Canine Intersex

From the UK Telegraph:

A dog abandoned by its owner after it was born as a hermaphrodite is looking for a home after having a sex change operation.
...
Now surgeons have transformed the dog by removing her male organs and turning her into a bitch.

Lisa Graham, 35, manager at the home, said: "People would see her and were quite attracted. When we explained the condition she had and that she would have to come back to us for surgery, they were repulsed – it was not the surgical aspect, it was the condition."

Abandoned...Surgery without consent... and people "repulsed" by the condition.

Why, this dog could be human. For that's how Intersexed children that age are treated too.

And on a personal note... our cat, Schroedinger, had been suffering congestive heart failure, possibly due to parasites picked up from a rat he'd caught. The heroic medical measures to reduce the oedema unfortunately resulted in no improvement, so we had him put to sleep before he became too uncomfortable. I miss him terribly, now's about the time he used to jump on my bed and snuggle up next to me, as I was working on my laptop.

I'm not a cat person, I'm a dog person. But for him.. I made an exception. We lost a member of our family today.

Inflation and the Military Budget

BBC News - Russia inflates its military with blow-up weapons

An S-300 long-range anti-aircraft missile system.

The idea is not new. Military History mavens will recognise this M4 Sherman from WW II.

Of course, it can go the other way too... a WW II British Churchill tank pretending to be a common-or-garden AEC Matador 4x4 truck.

In 1943 Winston Churchill reportedly told Joseph Stalin that "truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies".

Surgery on Intersexed Newborns

A segment from ABC's "Hungry Beast" programme.



The lighting is such that you can see where my sinus was crushed in an attack on me before I was 10. The lump on my forehead is still there, 44 years later. Bullying of Intersex and Trans kids happens, even if their genitalia appears normal. You don't prevent that by changing their genitalia, you do it by changing society. In the process, you'll save a lot of other kids too.

BTW - it wasn't until I had my skull PET-scanned for a chronic sinus problem about ten years ago that I found out my left brow sinus had been crushed. It seemed at the time no worse an injury than others I'd received.

A 30 years review of congenital adrenal hyperplasia in Northern Ireland

A 30 years review of congenital adrenal hyperplasia in Northern Ireland

Thirty-seven patients (22 female, 15 male) from 30 families presented with CAH over this time period giving an incidence of 1:23,092 live births. Eighteen (49%) were diagnosed shortly after birth (83% virilised females); 13 (35%) presented in the first few weeks of life with adrenal crises (85% male); and 6 (16%) presented with virilisation in later childhood.
...
In the first 16 years reviewed, 8 (80%) girls had perineal surgery in childhood, compared with 2 (16%) in the second 18 years. Two (9%) women had adrenalectomy. Eleven (58%) of those transferred to adult services have been lost to follow-up.

The "perineal surgery" in such cases would often be clitoridectomy. Amputating the clitoris for being too big. It's likely that the surgery performed in later life, on consenting adults, was likely to be less radical, and more concerned with preserving sensation.

Two had their adrenals removed. This tissue from Intersexed children was often used in early research into birth control pills.

These days, such surgical procedures are reserved for the most severe cases, where there is essentially no benefit from the completely dysfunctional glands. In such cases, the results can be very good. From ADRENALECTOMY FOR CAH Summary Research by Van Wyck and Ritzen:

We believe that these long-term studies document that bilateral adrenalectomy is a safe and efficacious method of managing patients with severe forms of congenital adrenal hyperplasia. It should be considered in patients who have repeatedly escaped from adrenal suppression and who are now suffering from progressive signs of both androgen and glucocorticoid excess.

As a last-ditch procedure when all else fails, there's usually an improvement. Not a good situation, certainly not a cure, but better than not performing the surgery, and often far better. It can make a real difference, when there's been a history of severe problems.

There are certain disadvantages though...

Adrenalectomized patients will require close medical supervision for life since they will remain at risk for serious consequences or death if not given adequate substitution therapy. Prophylactic adrenalectomy of young patients should be limited to academic centers with established research protocols.

Where at least the do good science when experimenting on Intersexed newborns. Which is what "Prophylactic adrenalectomy" is, because at that stage, we can't know whether the symptoms will be mild or severe.

The rules are different for Intersexed people.

ADHD, Genes, and Neurology

A Brain post, this one.

ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. First, an explanation of what we know about it:


The excellent necroblog on the subject, ADHD and More, has a very good article on it.

From MSNBC
:

British researchers compared the genomes of 366 white British children from 5 to 17 years old with attention deficit hyperactivity, or ADHD, to those of more than 1,000 similar children without the disorder. The scientists focused on a sequence of genes linked to brain development that has previously been connected to conditions like autism and schizophrenia.

In children without ADHD, about 7 percent of them had deleted or doubled chromosomes in the analyzed gene sequence. But among children with the disorder, researchers discovered about 14 percent had such genetic alterations. Scientists also found that 36 percent of children with learning disabilities in the study had the chromosomal abnormalities, compared to those with a normal IQ.

"This is the first time we've found that children with ADHD have chunks of DNA that are either duplicated or missing," said Anita Thapar, a professor at the MRC Centre in Neuropsychiatric Genetics and Genomics at Cardiff University who was one of the study's authors.

They got it factually wrong when the referred to "chromosomes" - we're talking about sequences of DNA, usually multiply-repeated ones, that we have good evidence are important in neurological development, not chromosomes as such. To use an analogy, like anomalies in the tread-pattern of a tyre, rather than a car with a missing or extra wheel.

As is typical, the effect is subtle. There is no "ADHD gene", just some sequences that make it more likely that a smaller-sized random hormonal glitch will cause real effects, rather than requiring a larger one - which happens sometimes too.

Peter Burbach, a professor of molecular neuroscience at University Medical Center Utrecht in the Netherlands, was surprised some of the genetic defects found for ADHD were identical to ones for autism and schizophrenia.
...
"This is not a structural abnormality in the brain, it's just the last phase of development that's gone wrong," he said. "It could be the brain just needs to be fine-tuned."

Perhaps. But I think not - we can certainly provide work-arounds and neural circuitry that will attenuate some of the worst effects, even convert them into advantages under some circumstances. But the basic structure will remain, even if asymptomatic due to deliberately induced anomalies in the more plastic parts of brain structure.

I don't think it's the last stage that's gone wrong. More like a very early one. Still, if we get a good result at the end by coarse-tuning of the plastic neurology during childhood, the effect is close to normal, and may be superior in some ways.

The corollary is that if the child is exposed to a malign environment when growing up, the symptoms of ADHD may be induced, even with a normal basic brain structure. Coarse-tuning the wrong way.

This may be a general rule (to a greater or lesser extent)in much neuro-atypicality.

The Chinese Tortoise

Not a new species; a description of the robust and long-term space program that China is quietly executing. One that means that the next human to land on the Moon will speak Mandarin - as will the first Lunar colonists.

From Space Daily :

Subsequently, China announced plans to launch the back-up orbiter on an independent mission, to expand on the discoveries of Chang'e 1.

The new mission was dubbed Chang'e 2. Its launch on China's national day (October 1) went smoothly. If the performance of the first mission is any guide, we can expect a satisfying set of outcomes from this orbiter over the course of its six-month mission.

The numerical designations of the landers underwent a short-term reshuffle. The rover-lander was now dubbed Chang'e 3 and the sample-return mission was Chang'e 4.

But there seem to be more missions planned than this. Evidence in the Chinese media increasingly supports the concept that China plans at least four lunar landers.

In an earlier article this year (China's Lunar Twins, SpaceDaily August 19, 2010), I drew attention to a small fact table published in the Global Times, a state-run newspaper aimed at an international audience. The table spoke of Chang'e 3 and 4 as being part of the second stage, or "landing" missions and Chang'e 5 and 6 as the third stage, or "returning".

U suspect we may be seeing a pattern here, a template: build two of each, so if the first, conservative, mission fails, the second has a good chance of meeting the minimal requirements. And if the first succeeds, the second can be a little more adventurous, stretching the envelope. The chance of one failure may be one in ten; but the chance of two, one in one hundred.

Chang'e 2 will make a very close lunar approach, and directly to lunar orbit instead of a transfer from geosynchronous orbit first. In this close approach, it will take photos to determine the best landing sites, in the Bay of Rainbows.

From Xinhua

XICHANG, Sichuan, Oct. 1 (Xinhua) -- If lunar satellite Chang'e-2 sends back high-resolution photos of the Bay of Rainbows, the mission can be deemed a complete success, said the chief designer of China's lunar exploration program Friday.

Wu Weiren said Chang'e-2 would take high-resolution photos of the moon's Bay of Rainbows area, the proposed landing ground for Chang'e-3.

Wu said four to five areas had been chosen for a landing ground for Chang'e-3, but the Bay of Rainbows would be the first choice.

"The geological structure in this area is diverse, so a probe there would have greater scientific value," he said.

"Other places on the moon have already been landed on, so we want to choose one that has not been explored before," he said.

"Previously, most lunar programs landed around the equator of the moon, an area easier for monitoring and control maneuvers, but Chang'e-3 will take on greater challenges."

The Bay of Rainbows, or Sinus Iridium, is located at about 43 degrees north latitude and 31 west longitude with a width of 300 kilometers.

Some remarks in Space Daily hint at the future:

"The most fundamental task for human beings' space exploration is to research on human origins and find a way for mankind to live and develop sustainably," said Qian Weiping, chief designer of the Chang'e-2 mission's tracking and control system.
...
Chang'e-2 is China's first unmanned spacecraft to be boosted from the launch site directly to the earth-moon transfer orbit, vastly reducing the journey time from that of its predecessor, Chang'e-1.

To acquire more detailed moon data, Chang'e-2 will enter a lower lunar orbit about 100 km above the surface, compared with the 200-km altitude of Chang'e-1, according to the control center.

Qian pointed out that China's pursuit of lunar probes and manned space flights was more out of a sense of responsibility than the need to follow in the footsteps of other countries.

"Once our mind is made up, we will do it no matter how many years later," Qian said. "However, we can never go beyond scientific rules and find a shortcut."

"What we're doing now is what some others already did 40 years ago. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we're lagging behind by 40 years," Qian said, adding that the country's levels of telecommunication, networks and scientific understanding, based on the progress in science and technology, were much more advanced than what they were decades ago.

"And we will shorten the gap fast," he added.
...
Qian said that China's space talents were outstanding and young. The average age of the design team for the country's manned project and lunar probe project was just a little over 30 years old, he added.

This isn't a space exploration program for prestige purposes.

It's about sustainability.
It's about the long term.
It involves a commitment.
It refuses to take short cuts to meet artificial deadlines.

All the things that are lacking in the US space program.

As for the Chinese? They're right on schedule.

An Unexpected Reverse

Here's a letter I've just written to the Federal Member for Fraser. Similar letters have gone to both ACT Senators, and the Attorney-General.

From:
Zoe E Brain
(address redacted)

6 October 2010

Dear Mr Leigh

May I draw your attention to section 62 of the SEX DISCRIMINATION AMENDMENT BILL 2010

62 After subsection 40(4)
1
Insert:
2
(5) Nothing in Division 2 renders it unlawful to refuse to make, issue
3
or alter an official record of a person's sex if a law of a State or
4
Territory requires the refusal because the person is married.

The above section is directly contrary to the recommendations of the Australian Human Rights Commission. It also enshrines for the first time in Federal Law the concept that someone's sex depends on their marital status, as opposed to their marital status depending on their sex.

Yes, which sex they are depends on whether they're married or not. Or which country they were born in. Yes, it is that bizarre.

This kind of surreal legislation will bring the Gillard Goverment into disrepute - frankly, it will make them a laughing-stock. While the state and territory legislation may have been explainable in the past as a regrettable relic of prejudice against Intersexed and Transsexual people, to introduce it into new Federal legislation whose avowed purpose is to get rid of discrimination, rather than legitimise it, sends a most unfortunate message. The Australian Human Rights Commission is working towards ending such practices - not giving them additional legitimacy.

Consider - two Intersexed people, equally situate in all respects - but one is married, another not. So under your Government's new law, they become different sexes, though biologically identical.

In fact, it's worse that that: for you can have two identical cases, one born in Australia, one born overseas, and the one born overseas can have the federal "cardinal documentation" changed, and the one born in this country cannot. So which sex they are for the purposes of Federal law depends on where they're born.

I remind you - this is not some relic of a discriminatory past; the Gillard Government is for the first time, enshrining this situation into Federal law. Judges in various administrative appeals decisions (e.g. Imbruglia vs Dept of Foreign Affairs) have commented that this situation is not just wrong and inhuman, but insane. Until now, there has been some latitude for judicial discretion to mitigate the worst effects. This legislation would remove that, by making parliamentary intent to discriminate clear.

This situation also undermines the whole concept of Marriage being between a Man and a Woman, and will be used as such to attack your Government. Because you will be making it plain in this legislation that the whole concept of man and woman is entirely arbitrary, and independant of biology.

Only about 200 people per year will be affected by this, at most. Please consider though the effects on them.

Without a birth certificate or other documentation that matches the biological reality, I think you can imagine the effects. Documents proving Identity that obviously contradict reality will often be deemed forgeries.

In order to avoid these, married couples who wish to stay together are compelled to do one of two things; either to perjure themselves before the Australian Family Court, manufacturing false evidence and witness statements to the effect that they are separated; or to actually separate, to physically split, something not even the most fanatic religious groups in parliament dare to impose on same-sex couples. Unlike the few other jurisdictions where marriage is an impediment to having documentation corrected, there is no method of converting marriage to a marriage-like arrangement in this country. Finances must be separated, and separate custody arrangements made for children.

I therefore ask you to urge removal of section 62 in its entirety. This will enable the Australian Human Rights Commission to move forward slowly, haltingly, in urging the rolling back of such inhuman legislation at state and territory level, rather than suffering a giant and wholly unexpected setback.

Ideally, section 62 should say "Nothing in Division 2 renders it lawful to refuse to make..." as that is what the AHRC recommends.

I draw your attention to this AHRC recommendation:

Sex Files: the legal recognition of sex in documents and government records
Concluding paper of the sex and gender diversity project
March 2009

ISBN 978-1-921449-10-9

Available at http://www.humanrights.gov.au/genderdiversity/sex_files2009.html#Heading180

The very first recommendation:

Recommendation 1: Marital status should not be a relevant consideration as to whether or not a person can request a change in legal sex.

For the first time in Federal Law, the Gillard Government will explicitly make it so that it *is* a consideration. This is not just not a step forward, it's a giant leap backwards when it comes to human rights for Transsexual and Intersexed people.

It is one thing to ignore a human rights report; quite another to deliberately do the opposite of what is recommended - and in a bill that supposedly is against discrimination. That adds insult to injury. I hope it's inadvertant, and not deliberate, a taste of things to come in the Gillard Government.

Yours Sincerely,
Zoe E Brain

Now to write to the Greens. I suspect they may have some words with their coalition partners... at least, I hope so.