Jump to content
  • Welcome to the TransPulse Forums!

    We offer a safe, inclusive community for transgender and gender non-conforming folks, as well as their loved ones, to find support and information.  Join today!

Transition with gene therapy?


Kaltia_Atlas

Recommended Posts

So I have been doing some research and have been asking some questions and I have decided to share with y'all what I have uncovered and get your opinions. PLEASE feel free to ask questions, add comments or share any other knowledge of the topic.

 

This topic came to mind when I was speaking with my therapist. One of the major factors to me being transgender is the untold depths of desire to conceive, carry and birth a child. For that matter, just to experience pierods! Anything to put me in the woman category I have dreamed of being in my whole life. So talking with my therapist, we decided some research into UTx and its subsequent surgeries was in order. UTx is uterine transplant btw. Which boils down to, being capable of producing your own estrogen without further HRT. *thats the ultimate goal*. But to achieve this goal, so many walls need to be overcome. 

 

So lets start with the first wall in our way. Bottom surgery. For MtF transgender, the penis is essentially inverted to create a neovagina. *there is more too it than that, however that is the basics*. But once the neovagina is created, the body doesn't really control the internals of the vagina. Not if there were a uterus or the other largely necessary components to control Ph balance and other womanly things I dont fully understand. Anyhow, the penis is reused to create the vagina, but the testicles are removed. Thus removing the majority of testosterone production. Without the hormone producing organ in the body, HRT is a requirement for life. 

 

That brings up the next wall. What if we could produce our own hormones and allow our own bodies to do all the work? Not possible? Blah. Every human being holds two genetic markers in their body. Foxl2 and Dmrt1. Foxl2 is the gene known for activating ovaries and creating estrogen. Dmrt1 is know for activating testicles and creating testosterone. Both are there, however only one is active. So what happens when the sctive one is turned off? The other turns on... A study with mice shows that a full grown male mouse with the Dmrt1 gene deactivated, will start to produce estrogen and other ovarian characteristics from the testicles. The same for a full grown female mouse vice versa. They do not change physical sex in any way. Just the chemical reactions of the genes changing what product comes from what is already there. 

 

Now for my proposal and questions. When an MtF transgender undergoes HRT and bottom surgery, would it be possible to do a UTx, along with gene therapy to activate Foxl2, to allow the MtF to create their own hormones? And eventually, conceive, carry and birth a child? Do some research and let me know what you think. I hope this could be possible in the near future...

 

If only I went to school for biology and research... Then maybe I could do these studies during my own transition.

 

Hugz ❤️

Kali

Link to comment

This is something I've thought of since puberty. I've long since wished I could "copy and paste" the whole ovary, uterus, vagina system into my body, cause not being able to bear children is really the sole source of my gender dysphoria comes from. 

 

I'm not sure how gene therapy would play into it, but i know it's doable. 

 

https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1471-0528.15438

Link to comment

Ive read that article. One of the biggest issues with doing a UTx in trans women is the transferance of the vaginal tissues. Some of the tissue is not viable from living donors. And the neovagina from the penile tissue has not been verified successful. 

 

Gene therapy would come into play by deactivating Dmrt1 and allowing Foxl2 to activate to fill in those gaps that the neovagina cannot do on its own. Also, it would help to "reform" the vaginal area and help it heal into what the front/bottom area should be after surgery.

 

At the least, that is what ive gathered from my research

Link to comment

I've read that a uterine transplant costs $200,000. I've also heard that it is necessary to take immune suppressing drugs after having the transplant (which makes the patient more vulnerable to disease including some cancers), and the uterus will have to be removed once pregnancy is finished so that immune suppression drugs are no longer needed.

 

This article from 2012 https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/organ-transplants-without-life-long-drugs says "Patients must also take immunosuppressive drugs for the rest of their lives", though it also discusses an experimental technique to train the immune system to tolerate the new organ.

 

This article https://theconversation.com/stem-cells-could-regenerate-organs-but-only-if-the-body-wont-reject-them-122017 says that even tissues generated by a patient's own stem cells get rejected.

 

I would like to receive a uterine transplant, but in addition to cost and the immune suppressing drugs, I am concerned about how safe it is. Since a very small number of uterine transplants have been done (and probably none on transgender women), there is very little data.

Link to comment

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6492192/

This article talks about the trials being done in Sweden. They have completed over 42 successful transplants and of those, 12 resulted in live births to date. There has been 5 successful transplants done in the US and 1 has resulted in a live birth, while several others are waiting for IVF. 

 

The science and technology is there. It is entirely possible to do UTx for women who are born unable to give birth. Not all trials include immunosuppressive drugs. Which is why I bring into question the possibility of using gene therapy for an MtF transgender woman. Since our gene Foxl2 is not active, would activating this gene allow for the UTx to be more successful? would it allow for the neovagina to grow and produce the needed Ph balance in the vaginal canal? 

 

With all of that said, how many trans women would line up for the chance to be able to give birth? I know when i start talking to my endo, i will see if she knows of any trials or any research being done in this field, and if not, then maybe reaching out to groups to see if they would be willing to start trials, or to include a trans woman in a current trial. 

Link to comment

If given access to the necessary information and specialists, i would definitely volunteer for the procedure.  Risks be darned. Of course, it's pretty easy to say that now, but still...it's been my one most visceral desire. 

Link to comment

I have considered this. Particularly the gene manipulation. Without having read too much into it, I imagine performing targetted gene alteration is complex and far from perfected. Most likely as the science is now, it is unachievable without negatively altering an undesirable part of the sequence, as such causing a mutation in it. But in theory it's possible. Someday, we may have the ability to alter our endogenous endocrine profile...

Link to comment

The therapy in interested in only refers to altering a single gene. Deactivating Dmrt1. So in theory, it should be as simple as a single regimine of the therapy to alter the active state of Dmrt1 in the entire body. 

 

This of course would require already having had the full bottom surgery and any other necessary surgeries to consider the body female. The final surgery which should be when the gene therapy would br used, would have to be the Its.

 

As far as gene alteration, there are more than 50 different gene therapies ACTIVE and in use today. The knowledge is there. I want to push it further.

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Kaltia_Atlas said:

A study with mice shows that a full grown male mouse with the Dmrt1 gene deactivated, will start to produce estrogen and other ovarian characteristics from the testicles. The same for a full grown female mouse vice versa. They do not change physical sex in any way. Just the chemical reactions of the genes changing what product comes from what is already there.

 

2 hours ago, Kaltia_Atlas said:

The therapy in interested in only refers to altering a single gene. Deactivating Dmrt1. So in theory, it should be as simple as a single regimine of the therapy to alter the active state of Dmrt1 in the entire body. 

 

This of course would require already having had the full bottom surgery and any other necessary surgeries to consider the body female. The final surgery which should be when the gene therapy would br used, would have to be the Its.

 

As far as gene alteration, there are more than 50 different gene therapies ACTIVE and in use today. The knowledge is there. I want to push it further.

If altering the gene causes the testicles to produce estrogen, how would it work on someone with full bottom surgery? With full bottom surgery, the testicles are removed.

Link to comment

Thats where the UTx would be required. If the organ that produces hormones is available, the active gene uses it to prodice its intended hormone. Wether it be testes or ovaries, the gene is what decides which hormone to produce. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Kaltia_Atlas said:

Thats where the UTx would be required. If the organ that produces hormones is available, the active gene uses it to prodice its intended hormone. Wether it be testes or ovaries, the gene is what decides which hormone to produce. 

Does the uterus produce hormones or does UTx include an ovarian transplant?

 

Link to comment

The UTx is the whole reproduction system. Uterus, ovaries, all the way to the vaginal canal *at least what can be used from a donor*

 

The intention of a UTx is for women who are unable to produce eggs. Their system for what ever reason does not function properly. This transplant allows them to be capable to become pregnant again/to begin with.

Link to comment

So... Doing a little more research, its possible the UTx is just the uterus. I'm wondering if there is a further surgery that would include ovaries. A complete transplant. Not totally sure. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Kaltia_Atlas said:

So... Doing a little more research, its possible the UTx is just the uterus. I'm wondering if there is a further surgery that would include ovaries. A complete transplant. Not totally sure. 

I've heard it is easier to transplant only the uterus than to transplant the entire reproductive system. On Wikipedia it says, "Ovary transplantation, giving rise to successful pregnancies, will result in children who will have the genetic inheritance of the organ donor and not the recipient; it has so far only been carried out on identical twins." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transplantable_organs_and_tissues#Ovary It also says Lili Elbe had an ovary transplant (and later died from surgical complications). When it says it has only been done in identical twins, I don't know if that means that ovary transplants that resulted in pregnancy have only been done in identical twins, or if any ovarian transplant (whether it results in pregnancy or not) where the patient survived has only been done on identical twins.

Link to comment

I'll be asking my endo about it when I have my first appointment

Link to comment
  • 3 months later...

Oh how I dream about being able to get pregnant and carry a baby full term and finally give birth. It's been a dream of mine to be a biological mother, but I don't think medical science is at the point were this can be done safely. The moment it is, sign me up. God I wish it was.

Link to comment

@HollyNoel I completely agree! After doing more research, it is medically safe, but VERY complicated, and extremely expensive. I dont see it being possible in my life time, but I hope that the next life gives me this ability. :)

Link to comment

I'm with you Elizabeth. I really want to be a biologic mother even if it means going through the pain of natural child birth. Lol

Link to comment

This all sounds amazing. I have a pregnant coworker and just today I was noticing how much I so very envied her condition, and so just this evening the idea of transfemale pregnancy (or...getting to be pregnant myself) has been on my mind. The idea that someday in the foreseeable future, transwomen could have things like a self-sustaining vagina (instead of a self-closing one) and a new life growing inside their own body...makes me wish I was younger, with a better chance of living to reach it!!!

Link to comment

The male pelvis is too narrow for childbirth so most transwomen would have to have a C-section when the time comes that transwomen can receive uterine transplants. I don't know how much variation there is in pelvic widths, so maybe there are some transwomen lucky enough to have a wide pelvis. Also, if male puberty is blocked in a transwoman before it has a chance to start and female puberty is started (with HRT) then maybe they would develop a more female pelvis, but I'm not sure.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 192 Guests (See full list)

    • MaeBe
    • SwiftySpeedy
    • Abigail Genevieve
    • Ashley0616
    • SamC
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      80.7k
    • Total Posts
      768.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      12,025
    • Most Online
      8,356

    JamesyGreen
    Newest Member
    JamesyGreen
    Joined
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Alscully
      Alscully
      (35 years old)
    2. floruisse
      floruisse
      (40 years old)
    3. Jasmine25
      Jasmine25
      (22 years old)
    4. Trev0rK
      Trev0rK
      (26 years old)
  • Posts

    • missyjo
      I've no desire to present androgynous..nothing wrong with it but I am a girl n wish to present as a girl. shrugs, if androgynous works fir others good. always happy someone finds a solution or happiness    today black jeans  black wedges..purple camisole under white n black polka dot blouse half open   soft smile to all 
    • MaeBe
      I have read some of it, mostly in areas specifically targeted at the LGBTQ+ peoples.   You also have to take into account what and who is behind the words, not just the words themselves. Together that creates context, right? Let's take some examples, under the Department of Health & Human Services section:   "Radical actors inside and outside government are promoting harmful identity politics that replaces biological sex with subjective notions of “gender identity” and bases a person’s worth on his or her race, sex, or other identities. This destructive dogma, under the guise of “equity,” threatens American’s fundamental liberties as well as the health and well-being of children and adults alike."   or   "Families comprised of a married mother, father, and their children are the foundation of a well-ordered nation and healthy society. Unfortunately, family policies and programs under President Biden’s HHS are fraught with agenda items focusing on “LGBTQ+ equity,” subsidizing single-motherhood, disincentivizing work, and penalizing marriage. These policies should be repealed and replaced by policies that support the formation of stable, married, nuclear families."   From a wording perspective, who doesn't want to protect the health and well-being of Americans or think that families aren't good for America? But let's take a look at the author, Roger Severino. He's well-quoted to be against LGBTQ+ anything, has standard christian nationalist views, supports conversion therapy, etc.   So when he uses words like "threatens the health and well-being of children and adults alike" it's not about actual health, it's about enforcing cis-gendered ideology because he (and the rest of the Heritage Foundation) believe LGBTQ+ people and communities are harmful. Or when he invokes the family through the lens of, let's just say dog whistles including the "penalization of marriage" (how and where?!), he idealizes families involving marriage of a "biological male to a biological female" and associates LGBTQ+ family equity as something unhealthy.   Who are the radical actors? Who is telling people to be trans, gay, or queer in general? No one. The idea that there can be any sort of equity between LGBTQ+ people and "normal" cis people is abhorrent to the author, so the loaded language of radical/destructive/guise/threaten are used. Families that he believes are "good" are stable/well-ordered/healthy, specifically married/nuclear ones.   Start looking into intersectionality of oppression of non-privileged groups and how that affects the concept of the family and you will understand that these platitudes are thinly veiled wrappers for christian nationalist ideology.   What's wrong with equity for queer families, to allow them full rights as parents, who are bringing up smart and able children? Or single mothers who are working three jobs to get food on plates?
    • Ashley0616
      Well yesterday didn't work like I wanted to. I met a guy and started talking and he was wanting to be in a relationship. I asked my kids on how they thought of me dating a man and they said gross and said no. I guess it's time to look for women. I think that is going to be harder. Oh well I guess.  
    • Ashley0616
      I don't have anything in my dress pocket
    • Carolyn Marie
      This topic reminds me of the lyrics to the Beatles song, "A Little Help From My Friends."   "What do you see when you turn out the lights?"   "I can't tell you but I know it's mine."   Carolyn Marie
    • Abigail Genevieve
      @Ivy have you read the actual document?   Has anyone else out there read it?
    • Abigail Genevieve
      I am reading the Project 2025 document https://www.project2025.org/policy/   This will take some time.  I read the forward and I want to read it again later.   I read some criticism of it outside here and I will be looking for it in the light of what has been posted here and there.  Some of the criticism is bosh.   @MaeBe have you read the actual document?
    • RaineOnYourParade
      *older, not holder, oops :P
    • Abigail Genevieve
      No problem!
    • RaineOnYourParade
      Old topic, but I gotta say my favorites are: "Stop hitting on minors" (doesn't work if you're holder tho) and "Sure as [squid] not you"
    • Carolyn Marie
      Abigail, I think we will just leave the other posts where they are, and the discussion can start anew here.  It is possible to do what you ask, but would disrupt the flow of the discussion in the other thread, and would require more work than it's worth.   Carolyn Marie
    • Abigail Genevieve
      I am in too good a mood to earn my certificate today. I am sure something will happen that will put me on the path to earning it.
    • Abigail Genevieve
      It's likely most cis-women consider a fitting unnecessary "because they know what  they wear" and get used to the wrong size.  The instructions for what your size is are simple and why go to any further effort?  You measure your bandsize and you measure your max and subtract the two to get the needed info for the cup size.  Then you buy the same size for years until it hurts or something.
    • KatieSC
      Congratulations Lorelei! Yes, it is a powerful feeling to have the documents that say "you are you".
    • Mmindy
  • Upcoming Events

Contact TransPulse

TransPulse can be contacted in the following ways:

Email: Click Here.

To report an error on this page.

Legal

Your use of this site is subject to the following rules and policies, whether you have read them or not.

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
DMCA Policy
Community Rules

Hosting

Upstream hosting for TransPulse provided by QnEZ.

Sponsorship

Special consideration for TransPulse is kindly provided by The Breast Form Store.
×
×
  • Create New...