Is PETA involved in this?

PETA’s big lie:

Just so you know. The false suggestion that the research is aimed at curing homosexuality was made by PETA. Yes, the animal rights group.

Of course PETA has their own motives for receiving press on this story. In fact, PETA heavily edited quotes by the researchers and even fabricated information to generate press coverage. Many weeks ago, a writer in the states looked into PETA false claims. Here’s what he found:

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2006/09/peta_crosses_th.html

OSU and OHSU’s Big Embarrassment

Thank you for covering this important issue. Jim Newman―the PR rep for Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU)―disregards criticism of the unscientific and unethical gay sheep experiments because of nothing more substantial than the fact that it was PETA who brought it to light. PETA sent a detailed seven-page letter to OHSU's counterpart, Oregon State University, with critiques authored by scientific experts and a prominent sexuality research society. Both universities have failed to address the key points that were raised in the letter.

OSU and OHSU certainly wish that PETA had never spoken out so that the experimenters could quietly continue their “research,” which embodies the needless slaughter of animals, an affront to human dignity, and a colossal waste of precious taxpayer funds.

To read PETA’s letter to OSU in its entirety, you can visit:
http://www.stopanimaltests.com/pdfs/LetterToOregonStateUniversitySeptember202006.pdf.

Thanks Shalin for commenting - it gives us a chance to further demonstate how PETA made up false claims of bigotry and homophobia just to get in the press.

However, before giving that information, I should note that PETA's false claims come 4 years after the research was initially announced by the universities and the real facts were reported internationally. Here's that initial press release that pretty much debunks your claim that the researchers were are trying to work in secret as you claim http://www.ohsu.edu/unparchive/2002/110402sheep.html

I should also direct everyone to a new posting about the Sunday Times article which has now become the source of wild conspiracy theories. I am pleased that a writer has thoroughly investigated the article. As he reports, the Sunday Times article is filled with major errors and false claims. His analysis also raises important questions about the timing of the article which comes almost five years after the research was actually conducted.

Here’s a link to that analysis that anyone who is interested in this topic should read:

A wolf in gay sheep's clothing: Corruption at the London Times
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/01/a_wolf_in_gay_s.html

As for how PETA the false claim up:

Here's a heavily edited quote Shalin likes to post to try and "prove" it's false claims.

"Stormshak has publicly stated that '[i]f people want to extrapolate [to humans the conclusions that he reaches with regard to altering sheep’s sexual orientations], that’s up to them.' Stormshak’s cavalier attitude shows that he places responsibility for the implications of his work on those who want to apply his conclusions to humans."

Now, here's a link to the full article in the OSU Barometer:
http://barometer.orst.edu/media/storage/paper854/news/2002/11/08/News/Osu-Professor.Studies.Sexual.Preference.In.Sheep-2294650.shtml?norewrite200611131817&sourcedomain=barometer.orst.edu

If you read the entire article, and not the info taken out of context, the message is very clear. The researchers are not extrapolating their research to humans, nor are they suggesting anyone should. It also clearly demonstrates your misuse of select quotes.

"The idea of the hormone treatment being forced on unwilling adult subjects or even minors, provokes a legitimate debate; the sort of debate that a sane and just society should be able to resolve using existing institutions such as its legislature or courts, and public debate."

Unless of corse the decision to force such treatment is made by a woman....for it is after all a womans *right* to choose. And any sort of debate should be shouted down as religious nonsense. Right?

For my part I agree with your statement, but there's a pretty large population out there that's not on the same page.