The Merck Manual

[iampunha]

In a recent conversation (still going) with an acquaintance of mine, the guy cited the Merck Manual for statistics and facts about homosexuality and pedophilia. I looked at these numbers and found them laughable, and found the definitions incomplete.

Is there a website or book that goes into detail about the methods by which the various people went about gathering the data in the manual? And is there, furthermore, an online site where the text of the DMS-IV is available free-of-charge? This manual, in its description of pedophilia, makes no mention of female pedophiles and claims elsewhere that most homosexuals are incapable of a long-term relationship. I find the former evidence of the book’s . . . well, respectability (low), and the latter downright insulting when combined with the lack of explanation of research methods.

So what’s the deal?

[Zenster]

Sounds like the traditional hidebound crap from the middle of last century. I’d expect much better of such a well distributed reference.

[BobT]

The current Merck Manual is available on-line.

It has no references at all to pedophilia.

Here is what it says about homosexuality.

About 4 to 5% of the population are preferentially homosexual for their entire lives. Since 1973, the American Psychiatric Association has not considered homosexuality a disorder. Like heterosexuality, homosexuality results from complex biologic and environmental factors leading to an almost inevitable preference in the selection of a sexual partner. For most, it is not a matter of choice. Nevertheless, many people, including physicians, regard homosexuality as immoral and sinful, and a physician’s intense aversion to homosexuality (homophobia) may interfere with appropriate care of homosexuals

You can read the whole Merck Manual online at http://www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual/

I don’t believe that the DSM-IV is available for free online. You should be able to find it at most public libraries however.

[KarlGauss]

*Originally posted by BobT *
**
It has no references at all to pedophilia.

**

What about this (half way down)?

[BobT]

I suppose I would have come up with that article if I had spelled the word “pedophilia” correctly in using the search engine.

[iampunha]

Bumping this off page 2.