"Puberty should not be compulsory"

[Waka Gashira (imported)]

This issue has been discussed numerous times here, some people believe that castrating a child would be unfare as the effects are irreversabe, others belive that the effects of puberty are also irreversible and should not be forced on all children.

Anyways, onto the new stuff. I was surfing today and stumbled across an intreaguing article which may be of interest to you.

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/001741.html

[Paolo]

The text of the article.

I also suggest reading the rebutals and comments lower down on the page.

Also, this is a text copy only. It's not MY opinion. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but given the fact that the testosterone levels here in 4 of 'my' 5 boys are so high it hangs in the air like a fog, I might be inclined to see some benefit to it. However, as in all things, there's a downside if you think about it. :-\

More to follow, I"m sure.

Have at it, folks.

P.

***

NIH-funded researchers have identified a gene that appears to be a crucial signal for the beginning of puberty in human beings as well as in mice. Without a functioning copy of the gene, both humans and mice appear to be unable to enter puberty normally. The newly identified gene, known as GPR54, also appears necessary for normal reproductive functioning in human beings.

The study, funded in part by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), appears in the October 23 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. GPR54 is located on an autosomal chromosome (a chromosome that is not a sex chromosome). The study also was funded by the National Center for Research Resources and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, both at NIH.

"The discovery of GPR54 is an important step in understanding the elaborate sequence of events needed for normal sexual maturation," said Duane Alexander, M.D., Director of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). "Findings from this study may lead not only to more effective treatments for individuals who fail to enter puberty normally, but may provide insight into the causes of other reproductive disorders as well."

Puberty begins when a substance known as gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) is secreted from a part of the brain called the hypothalamus. Individuals who fail to reach puberty because of inherited or spontaneous genetic mutations are infertile.

"The discovery of GPR54 as a gatekeeper for puberty across species is very exciting" said the study's first author, Stephanie B. Seminara, of the Reproductive Endocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston and a member of the NICHD-funded, Harvard-wide Endocrine Sciences Center. "In the future, this work might lead to new therapies for the treatment of a variety of reproductive disorders."

While the researchers involved emphasize the value of the research in terms of the development of new therapies for infertility there are other less conventional but perhaps more widely useful reasons for being able to control the onset of puberty. Among the very practical reasons to delay the onset of puberty:

Reduce the risk of female cancers by reducing the total number of menstrual cycles a woman experiences in her lifetime. The total number of menstrual cycles represents a cumulative risk for cancer. The stimulation of ovarian, breast, and other female tissue types by female sex hormones as part of the menstrual cycle causes damage that eventually leads to various cancers. That is the reason why women who have more children early in life have a lower risk for some types of female cancer: they didn't experience as many total menstrual cycles.

Reduce the risk of male cancers. A delay in the rise of testosterone would reduce the risk of prostate cancer many decades later.

Reduce teen pregnancies. Kids who haven't gone thru puberty can not start pregnancies.

Improve educational achievement. Kids will be less distracted from school work if they haven't started to feel a strong sex drive and all the changes in feelings that puberty brings on. Time spent thinking about sex and romance is time not spent paying attention to teachers or studying.

Reduce the spread of sexual diseases. Delay the onset of the sex drive and there will be less teen sex.

More time to emotionally mature. Allow children to grow up more and learn more about the world before having to figure out romantic relationships.

Reduce school violence. Less sexual competition would translate into a calmer and safer school environment which would be more conducive to learning.

Delayed female puberty would probably delay the point at which women become infertile at middle age. Women who are trying desperately to have children in their late 30s and beyond would have better odds of they haven't already produced as many wasted eggs up to that point.

As I've argued previously, we need to adjust humanity to be more adaptive to the environmental changes that we have created for ourselves which are a consequence of technological advances. The delay of puberty is a great example of how humans could be made more adaptive to modern industrial society. Humans were already selected for to spend a longer time in childhood learning than is the case for most species. But modern technological society demands an even longer period spent learning than we are designed for. Puberty comes too soon before learning is done and before humans are trained well enough to be able to work and support a family. It makes no sense to have puberty start as soon as it does.

[HairyHarry (imported)]

The delaying of puberty is something I thought about some twenty years ago. As the above text points out, there is a lot more to learn in our technological society, apart from the fact that improved healthcare, and nutrition, have produced ever-younger individuals who can reproduce, but do not have the emotional maturity to control themselves, and make reasoned judgements. One has only to observe the behaviour of some teenagers on alcohol binges, Only today, judges and senior police officers are railing against the proposed relaxation of licencing hours in the UK. Young women regularly put themselves sexually at great risk while intoxicated.

At the age of 13, my daughter discovered sex, and, unfortunately, a succession of inadequate older boys discovered her. It was not a happy time, and though she settled down later, it cost her several years of valuable growing-up time.

At the time, I thought that a drug therapy might be developed to delay puberty until school and college days were past. Certainly, a return to the days when puberty did not complete before the age of 18 or so, as frequently happened in the 19th century, may well be a good idea. A woman friend, however, thought that it might be better to let puberty proceed to completion, and then resume education.

[Waka Gashira (imported)]

Im not sure about my opinion in reguard to ethical issues on this subject, but looking back, I would have certainly prefered to have entered puberty later (rather than almost abnormaly early as I did) or maybe have the choice weather to or not.

[madscientist1 (imported)]

Since I started taking Depo-Provera I believe that it should be given to all males until they finish high school.

[bruce2 (imported)]

I am highly skeptical that you can just "stop" puberty and expect it to "start right up" at the determined age of 18 or whatever ... we're just now finding out that chemical castration has longterm, possibly permanent consequences ... imagine the effect of halting the entire process of puberty ... "sorry son, we thought your dick would grow, but I guess you'll always have the genitals of a 9 year old!"

I remember being 10 or 11 and I couldnt WAIT for my dick to grow like the older boys. I don't imaging many 10 year olds submitting to a medical treatment that will keep their cocks tiny for the next 8 years ...

There is a study on the internet about administering Depot Lupron to adolescents who were in treatment for sex offending. They gave relatively low doses which still allowed the boys to masterbate. Apparently it was very helpful and the boys stopped many of their troubling behaviors.

So I imagine with the rapid increase of knowlege in the area of "hormonal modulation" we'll find a way to "turn down" puberty without actually halting it ... and I imagine acceptance will be much higher when it is presented as a "helpful therapy" rather than castration ...

As for my own chemical castration, I feel like I've returned to pre-puberty, complete with a pre-pubertal cock and balls ... as I've adjusted to this feeling I am beginning to reall love it, I don't miss the confusion and frustration of sexuality at all. I love pulling off my underwear and knowing my package is basically "closed for business" for the foreseeable future.

[HairyHarry (imported)]

Im not sure about my opinion in reguard to ethical issues on this subject, but looking back, I would have certainly prefered to have entered puberty later (rather than almost abnormaly early as I did) or maybe have the choice weather to or not.

Looking back to my own puberty, it was not a particularly happy time. I would have been better off waiting until the girls I fancied had matured in more than the physical sense. But being short, poor, and ugly, did nothing for me in any sexual sense. I gave up trying, did other things, and eventually met a woman who liked me, when I was about 25.

[fox_hung (imported)]

The on/off switch for puberty should not be messed with reguardless to if boys and girls have raging hormones. That in itself is part of growing up that every human has done. Some are more worse at it than others, but its still a right. Even troubled youngsters should grow as man has since the beginning.

[Paolo]

After a few nights of thinking about it, I’ve come up with some thoughts on the delay of puberty.

First, before we even discuss genetic manipulation and/or control of said puberty gene, let’s look at the other options currently and “readily” available.

Surgical castration – not really an option in our modern world.

Even towards the end of the period of history where castrated singers were still in fashion, there was some outcry against it. Eventually, ‘fashion’ shifted away from the Castrati onstage. Routine castration is something that we just don’t DO anymore. While mainly applied to boys in removal of the testicles, this only happens nowadays due to serious injury or disease and then only as a final option. We can also compare this, theoretically, to circumcision. Insurance providers are beginning to scale back on this one, refusing to pay for the surgery on infants and only paying if the child is older and there is a valid medical reason. Other treatments for said problems are being discovered, before they get the knife out now. There’s a great deal of research on the subject, and the two opposing factions are very passionate and polarized on this issue. Can you imagine what we’d be seeing and reading if the practice of routine castration of little boys to prevent or delay puberty (with HRT later) becoming legal would cause? Besides, look at how many grown MEN we have here, TS inclined or not, who have problems in getting castrated. That’s why we’re here, on this board – it’s just not something you can run right down to the “rent-a-doc” and have done. Imagine a gang of 10 year olds at the pediatrician asking to have their balls cut off. You can’t even get your tonsils and adenoids out, even with a family history and a suffering kid. Trust me, I know…and I absolutely loved it when I got to look at my Nephew’s doctor and say “I told you so. Now say it with me, Doc, ‘You were right, I was wrong!’”. Also, add to the issue that probably 9 out of 10 boys are totally freaked out at the idea of “getting neutered”. We had this discussion once with Godson2’s little league baseball team, when one of the fielders (wearing a cup, obviously) took a line drive right in the crotch. The comments that followed about “getting your balls knocked off by a baseball” were funny, if not insightful. When the drama was over for the moment, however, it was the opportune time to survey. Only one (1) boy out of thirteen (13) figured it wouldn’t bother him a bit if he lost his balls. (His justification was “I hate kids anyway, why would I want one and then no one could hit me in the balls, right?”) One (1) other boy made the argument that if he was castrated, no one could hit him in the balls either. He’d changed his mind by the next game, though. Must have done some research of his own.

Chemical castration – While it’s available, relatively affordable, easy to do, and there are some studies to prove that it does help in certain cases, it’s primarily only used in the mainstream for cases of precocious (early onset) puberty. You can do a web search on that, perhaps add Depo Lupron to your search and see what you get. I’m sure there could be side effects in some children, too. We’re always joking about spiking the boys’ breakfast juice with some Androcur or such, but we’re only joking. I’m not even sure of the legality of that one. Add to that the fact that you’re not going to get a doctor to prescribe anything for it, at any age, just because YOU as the parent feel that puberty is coming on too soon. I went through this with my other Nephew when he was 10 and started sprouting pubic hair. I begged his doctor to examine him, and it came down to an almost knock-down-drag-out fight just to get the doctor into the kid’s pants to see what was going on. And that’s all he did was look and feel, dismissing my concerns and family statistics on when the boys hit puberty. Nephew was a couple of years early; early enough, in fact, that he skewed the curve that you could draw for our families, both sides, WAY out of whack. His argument that stalling it off with drugs was not only illegal, it was morally wrong. More on that in a bit.

Birth Defects/Accidents/Diseases – Not really an issue to be decided by the parents for said ‘delay of puberty’, in the cases of boys being born with either missing or defective testicles. In our modern world, the pediatrician would probably be screaming for HRT to begin as soon as possible. In most of the civilized world – and I use that term loosely and not judgmentally – mumps and other problems like infections are preventable and treatable and not much of a problem nowadays. I guess I’m the oddball there, in that I had mumps as a boy and infections as an adult. Also, more on this shortly.

These three subjects are all I can come up with before we start discussing genetic manipulation. Keep in mind, however, that we do not perform surgical/chemical castrations for the sake of delay of puberty in our Society nowadays, except for perhaps the ‘underground’ incidents that are more than probably illegal.

Now:

Genetic manipulation - If the gene that controls the start of puberty has truly been identified, let’s theorize and debate on its use.

For now, we don’t just haul our boys into the doctors’ minor surgery rooms for a routine castration. Circumcision is falling out of fashion, just as surgical castration did years and years ago. Whether it was castration for the sake of the voice, chronic masturbation cures, or religious piety – it’s not done. We don’t normally give our boys puberty-blocking drugs like Lupron, etc. just because we as parents feel like it. We argue over circumcision, some doctors even refuse to do it. It’s also possible, in our modern day Society, that a boy born without testicles or without working ones could get a lawyer and sue his parents to let him have HRT if they decide not to give it to him. Remember that children have successfully sued their parents for divorce (forcing the termination at the child’s request of their parental rights), and in Indiana, the child of a parental divorce has his own say at age 14 without anything of a court fight, as to which parent he wants to live with. Recall the case of Gregory K., who pulled off this landmark case. Younger, and the kid’s chances of winning his right in court to pick the parent he wants to live with are pretty damn high. I have found this out from experience of late. I rather like that law, since once again, ‘I was right…I was right…’ but I digress.

Genetic manipulation is something pretty new and not well known. It is not something we do every day, by routine, in creating children. We know that common sense in just picking a mate can decide what kind of child you will have, and people DO do it. Sperm banks even label their inventory by the traits of the man who donated it. Does the sperm labeled “brown hair-brown eyes, sickly, allergies, non-athletic, small build, but intelligent” get picked a lot? Probably not. But yet we still have children who suffer from the genetics of their parents, even when the useful genes have been identified and the problems can be prevented. Example – they discovered the genes that can cause muscular dystrophy years ago, yet dystrophic children are still being born. Why?

Here is where the morality question rears its head. It may be ugly to some, pretty to others.

Let’s hypothesize for a bit and assume that we could get away with genetically manipulating the onset of puberty. A simple blood test will signal the dreaded puberty gene. Now that we have it, what do we do with it? Let us then look at the current outcry over similar issues. Is mapping a child’s genes, or the parents’ genes, a violation? Are we playing God? Should we? Such is the hot issue of our day in various other topics such as stem cell research and all of the other neat “embryonic tricks” that science can do. But those are not the issues we need to look at in this.

We have already decided that we cannot just surgically or chemically castrate our children at our parental whim. But let’s suppose we could do so, in the near future, with genetic manipulation. Picture the scenario – a shot or two, no surgery, no recovery, no prescriptions to take every day, and you’ll have a child that won’t start puberty until, say, age 19-20. Later, even, if you don’t want your child to ‘grow up’ until after college. We have already read research where the onset of puberty interferes with school and learning, because of the distractions it can cause.

Statistically, we are seeing that puberty is setting in much earlier than it used to. In researching older choral music, we find that some boys’ voices didn’t even change until age 17 or 18, and before that was considered abnormally early. Even back in the 1980’s, in 8th grade choir, one other boy and I were considered freaks because we could sing just as high as any of the girls. In short, we are seeing kids reaching puberty much earlier than before. Look it up. There’s no point in rehashing it here.

Now, for the Queen-Mother of all questions in not only this issue, but in myriad others as well –

Who’s right to choose is it?

If genetic manipulation is something that must be done during conception, the designer-baby, per say, then the child obviously will have NO say in it when he’s a just a bundle of several cells. Think – a tiny blob of goo. If the manipulation of the puberty gene can be done in later childhood, say, age 3 or 4, or later…when he’s up and about and chattering and learning…when does the child have the cognitive ability to decide for himself? Should the parents be allowed to determine WHEN or even IF their child goes through puberty?

Many of us here would argue that we would have loved to have been castrated before puberty and never experienced the onset on full adult maleness. BUT we are saying this now as adults, in hindsight, looking back at our own childhoods with an adult mindset. We have the logic and learning that we lacked as 10-year olds, or younger. Should we even redesign sex-ed classes, so as to educate our children at a much earlier age about the pros and cons of puberty so that they may be able to decide for themselves before it can hit? Or, in the genetic manipulation ideal, to better prepare them for what’s going to happen later on in life when they DON’T hit puberty

Do we have the right to impose something like the start of puberty (or not) upon our children?

Herein lies the moral issue.

Now, let us assume that Society will accept this. Only imagine it for now. It’s probably not going to happen anytime soon.

As some of the replies to the article in question said, on the linked page above, there are issues to deal with even if it were something easy and acceptable. Let’s say the delay of puberty issue, genetically, is easy and safe and you can have it done readily. Here are some factors to think about:

Cost – There’s no free lunch, folks. Everything comes at a monetary price. We can’t even resolve the insurance / health care costs issue in the USA right now. Even if we could get the gene-issue accepted and could do it, who would be having it done? Who would pay for it? Who could? Would we then have a segment of the wealthier kids in school, not hitting puberty until age 20 or 24 or so? That would leave the lower-class (money-wise) segment starting puberty normally, breeding before the other well-to-do segment even has a chance, and filling the population in with their own kind. If teen-pregnancy is an issue to avoid and argue FOR this delay of puberty, then it must be something that everyone can access equally. Now, that sounds eugenic, yes, and I do not mean that in a derogatory or judging way in saying that low income people shouldn’t breed. That is not what I am saying. But let’s look at the kind of classes we already have in Society. The split is widening every day. When you struggle to provide a home and food, chances are you’re not going to have the means to control when your kid hits puberty, and you probably don’t care. Your main medical concerns are the usual diseases and injuries that children incur. So we end up with public schools full of “normal” or low-to-moderate income kids who hit puberty naturally, and we also have a bunch of Prep or private “upper crust” schools full of prepubescent 18 year-olds? SO who gets it done? The ones who can afford it. In short, the upper class.

Social implications – we assume here that we can have it done with no fight. Fantasy, probably. In reality, there’s bound to be an outcry to stop this research. Remember, surgical and chemical castration for the very reasons this article cited are not in common use right now. Most people would probably he horrified of it.

HRT – Will HRT then become illegal drugs, for the rebellious genetically manipulated child? Much like sex offenders on forced chemical castration today, what is to stop the child from acquiring HRT and self-medicating? There’s a nightmarish scenario to ponder. And we all know that HRT can be had with the Internet and a Visa card from overseas, and kids are very computer savvy these days.

Physical / Mental Consequences – imagine a classroom of high school seniors, hot to graduate. The boy in seat A has stubble on his face, a deep bass voice, weighs 225 lbs., is 6’3” tall, and the star quarterback of the football team. The boy behind him in seat B is 5’1” or less, weighs 95 lbs. soaking wet, and is the lead boy soprano chorister who has never had to shave yet. Yes, kids mature at different rates naturally, but this is the extreme scenario we’d be looking at if we could decide when our kid goes through puberty and grows up. Looking back, I still remember the ribbing that “J.” and I took because we were the last ones to hit the voice change phase. Not pleasant memories. Must we exacerbate that issue?

Add to this that we do not have a medical database upon which to judge toying with this gene. What if this genetic delay of puberty, even though there is no genital damage, presented problems in later life? “Sorry son, you’re going to be sexually helpless and infertile for life, seeing as how we messed up your genes when you were conceived.” So not only is Junior behind some of his peers, who were left alone and developed normally, he’s now condemned to life as a eunuch, or a slave to HRT. It could happen. We don’t know, because we’re not manipulating the puberty gene in our kids right now. Mice in the lab just don’t get it in reality. We’re talking about the lives of children here. We have no data to confirm, that in humans, tampering with the puberty gene will only cause puberty to be delayed. It could, and probably will, go wrong. Can we experiment upon a control group then? Is that moral?

Add to that what it’s going to do to the child’s mind. How is little Tommy going to take it when his best friends all hit puberty, he doesn’t, and they ditch him because he’s still a little kid in their eyes. They’re becoming men, Tommy isn’t. That’s sure to cause some psychological issues. Also, is Tommy, and boys like him, going to be targets for bullies? Are they to become their own social clique, to be laughed at by the “real boys” who are pubescent? “Let ‘em stay in choir or the library where they belong.” Lovely thought. Enough of this goes on already without encouraging more of it. Sample any similarly-aged gang of boys and girls, and you’ll find disparity all across the board, widely. Why increase that?

Also, what does it do to the structure of organized youth sports and other events in social settings? Take for example, age based sports. I cite this because I know about it. Nephew2 missed the baseball birthday rule by 3 days, on age limits. He was forced onto the next level team, which consisted of boys who could shave, drive, make babies, etc. … men, in fact, for all intents and purposes. He and his friend ‘T.’ were the smallest two in the league, joked about, laughed at, to the point where both of them wanted to quit. The emotional support required was unbelievable. Meanwhile, the 10-12 year old teams had boys playing, next field over, that were bigger and more talented than our two “old” boys forced up a level. Imagine increasing THIS problem. Someone needs to rewrite THOSE rules, other guidelines, and not only in youth sports leagues if we can manipulate the start of puberty someday. So, what will we have, “The Castrati League”? “The No-T League”, “The Natural Puberty-League”…whatever.

And while we’re thinking along those lines, can you imagine being the genetically manipulated kid who has to shower or even dress out with other boys who are ‘gorillas’ compared to himself? I suppose we can say the say would apply to girls, as well. Ah, the fond memories from Scout Camp, being the little guy with no body hair and high voice and a penis that seemed like an acorn compared to the garden hoses that other boys (some even younger) had. Humiliating? It was for me. It was for a few of my friends, which I will repeat, formed up a separate social group from the other, more developed boys. Age regardless also.

In essence, we would be creating a new class of child. Call it “The Late Bloomer Breed” if you like.

Now let’s compare this to Gay, Lesbian, Bi, and Trans youth. Let’s think about the static that they take, when they are “out” or known about. I suppose we’d be throwing the ‘E is for eunuch’ group in with them as well. As Dr. Richard Wassersug once commented, perhaps the GLBT acronym needs a vowel in there somewhere. How about E for eunuch? And that’s essentially what we’d have – a genetic eunuch class, albeit one that’s on a genetic timer, so to speak. Society already conditions us to hate and/or fear that which is not “normal”, that which does not fit into the polarized roles of MALE and FEMALE. Once you’re labeled, let’s take ‘gay’ for example, you’re a target. Even if the evidence is only in rumor and hearsay or jokes gone wild. However, when you’re 16 or so and still built like a 10 year old, then you’re REALLY going to be a target. And would the time-delay puberty gang be in the majority? I seriously doubt it.

I ask again, do we have the right to do this?

Should we do this, based upon the reasons presented?

What ARE the valid reasons, anyway? Everyone will see different reasons, too. We could list them all and go on and on.

Are we about to create more problems than we solve with genetic manipulation of puberty?

You could also think about it this way – it’s sort of like taking the long way around or getting the proverbial cart before the horse. If Society is to accept this genetic timing of puberty, then why not just go the chemical (or surgical route, if we’re hypothesizing – where could this lead?) where we already have some research and medical reference?

Debate and comments welcome.

[n3rf (imported)]

Paulo, You write so well, I get envious. The question - do we not already 'manipulate' these by the food supply nowadays with hormones given in the meat and milk and other ?? products to produce more of it ?? So what do You say - it is already goings on - intentionally or not ?? Regards Johan N3RF