As with Wilde Lettuce's response to the scientific argument on homosexuality, I would like to question Dr HT Tan's motives in writing his letter (and hopefully, let Tan see the actions of his letter).

As a scientific person, let me first ask you if one can conclude that the cause of homosexuality is caused by the environment, or, to put it another way, is not inborn/innate? As a scientist, Tan should be familiar with the philosophy of science and Popper's falsification theory at the heart of 'real' science, or to put it simply, (quote from Professor of Biology, Paul Grobstein), science is a process of perpetually 'getting it less wrong'.

Thus, the issue of 'nature vs nurture' gets boring after a while. Most scientists generally agree that the cause of human behaviour is an interplay between genes and environment. Humans do not exist in a vacuum. To make generalisations between scientific studies and human behaviour always involves a great leap of faith and marketable story telling.

Any scientific discourse on 'nature vs nurture' as a cause for social behaviour ultimately serves as a tentative truth, or more dangerously, ammunition for the perpetuation of bigotry. Tan's letter is a good example of a socially irresponsible piece on the 'gay gene' and homosexuality.

If he claims to be objective, why not examine also the possibility of homosexuality not being a matter of choice? Tan's approach is reminiscent of eugenics when Nazis used science to justify mass killings of people belonging to the 'inferior groups'.

Such bigotry still exists these days, with some using science as 'evidence' for some race being born more intelligent or superior than others, perpetuating racist agendas. It is disconcerting that many scientists who are regarded as 'purveyors of the truth' in this day and age use science to advance their own prejudices or fail to acknowledge the effect of politics and belief on the everyday science they speak.

I hope Tan, and all who identify themselves as scientists, consider the social implications of their actions when you say or do anything in the name of science. To be clear, I am not asking scientists to distort the 'truth', but rather, not to be selective in the 'facts' they wish to point out.

Even if environment is the cause of homosexuality, one cannot say that homosexuality is a matter of choice. What is more important for all in this time is to tackle the issue of discrimination. Tan's one-sided article not only failed to do that, but is just the sort of material that will be used by bigots as ammunition for their own prejudice.

As much as I love the process of science, having devoted a part of my life towards experimental science, I am also highly aware of how science can be used in an irresponsible manner. While it is important to understand and use science from an underlying belief that it might lead to truth, it is also important to emphasis and realise that politics and prejudice influence the direction of science.

Hence, society would certainly benefit with more responsible and socially-conscious scientists rather than those who selectively speak of scientific studies for no purpose other than to feed a prejudice.