Same-sex sexual behaviour among mammals is widely observed, yet seldomly reported: Evidence from an online expert survey.

Same-sex sexual behaviour (SSSB) occurs in most animal clades, but published reports are largely concentrated in a few taxa. Thus, there remains a paucity of published reports for most mammalian species. We conducted a cross-sectional expert survey to better understand the underlying reasons for the lack of publications on this topic. Most respondents researched Primates (83.6%, N = 61), while the rest studied Carnivora (6.9%, N = 5), Rodentia (4.1%, N = 3), Artiodactyla (2.7%, N = 2), and Proboscidea (2.7%, N = 2). Most respondents (76.7%, N = 56) had observed SSSB in their study species, but only 48.2% (N = 27) collected data on SSSB, and few (18.5%, N = 5) had published papers on SSSB. Of the unique species identified as engaging in SSSB in the survey, 38.6% (N = 17) have no existing reports of SSSB to the knowledge of the authors. In both the survey questions and freeform responses, most respondents indicated that their lack of data collection or publication on SSSB was because the behaviours were rare, or because it was not a research priority of their lab. No respondents reported discomfort or sociopolitical concerns at their university or field site as a reason for why they did not collect data or publish on SSSB. Multiple logistic regressions were performed to assess whether taxa studied, education level, or identification within the LGBTQ+ community predicted observing, collecting data on, or publishing on SSSB, but none of these variables were significant predictors. These results provide preliminary evidence that SSSB occurs more frequently than what is available in the published record and suggest that this may be due to a publishing bias against anecdotal evidence.

Queering food security research: A critical analysis of 2SLGBTQ+ People's experiences of food insecurity in Toronto during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Household food insecurity (HFI), stress, isolation, and discrimination are major determinants of health that disproportionately affect 2SLGBTQ + people. The COVID-19 pandemic potentially exacerbated these inequities. This study investigates HFI rates among 2SLGBTQ + adults living in diverse household conditions during the pandemic and explores the idea that heteronormative conceptions of the "household" may affect measurement of HFI. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey responses were collected from 437 self-identified 2SLGBTQ + people from Toronto, Canada between March and July 2021. The survey measured HFI, sexual/gender identities, socio-demographic factors, household composition, and psycho-social stress/distress. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess variation in odds of marginal, moderate, and severe HFI in relation to sexual/gender identities, household composition, psycho-social distress, and socio-demographic covariates. RESULTS: Forty-two percent of respondents reported some level of HFI, with severe HFI higher among respondents who were bisexual, transgender/gender diverse, and/or assigned-female-at-birth. Living alone was associated with decreased odds of reporting marginal HFI but increased odds of moderate or severe HFI compared to living with a partner, family, or roommates; living with children was associated with decreased odds of both marginal and severe HFI. One indicator of psycho-social distress (perceived discrimination) was associated with higher odds of all levels of HFI, while the other (isolation) was associated with decreased odds of marginal HFI. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the high prevalence of HFI linked with discrimination among 2SLGBTQ + individuals during the pandemic. The complicated results regarding household composition and social isolation may suggest a need to revise definitions of the household when measuring, monitoring, and seeking to mitigate HFI in 2SLGBTQ + communities.

Sexual minority status is associated with earlier recalled age of menarche: Evidence from the 2005-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Menarcheal timing is associated with growth, development, health, wellbeing, and reproduction across the lifespan. Although sexual orientation is a known correlate of health and developmental inequities, relatively little evolutionarily framed research has investigated sexual orientation-based variation in maturational timing. To improve our understanding of menarcheal timing among sexual minority (SM) people, we use a biocultural-evolutionary life history lens that takes into account the stresses of minoritization to examine the relationship between sexual orientation and self-reported age at menarche in a sample of American adults. METHODS: Using the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), a large, nationally representative dataset (n = 9757), we fit multiple logistic regression models and survival curves to evaluate associations between sexual orientation, indicators of somatic and material resources during adolescence (e.g., education, citizenship, upper arm length), and self-reported menarche. RESULTS: SM respondents were more likely to report earlier (by 4-5 months) ages of menarche (p < .001). Post-hoc tests revealed that these differences were driven by bisexual (p < .001) and same-sex experienced (p < .001) relative to heterosexual and lesbian/gay respondents. Earlier menarcheal timing among SM respondents persisted after adjusting for socio-demographic factors and proxies of developmental conditions. DISCUSSION: Our findings reveal that SM status is associated with earlier ages of menarche, an important social and reproductive milestone. We argue that uniting life history theory with the minority stress hypothesis better explains differences in menarcheal timing by sexual orientation than previous paradigms. Investigators should attend to sexual orientation-based variation in maturational timing using holistic, inclusive approaches.

Sexual orientation-based disparities in food security among adults in the United States: results from the 2003-2016 NHANES.

BACKGROUND: Access to sufficient, safe, culturally appropriate, and nutritious food is essential for maintaining both physical and mental health. Despite a growing body of evidence suggesting that sexual minority (SM) people experience significant disparities in socioeconomic and material resource security, there remains a paucity of empirical studies examining the prevalence of food insecurity among SM people relative to their heterosexual peers. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of adult and household food insecurity across sexual orientation groups in the United States after adjusting for multiple covariates. METHODS: We combined 7 cycles of US NHANES, 2003-2016 (N = 21,300) to examine sexual orientation-based disparities in adult food security among lesbian/gay (n = 373), bisexual (n = 606), same-sex experienced (SSE, n = 693), other sexual minorities (OSMs, n = 88), and heterosexual (n = 19,540) people. Food (in)security was measured using the US Food Security Survey Module and categorized as secure, marginally insecure, moderately insecure, and severely insecure. RESULTS: Severe adult food insecurity was higher among bisexuals (17.16%; 95% CI: 14.36, 20.38), SSE (13.71%; 95% CI: 11.34, 16.48), OSMs (12.50%; 95% CI: 7.04, 21.24), and lesbians/gays (13.14%; 95% CI: 10.07, 16.97) compared with heterosexuals (8.23%; 95% CI: 7.85, 8.62). Multivariable multinomial logistic regression analysis adjusting for gender, race/ethnicity, age, citizenship, education, household size, income, cycle year, emergency food use, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participation showed that bisexuals, OSMs, SSE, and lesbians/gays were more likely to experience moderate to severe food insecurity compared with heterosexuals. CONCLUSIONS: SM people are significantly more likely to experience increased likelihood of food insecurity relative to their heterosexual peers.

Biocultural approaches to transgender and gender diverse experience and health: Integrating biomarkers and advancing gender/sex research.

Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people are increasingly visible in U.S. communities and in national media. With this increased visibility, access to gender affirming healthcare is also on the rise, particularly for urban youth. Political backlash and entrenchment in a gender binary, however, continue to marginalize TGD people, increasing risk for health disparities. The 2016 National Institute of Health recognition of sexual and gender minority people as a health disparities population increases available funding for much-needed research. In this article, we speak to the need for a biocultural human biology of gender/sex diversity by delineating factors that influence physiological functioning, mental health, and physical health of TGD people. We propose that many of these factors can best be investigated with minimally invasively collected biomarker samples (MICBS) and discuss how to integrate MICBS into research inclusive of TGD people. Research use of MICBS among TGD people remains limited, and wider use could enable essential biological and health data to be collected from a population often excluded from research. We provide a broad overview of terminology and current literature, point to key research questions, and address potential challenges researchers might face when aiming to integrate MCIBS in research inclusive of transgender and gender diverse people. We argue that, when used effectively, MICBS can enhance human biologists' ability to empirically measure physiology and health-related outcomes and enable more accurate identification of pathways linking human experience, embodiment, and health.

Sexual orientation-based disparities in bone health: Evidence of reduced bone mineral density and mineral content among sexual minority men but not women in multiple NHANES waves.

INTRODUCTION: Sexual minority (SM) people experience significant stress associated with stigma, contributing to a higher rate of adverse health outcomes. Several known factors (eg, smoking) elevate risk of poor bone health, but to date little research has examined disparities in bone health among SM people. To address this, we analyzed sexual orientation differences in an available bone mineral density (BMD) cross-sectional dataset assessed via dual X-ray absorptiometry. METHODS: We combined the 2007 to 2008, 2009 to 2010, and 2013 to 2014 cycles of US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to examine sexual orientation-based differences in z-scored BMD in the proximal femur (greater trochanter and intertrochanter locations), bone mineral content (BMC) in the femur and spine, and osteoporosis risk among Lesbian/Gay (n = 53), Bisexual (n = 97), Same-Sex Experienced (n = 103), and Heterosexual (n = 2990) adults. RESULTS: Sexual orientation-based disparities in bone mass were observed across all anatomical sites. This effect was due to differences between heterosexual and gay men and persisted in linear regressions after adjusting for risk factors. We found differences in femoral and femoral neck BMC in heterosexual and gay men (P = .02) and in femoral, femoral neck and spinal BMC between heterosexual and bisexual women (P = .05). Sexual orientation remained significant in BMC regressions. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that SM men but not women are at greater risk for poor bone health relative to heterosexuals and this disparity is independent of the lifestyle and psychosocial risks included in our models.