Some men carry 'commitment-phobia' gene

Forget the prenup. Couples pondering whether to tie the knot should proceed straight to gene testing.

Well, that's one conclusion you can draw from a study in this week's Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. Researchers at the Karolinksa Institute in Sweden examined a gene allele 334 in people enrolled in the Twin and Offspring Study in Sweden. This gene can affect the production of a hormone called vasopressin, which has been shown to influence monogamy in animals. They found that men who had two copies of allele 334 were twice as likely to have had a marital or relationship crisis in the last year compared with those who lacked the gene variant.

These men seemed less able to bond with their partners, says lead author Hasse Walum, a postgraduate student in medical epidemiology and biostatistics. "Women married to men who carry one or two copies of allele 334 were, on average, less satisfied with their relationships than women married to men who didn't carry this allele.

But, men, if you're tempted to use genes as an excuse for bad behavior, forget about it. Walum notes that though the study may shed some light on the genetic underpinnings of human bonding, "there are, of course, many reasons why a person might have relationship problems."

Walum's research is aimed at improving the understanding of vasopressin and its role in disorders such as autism and social phobia.

-- Shari Roan

Photo: Karolinska Institute researcher Hasse Walum. Credit: Sebastian Dahlgren, courtesy of Karolinska Institute.

Comments

[Jay Arr]

Oh, I see. Every time I get in the mood my wife has a 334 sneezing attack and rolls over with no interest. I can only hand it to the mood.

[edwards]

Here’s another interesting aspect of the new gene findings. Brits call it The Divorce Gene, but in the U.S. it’s the Bonding Gene or the Monogamy Gene. How did that happen? You can actually buy www.TheDivorceGene.com, www.BondingGene.com and www.MonogamyGene.com and turn them into info sites or expressions of glee or dismay, depending on your take on this odd research. Are Brits more cynical than Yanks???

[Pedro Cruz]

Now we know that cads, bounders, and profligate husbands are not to blame for their behavior, but homosexuality is "learned."

[irspariah]

Why does all this buzz about this gene and that gene make me think politically driven "research"?

[Virginia]

Um interesting. I would assume that women may carry this gene as well. I wonder if these female carriers of the gene would commitment phobic also?

[rablib]

So, were the women tested too? If not, why not?

I have seen many women that were commitment phobic. It seems to me that if men carry this gene, so would women in equal numbers, so it would be a HUMAN trait, not just a male trait.

Why is it that the idea that men are not going to stay faithful is so often pushed? Are they just trying to make excuses for the men, or are they trying to make the women nervous, or make the men think that women will be faithful even if the men aren't, or something else?

It's rather confusing, the way things are worded sometimes. If it's in the genes, it's a trait that is likely to be in both sexes, not just one.

[PepsiJuror]

I'm a male and this is about the stupidest things I've ever heard. What exactly is the gene you vague charlatans? For god's sake, what else are you going to find out is wrong with the human race physically?

If someone is shy, that's their personality or just maybe they've committed acts in their past their ashamed of.

There is not anything wrong with someone (man or woman) who is unable to commit except their fickleness. Why does everything these days have to be gene or chemical problem versus the basic personality or perhaps (in this case) a manifestation of perhaps acts committed against the opposite sex which they are not proud of.

Where is the human factor? People are people, not a bunch of genes and chemicals.

Headline after headline tries to convince man that he is a puddle of matter, and this matter drives him exclusively.

Of course, physical derangement within the body can adversely affect a person (dehydration, lack of vitamins and minerals, etc), but for god's sake, quit overlooking the individual him/herself.

Stop looking for what wrong and look at what's right. We're human, and for that, - THANK YOU

[LAAG]

This "research" is what happens when we run around looking for the "gay" gene. It is an example of what happens when political correctness (PC) runs amuck and affects true science. It is just as bad as the "intelligent design" people selling their line of "science". Stop looking to genes and DNA as the sole reason for all human behavior. Again this is like the psychiatry associations saying all conditions are mental "illnesses". PC.. In most cases it is "nature plus nurture"