[r0ze-at-hn]

There has been some research mostly into gay men. But honestly the transgender data set is much richer. At the end of the day it is a minority that is being politicized so not exactly being investigated, but once you figure it out it is like shooting fish in a barrel there is so much easy research. Before this it was (simplifying but not) brain scans for the most part. It was mostly unknown.

[calf]

I know of Sapolsky saying what a decade ago that LGBT brain structures are, like, flipped wrt. heterosexual people. But I thought the scientific consensus has been that there is no easy way to find a gay gene(s), so your claim of finding such low-hanging fruit seems to fly in the face of that. I'm already imagining that academic scientists would be ready to dismiss your work outright.

[Izkata]

Consensus is that there is no single "flip this and you're gay" gene, but we've known for decades there is a genetic component because of twin studies. Fits right up with what this person says they've found.

[r0ze-at-hn]

If you know one that wants to talk I am happy to. In the meantime it is being put to practical use today.

[calf]

Why didn't the medical news journal hook you up with a professor? They could've taken a look at your work. Like, how do you know your scripts isn't just doing pseudoscience and based on a superficial understanding of all those papers, especially if this is just a hobby project. There could be blind spots.

[r0ze-at-hn]

I am already working with a doctor and have talked with those in academia. They find it neat, but are not going to jump projects, they already have their area of study that they are working to publishing something on, not this.

There absolutely could be blind spots and been iterating on it all year each time the tweaks are smaller, but the core idea has not changed, but simply accumulated more and more evidence.