not a welcome addition to the intents and purposes of the proverbial West; or to Blackrock, Wall Street, or the bankers who ultimately benefit from war.

According to what seems like ordinary logic, Russia has secured the buffer zone they wanted in eastern Ukraine, while the bayonets behind the Ukrainian soldiers being pushed into the meat grinder are held by team USA.

Washington, D.C. fears that if Donald Trump wins in November, they will lose their ability to push NATO into war.

Meanwhile, PM Viktor Orbán continues his mission for peace!



Reprinted with permission from the Conservative Treehouse.

Continue Reading