Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

I think we are back to Aurora believing her own rhetoric

Only 20% of patients at GIDS were put on puberty blockers.

Where are all the suicides of amongst the 80% who didn't get them then? Tavistock opened around 2020, you'd think that would have come to light.

One of Cass's findings was that there was no way of knowing which children would benefit from puberty blockers and which wouldn't. Yet almost all who went on blockers at age 11 and above went on to adult cross sex hormones. Puberty blockers are a pathway to being a lifelong patient, with all the risks we know that entails.

You could advocate for what we know works with children in distress about their body; exploratory therapy, psychological support, and watchful waiting. But you don't.

 

[monkers]

N again

You don't give medical interventions to children unless there is good evidence of long term benefit. Children demanding puberty blockers in response to propaganda isn't evidence. Parents demanding them because they think it will solve the problem isn't evidence.

There is plenty of evidence of long-term benefit. The controversy lies with the lack of evidence concerning any long-term detrimental effects. In my own case, I asked for puberty blockers. I had to wait until I was thirteen. I was assessed for Gillick competence. The benefits and detriments were explained to me verbally and in writing. I then was required to attend two further appointment before prescription. I was Tanner 2 by the time of prescription. I took blockers for three years.

The detriments were explained to me, as were the measures that I could take to minimise them.

Today, I have no residual harm from taking puberty blockers. I described them as 'life savers' and so they were. When my distress was at its worse, I took time away from school. In my own case, being a pretty determined individual, I more than made up for that lost time with home schooling and self study.

From my perspective, the ongoing difficulty is concerned with appropriate age to prescribe.

If puberty blockers are to prescribed in a timely manner, and only for a shorter period so as to help prevent long-term detriment, then access to cross sex hormones needs to occur at the age of sixteen rather than eighteen.

In the UK, the age for consent without parental permission for medical procedures is sixteen. There is no legal basis to deny the same arrangement for consent to young trans people as young cis people.

 

[monkers]

One of Cass's findings was that there was no way of knowing which children would benefit from puberty blockers and which wouldn't.

N again.

And if there was a way of knowing, then the trial would not meet with gold standard clinical trial requirements, and would have been rejected by Cass on that basis.

The argument for no scientific basis is crumbling.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

It's about men abusing women. If you can't see how that's on topic, well, I'm afraid that's a you problem.

Topic title reads ''Gender again, sorry'' there are other topics about abuse. Do keep up!

Meanwhile you still fail to respond to the main point that it is nonsense to compare violence of a group 8 times(if not more) the size of a other group just to claim that other group much smaller group would be less violent.

 

[AndyRM]

Topic title reads ''Gender again, sorry'' there are other topics about abuse. Do keep up!

Meanwhile you still fail to respond to the main point that it is nonsense to compare violence of a group 8 times(if not more) the size of a other group just to claim that other group much smaller group would be less violent.

Stick to the simple stuff like imagining support for Hamas and Biden.

 

[multitool]

Where are all the suicides of amongst the 80% who didn't get them then? Tavistock opened around 2020, you'd think that would have come to light

A post so mathematically bone stupid it is hard to know where to start.

One of Cass's findings was that there was no way of knowing which children would benefit from puberty blockers and which wouldn't. Yet almost all who went on blockers at age 11 and above went on to adult cross sex hormones. Puberty blockers are a pathway to being a lifelong patient, with all the risks we know that entails.

You could advocate for what we know works with children in distress about their body; exploratory therapy, psychological support, and watchful waiting. But you don't.

I know you are blinded by ideology, but 80% of young patients had exactly that. See my above comment and come back when you've had a think

 

[Deleted member 159]

View: https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1812126193056874832?t=COrVMGmgIOUezIPq5DyAfw&s=19

 

[monkers]

View: https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1812126193056874832?t=COrVMGmgIOUezIPq5DyAfw&s=19

When the argument is failing, just look to Rowling for help to move the goalposts.

Tell you what Andy, why don't you try a reasoned discussion with N? Maybe finding that a bit too difficult?

 

[multitool]

Further down the rabbit hole she goes.

So it's not just about 'protecting women's spaces' anymore for Rowling, it's a full-on attack on trans heth, and doubtless the subtext is that trans people do not exist.

 

[AuroraSaab]

There is plenty of evidence of long-term benefit.

No there isn't. York University used a standard methodology to assess the studies. They were mostly found to be poor quality and thus unreliable.

Trans activists were happy enough to claim these studies as supporting puberty blockers, despite not being double blind, for years.

They are poor quality for many reasons btw, not just because they aren't double blind.

I know you are blinded by ideology, but 80% of young patients had exactly that. See my above comment and come back when you've had a think

Well they didn't kill themselves when they didn't get blockers, and they didn't go on to cross sex hormones. Who knows what the outcome would have been if the 20% who did go on puberty blockers had simply received exploratory therapy and support?

Hard to fathom the motives of people who think turning kids into lifelong medical patients is a better outcome than talking through their issues and resolving their distress without drugs or surgery. Especially when the latter is no more beneficial than the former in terms of how happy they are later on.

Opinion piece in the New York Times this week. Unfortunately, imo the transition ship won't turn round in the US for a long time. Too much money involved.

https://archive.is/gq2ba

 

[monkers]

No there isn't. York University used a standard methodology to assess the studies. They were mostly found to be poor quality and thus unreliable.

Trans activists were happy enough to claim these studies as supporting puberty blockers, despite not being double blind, for years.

They are poor quality for many reasons, not just because they aren't double blind.

N again.

As I had said, studies that were not gold standard clinical studies are deemed 'poor quality'. Also as I had said, I did foresee that you had not given consideration to decisions being made on best evidence, including considerations where gold standard clinical evidence is not available.
These studies can not be double blind clinical trials for ethical reasons. That leaves three avenues of consideration; that the trial standard on their merits in allowance of the ethical requirements, that a decision is reached solely on the basis of other considerations, or a combination of the best available clinical evidence and other evidence.

For example, the Cal Horton Review is worthy of consideration in decision making. Cass made no mention of the Horton Review in her own review, limiting her own ability to successful in weighing all available evidence.

Please do not confuse my words with those of trans activists. I am not quoting trans activists, however I note your own tendency to quote anti-trans activists.

The best available evidence for the success of puberty blockers is life expectancy. Despite the chaotic conditions at the Tavistock Centre, we understand that one death occurred due to suicide. Since the original Bell case, puberty blockers have been unavailable through the NHS, sixteen lives lost have been reported due to suicide.

One has to have one's head firmly up ones bottom not to recognise that has a significant fact.

 

[classic33]

Physical. But if you are making an analogy with puberty blockers, if there were talking therapies that relieved the symptoms of epilepsy, would you insist that they be ignored in favour of continuing to give epileptic children meds that have side effects and no evidence of benefit? Of course not.

A condition that affects the brain is a physical condition. At present, in the UK, the largest studies into it are looking at the mental aspects of the condition.
The largest research into treating it are looking at surgical intervention, in place of medication.
Why would this be?
Personal opinion is that we're going backwards on this, not forwards. The parallels between what I've lived and those you despise are a lot closer than you may care to think about. Different but very similar. For a while I was taking a drug that was on the banned list. The argument being it gave me an advantage, higher pain threshold. So whilst they let me run, they'd quite happily take the entry fees, they didn't record my times.

There are some "talking therapies" for epilepsy, however their benefits and effectiveness are of a dubious nature.
You also have an eating therapy, the ketogenic diet. Now hijacked and pushed as a trendy diet. Developed for one thing, and later used for something else not remotely akin to what it was developed for.
It's most effective in children, who are basically kept at just above starvation level. Doesn't work for everyone who starts it, but its not "drugs" supplied by "big pharma". So there must be some benefit to it, right?

For the majority though, it's a lifetime of medication to try and make the condition livable with. More and more we're seeing kids being started on a lifetime of medication, to control a condition they can do little about. I agreed, aged 10, to start on a new, to me, drug. Now I'm officially addicted to it.

The amount of bullying, snide remarks, exclusion and outright hate directed at kids who've just been told they've now got this condition has to be seen to be believed. The means of doing all this has changed, making it almost instant these days, but the underlying message of "you're different, we don't want you near us "normal people"" hasn't changed in over 200 years.

And if you're going to keep on implying that just because I don't agree with your ideology, I'm for "the other side", you are going to have to start showing where I've said that.

 

[Deleted member 159]

View: https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1811833355903860745?t=j4hCQ5ayntaUU3OxIfiQGA&s=19

 

[monkers]

View: https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1811833355903860745?t=j4hCQ5ayntaUU3OxIfiQGA&s=19

Goalposts again. A repeated declaration of a failure to engage with the topic. Why not scour Rowling some more and go for three?

 

[AuroraSaab]

For example, the Cal Horton Review is worthy of consideration in decision making. Cass made no mention of the Horton Review in her own review, limiting her own ability to successful in weighing all available evidence.

1. Cal Horton's qualifications are in education.
2. They have a trans child so a vested interest.
3. Their 'review' is simply an opinion piece. It came out after Cass had completed its work anyway.

The final Cass review, a 4 year endeavour by an expert clinician who was Head of the Royal College of Paediatricians, is not going to mention let alone take into account an opinion piece by some random unheard of commentator with a vested interest.

The best available evidence for the success of puberty blockers is life expectancy.

The Djeine research showed that transgender people have a higher mortality rate from all causes, including suicide. As most children who start down the puberty blocker path end up on cross sex hormones, it suggests puberty blockers don't help life expectancy at all.

Despite the chaotic conditions at the Tavistock Centre, we understand that one death occurred due to suicide. Since the original Bell case, puberty blockers have been unavailable through the NHS, sixteen lives lost have been reported due to suicide.

Reported by Jolyon Maughan and you. No actual evidence has been forthcoming.

One has to have one's head firmly up ones bottom not to recognise that has a significant fact.

It's not a fact until there's evidence. You said you've seen coroners reports. I call bs on that.

Children are easily suggestible. They believe what adults tell them. I find your pushing of the suicidal narrative - if you don't get your puberty blockers you'll be likely to kill yourself - to be absolutely abhorrent. You are promoting suicidal ideation in vulnerable kids.