Read by QxMD icon Read

US proposal for defining gender has no basis in science

(no author information available yet)
Nature 2018, 563 (7729): 5
No abstract text is available yet for this article.


You need to log in or sign up for an account to be able to comment.

Josh Gordon wrote:


I only wish this article wasn’t written with the bias that it so obviously had. There are practical reasons that a health care practitioner may want to know the biological sex of an individual. Personally, I couldn’t care less about gender and gender labels; live and let live. But for diagnosis and treatment, objective measures like karyotype have utility.

Byron Castaneda wrote:


It's completely surprising what is nowadays "science ", no facts anymore, feelings and "social construction " are more important than biology

Brian Duncan wrote:


Sad. It’s clear that Nature has an agenda that isn’t rooted in truth or fact in regards to this topic.

Etienne Prinsloo wrote:


Coming from a high impact journal like Nature, this pandering to the hard left is truly disappointing. The future of women’s sports is bleak. Once all the podium places are occupied by transgender males, some sensibility might return. Sadly the “alternative” community has, via leftist politics managed to have assigned themselves more rights than the rest. Discrimination is discrimination no matter how you slice it.

Harrisonius LeManly wrote:


Thoroughly disappointing.

Rafael Diaz wrote:


Nature is now "antinature". Sad.

Buril crohns wrote:


Looks like the neo Marxists have taken over western academia as Peterson has repeatedly claimed.

Peter Volsky wrote:


Editor: Invite a counterpoint and publish both pieces.

fernando cardona wrote:


Esto quiere decir que los estudios donde se pone "mujer:hombre" o se compara epidemiologia entre generos (de este mismo journal inclusive) estan todos mal y que ahora toca discriminar los estudios por cada uno de los generos que se han inventado hasta el momento? No lo creo, personalmente

Michael Ayling wrote:


When ideology and the desire to impress class peers overrides evidence-based based evidence.

brian levy wrote:



Charles DeFreest wrote:


Nature is fickle.

Abilio Munoz wrote:



Fernando Fernandez Gonzalez wrote:


Sex & Genre. Sexo es un significante lleno de criterio biológico, sin embargo, genero es un significante de contenido sociológico. No se debe confundir este aspecto al redactar articulos o incluso la realizar hipotesis o elucidaciones científicas.

Lachlan Doughty wrote:


I look forward to the demise of gender discrimination. Let all competition in sport, fashion and commerce be open to all comers. No matter what lies beneath their epithelium.

Nicole Nelson wrote:


Excellent. This includes a brief mention of the failure of the Olympic IOC inability to fairly determine a binary sex to separate people for competition. This ongoing battle alone is worth reading about to see how the selective, even invasive, criteria continually fall on women wishing to compete.
Gender is a range and there are intersexed individuals. Acceptance will allow us to move on to fairly dealing with their needs in our community. Having Nature back this position is a good step in this direction.

Trending on Read

Available on the App Store

Available on the Play Store
Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"