If you read the report she cites you will find that 1.5 out of the 1.728 number she cites comes from "late-onset CAH" and that number comes from a single study which has been frequently cited but never confirmed by another investigation. That study assumes, as far as I can see, that a gene the researchers believe to be associated with "late-onset CAH" actually causes the disorder to be expressed in all who exhibit the gene and that their population estimates are correct.
Therefore I say again that the number is high and, even if it wasn't, that it does not represent a continuum implying non-dimorphism because every number they cite is associated with a serious, identifiable disorder.
boddi
On 11/19/05, Dennis Claxton <ddclaxton at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >The number of births you cite is very high and does not conform to any
> >studies that I know of.
>
>
>
> Except for the one Yoshie cited, which surveys over fifty years of medical
> literature on the subject.
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>