Do Extreme Interventions for Trans Youths Save Lives?

[The Hammer]

5 year olds are choosing and being allowed to transistion in every way except medical treatment. That is a big decision for a 5yr old.

So they can talk and act how they want. Cool?

They just can't be given medical interventions. Makes sense to me?

If my son came up and said I want to wear dresses and be called a girl. Fine. It's not really a big deal. Live and let live right? If they decide later it's not right, no foul imo. This is why medical interventions don't start until puberty. Nad that is restricted to puberty (hormone) blockers which are reversible.

Edit: The Effects of Puberty Blockers Are Reversible: 14 FAQs

There are medical studies (longitudinal) that need to be done, but overall they are deemed safe, and reversible.

 

[SomeRandom]

It raised flags for me as well. But I think a couple of ideas come into play here:

- This is a very politically charged topic, so EVERYONE who chimes in is likely to have an agenda.
- I think it's good policy to separate the message from the messenger.

I wholeheartedly agree.

A couple of responses:

- I agree that rigor is called for
- This article is loaded with clearly written, unambiguous, factual claims. As you know, clear factual claims are relatively easy to research to establish their veracity.
- The article includes an EXTENSIVE, 29 item, list of citations

I will have to actually go through and read the article a bit more thoroughly in order to respond to this, I’ll admit that I kind of skimmed it the first time round
And again stress my position/education on this topic is that of a layman. So I will do my best to cypher through all the jargon

Right now is the start of my weekend, so I hope you don’t mind if I forgo that for a time. I’ll do my best to remember to do this later on lol

I’m a couple drinks down as it is

 

[SomeRandom]

5 year olds are choosing and being allowed to transistion in every way except medical treatment. That is a big decision for a 5yr old.

You mean like letting them express themselves however they see fit?

How awful?

 

[metis]

Lol. You responded to my post that wasn't even to you. Maybe you should have just skipped it if as you say "has nothing to do with what you posted".

I do think it's a common practice here at RF to comment on someone else's post even if wasn't directly addressed to them, plus your post #80 is nothing short of totally made-up nonsense, thus you hurt your own position when posting dung like that.

 

[SomeRandom]

- I agree that rigor is called for
- This article is loaded with clearly written, unambiguous, factual claims. As you know, clear factual claims are relatively easy to research to establish their veracity.
- The article includes an EXTENSIVE, 29 item, list of citations

Okay I’ve looked at the article a bit more thoroughly
(Please forgive my hangover and if you think I haven’t been thorough enough, I do sincerely apologise.
Again it’s the start of my weekend, so I’m trying my best with the aid or perhaps detriment of alcohol lol. Please forgive any rambling lol)
It cited, among others, Sweden’s apparent “U Turn” in regards to gender affirming care. And indeed various articles that I can find seem to support this. Am I correct?
However again as we both know this is a highly politicised issue. Sweden recently released a statement, apparently, indicating that the cons outweigh the benefits, in terms of gender affirming care for youths. Which, okay that’s a fair concern to have if that’s the case

However I can’t seem to find any actual supporting scientific peer reviewed studies to back this decision. And indeed there seems to be a number of reports of a growing right wing party in the country that is actively hampering the results.
I’m not saying there aren’t any scientific results to back this conclusion, I’m merely saying that I can only find politically skewed reports online right now, (on both sides) not actual factual peer reviewed scientific reports. Perhaps you can show me a couple.

And this is just one citation, never mind the 29 you alluded to. The unfortunate consequence, I hope you’ll note, of pushing against the mere idea that we shouldn’t just rely on the science is the reality that one has to spend far more effort in countering unscientific and often misrepresented results for hours upon hours. Whereas science usually just wants you to “follow the research.” Countering misinformation is a far more rigorous venture.
It’s why atheists and qualified biologists had to take actual media training to combat creationist rhetoric back in the day. Not even kidding.

This is a case that unfortunately reinforces my concern that trans care among the youth in general is pushed by politics (on either or both sides) rather than fuelled by pure science. But I can’t say one way or the the other in this particular instance. That’s just my personal opinion and cynicism of the way our world works. I’m probably wrong (I sincerely hope I am, as this directly impacts youth care, not just for trans youth even. I’m just saying.)
As far as I can tell the rest of Europe is pushing forward with such care. Due to the science, as they claim.
But in fairness I’m having trouble finding the backing scientific research for such a U Turn that Sweden took and why the rest of Europe is moving forward
Again not saying it doesn’t exist, just that I can’t find it

It very well could be that recently, especially as a layman myself, I find it increasingly harder and harder to discern political and scientific endeavours when it comes to this particular subject. It’s all seemingly politicised, on both ends.
At least that what I find when I try to actually look into various claims made about trans youth care internationally, such as the claims from the article you linked.
(I think I require a more learned interpreter to all this fiasco, if I’m being honest lol)
And again, I have to stress that it’s still early days in terms of research, everywhere. We very much still are in the “experiment phase.” Sad to say.

I hope you don’t think my answer too vague or to be of one of belonging to either side of the politics.
Much like you, I am largely skeptical, I just wish to have my answer align with the actual science. But politics are interfering with this far too much (again on both sides.)
But I am a dumb laymen without actual training. I can only go so far

 

[icehorse]

Much like you, I am largely skeptical, I just wish to have my answer align with the actual science. But politics are interfering with this far too much (again on both sides.)

I agree.

But here are a few articles - from MDs - that are questioning the safety claims and/or the claims of effectiveness:

https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jac5.1691

One Size Does Not Fit All: In Support of Psychotherapy for Gender Dysphoria

After plowing through a bunch of these articles my layman's takeaway is that a few earlier studies were done, and they seemed to indicate that these extreme interventions improved mental health. But that these few, key studies are now under more scrutiny and many healthcare professionals are thinking that these early studies are flawed.

So MAYBE these extreme interventions "save lives" as claimed, but maybe they do not. And to me, they're SO extreme, and so riddled with negative side-effects, that we ought to be cautious about using them until the evidence is totally bombproof.

 

[We Never Know]

I do think it's a common practice here at RF to comment on someone else's post even if wasn't directly addressed to them, plus your post #80 is nothing short of totally made-up nonsense, thus you hurt your own position when posting dung like that.

For post #80 that you think its made up nonsense

"Ask Jacob why he transitioned and his answer is simple and straight-forward: "I wanted to be a boy."

Jacob's Journey: Life as a Transgender 5-Year-Old

In a rare and frank interview, Joe and Mimi Lemay share in their own words why they decided to let their 5-year-old transgender son Jacob transition.

www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[SomeRandom]

I agree.

But here are a few articles - from MDs - that are questioning the safety claims and/or the claims of effectiveness:

https://accpjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jac5.1691

One Size Does Not Fit All: In Support of Psychotherapy for Gender Dysphoria

After plowing through a bunch of these articles my layman's takeaway is that a few earlier studies were done, and they seemed to indicate that these extreme interventions improved mental health. But that these few, key studies are now under more scrutiny and many healthcare professionals are thinking that these early studies are flawed.

So MAYBE these extreme interventions "save lives" as claimed, but maybe they do not. And to me, they're SO extreme, and so riddled with negative side-effects, that we ought to be cautious about using them until the evidence is totally bombproof.

I appreciate you citing these sources. It shows that there is still a argument to be made among researchers about this topic.
Though interestingly enough, both articles have in their conclusions that they think bias was shown in the article mentioned.
I feel like that is something that one should mention, but again I’m just a dumb layman so I feel like there is a significance that I’m probably missing lol
Perhaps another poster can point that out in better detail, I don’t know.
(Lol can you tell I’m not completely sober yet?)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

That's why RF needs me.
Yes, there are risks in enabling youth to make life
changing decisions. Some will suffer. Even die.
But denying them the opportunity has the same
effects.
How do we know where to draw the line on who
gets change & who doesn't? Experimentation
is the only way to know competing results, &
decided on the best course.

Oh, one other thing...
Decisions shouldn't be made based upon
what someone thinks the Bible says.

Agreed -- with everything.

One thing not mentioned so far is that while it is true the castration (chemical or otherwise) is permanent and life-altering, doing nothing about the onset of the hormone bath that will forever change the body is likewise permanent and life-altering.

If, as many professionals now believe, trans-genderism is in fact a mind-body misalignment (and we must remember that brain structures develop AFTER many body structures are determined, which may well be a cause of such misalignment), that unless you can actually change the mind, it may well be easier to change the body to match it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Agreed -- with everything.

Woohoo!

One thing not mentioned so far is that while it is true the castration (chemical or otherwise) is permanent and life-altering, doing nothing about the onset of the hormone bath that will forever change the body is likewise permanent and life-altering.

Agree.
We should all consider both consequences & alternative
consequences when we advocate for & against something.

If, as many professionals now believe, trans-genderism is in fact a mind-body misalignment (and we must remember that brain structures develop AFTER many body structures are determined, which may well be a cause of such misalignment), that unless you can actually change the mind, it may well be easier to change the body to match it.

Thus showing that as a science textbook,
the Bible isn't just obsolete...it's dangerous.

 

[metis]

For post #80 that you think its made up nonsense

"Ask Jacob why he transitioned and his answer is simple and straight-forward: "I wanted to be a boy."

Jacob's Journey: Life as a Transgender 5-Year-Old

In a rare and frank interview, Joe and Mimi Lemay share in their own words why they decided to let their 5-year-old transgender son Jacob transition.

www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org

Did you actually read the rest of your own link, WNK??? I ask this because here's what it says: "For young children, there is no surgery or hormonal therapy."

 

[icehorse]

Agreed -- with everything.

One thing not mentioned so far is that while it is true the castration (chemical or otherwise) is permanent and life-altering, doing nothing about the onset of the hormone bath that will forever change the body is likewise permanent and life-altering.

If, as many professionals now believe, trans-genderism is in fact a mind-body misalignment (and we must remember that brain structures develop AFTER many body structures are determined, which may well be a cause of such misalignment), that unless you can actually change the mind, it may well be easier to change the body to match it.

A couple of questions:

- What should we call this "misalignment"? Is it a disorder or what?

- Do you think ecological factors might sometimes be exacerbating these "misalignments" ?

 

[icehorse]

I appreciate you citing these sources. It shows that there is still a argument to be made among researchers about this topic.
Though interestingly enough, both articles have in their conclusions that they think bias was shown in the article mentioned.
I feel like that is something that one should mention, but again I’m just a dumb layman so I feel like there is a significance that I’m probably missing lol
Perhaps another poster can point that out in better detail, I don’t know.
(Lol can you tell I’m not completely sober yet?)

I think that something you said earlier ought to be amplified:

This issue is surrounded by so much political noise - from every corner.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

A couple of questions:

- What should we call this "misalignment"? Is it a disorder or what?

- Do you think ecological factors might sometimes be exacerbating these "misalignments" ?

Call it what the profession calls it -- gender dysphoria. A dysphoria is a profound feeling (a mental feeling) of unease about something. In this case, the dysphoria appears to be what feels to the individual as a mind that does not identify with the gender that their body presents.

The mind quite often does things that don't align with current bodily reality. Consider phantom limb syndrome, in which the mind perceives pain or other sensations from a limb that is no longer there, and which can, therefore, no longer deliver such sensations. And yet, the pain or other sensation is quite real to the mind that perceives it. Is that an illness or a disorder? I don't think so. In fact, something like 8 in 10 people who lose a limb, or even just a finger or toe, have such experiences. The mind is the creation of a brain, but it is not the brain.

Post-mortem and in vivo neuroimaging studies strongly suggest the existence of a sexual dimorphic brain, i.e., slight differences in brain anatomy and functioning between the two sexes. Now, if some of the relevant sub-structures in the brain develop after some parts of the body that produce the hormones and proteins that decide physical gender, is it not possible -- perhaps because of something that happened to the mother to change her hormonal patterns between the gonadal development and brain gender sub-structures -- that the brain and the body might actually be of different genders?

And by the way, considerable work has been done to demonstrate that such brain structure developments also account for many cases of homosexuality -- and that this is likely very normal, and nature's way of providing for additional family support when a woman can't do it all. It's interesting to note that for every older brother a boy has at birth, it's chances of developing into a gay man increases by about 33%.

 

[We Never Know]

Did you actually read the rest of your own link, WNK??? I ask this because here's what it says: "For young children, there is no surgery or hormonal therapy."

Did you actually read my post #80 that says except medical treatment.

Last time I checked surgery is a medical treatment, part of the practice of medicine.

 

[Yerda]

2 - Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence: It's more than reasonable to hold the proponent's claims to an extremely high standard. A well known guideline / tool in critical thinking says: "Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence". When we apply that tool to this situation, the burden of proof falls to the proponents of castration. It's up to them to prove - without much doubt at all - that:

- the negative aspects of these extreme measures are well communicated to potential patients and advocates,
- their long term efficacy is proven,
- the organizations supporting these extreme measures are beyond reproach

The claim that appropriate health care can help transgender people avoid suicide or severe mental health issues doesn't seem extraordinary at all. It should be supported in the same way as other health care effects. Primarily that will be studies of people who have received this kind of care.

We all want to reduce suicidal tendencies in youth. But it seems to me that the extreme measures of puberty blockers and surgeries ought to be suspended until MUCH better evidence is available.

Have you looked at a lot of studies?

If not (I haven't), what is the source of your belief that the evidence isn't good enough?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I would be very surprised if the people writing NHS guidelines or the Royal College of General Practitioners, for example, weren't familiar with the evidence.

 

[SomeRandom]

I think that something you said earlier ought to be amplified:

This issue is surrounded by so much political noise - from every corner.

Unfortunately the noise tends to hurt more than it helps.

When people bring up concerns about the research, it shouldn’t be met with fierce opposition (provided the person is doing so in good faith, of course.)
Unfortunately given it’s a political hot button issue, this is exactly what tends to happen. But that’s because those who are arguing against concerns are doing so because, politically speaking, they kind of have to be aggressive. Rights and bodily autonomy are on the line as we speak. Not just for the trans community, but the medical treatment used to treat intersex conditions, like I said earlier, largely overlap and are performed on minors everyday.
Thus any laws affecting trans medical care often by default can impact intersex care.

Law makers and politicians are constantly using the issue to further their own agenda (on both sides.) And ultimately it’s those within the trans community that suffers.

Personally I think it’s far more healthy to try to find the source of these concerns and legitimately put them through the actual rigour of the scientific method.
But discussions usually devolve into politics, rather than actually doing this. Creating walls when it could be used as an excuse to further education instead and hopefully quell the misgivings.

Doesn’t seem to happen though. Like you used a source that we both agreed raise red flags for us. And I’m not saying that to criticise you, just pointing out that this is where the discussion often leads people wanting to have a conversation about concerns. That shouldn’t be happening, on either side. Because I think the medical community should be concerned with examining every possibility. And it’s fine to have misgivings. This is a relatively new process in terms of medical application. At least in the Modern West.

But it sadly does, far too often

 

[icehorse]

The claim that appropriate health care can help transgender people avoid suicide or severe mental health issues doesn't seem extraordinary at all. It should be supported in the same way as other health care effects. Primarily that will be studies of people who have received this kind of care.

I think the key word here is APPROPRIATE, correct? That's what the entire thread is about. As has been stated, we all want to help reduce suicides, I don't think that point is up for debate

But the extreme interventions I'm discussing come with their own seriously negative side effects.

 

[icehorse]

Have you looked at a lot of studies?

If not (I haven't), what is the source of your belief that the evidence isn't good enough?

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I would be very surprised if the people writing NHS guidelines or the Royal College of General Practitioners, for example, weren't familiar with the evidence.

In the articles I've linked to there appears to be a causal chain that's not as robust as we might imagine. It goes something like this:

- the medical establishments have millions of concerns
- they rely on a few studies and the recommendations of special interest groups to establish their recommendations.

So now it appears that there have been a very few studies that have been used over and over again to establish the guidelines, and those studies are not holding up to serious scrutiny.

 

[Yerda]

I think the key word here is APPROPRIATE, correct? That's what the entire thread is about. As has been stated, we all want to help reduce suicides, I don't think that point is up for debate

But the extreme interventions I'm discussing come with their own seriously negative side effects.

Absolutely agree.

What I'm getting at though, is the phrase you've used "extraordinary claims....extraordinary evidence" suggest that the claims are of an extraordinary nature. But I'm not sure they are. So I would expect the evidence for the claims to be of the same nature as other claims for the efficacy of a given medical treatment.

In the articles I've linked to there appears to be a causal chain that's not as robust as we might imagine. It goes something like this:

- the medical establishments have millions of concerns
- they rely on a few studies and the recommendations of special interest groups to establish their recommendations.

So now it appears that there have been a very few studies that have been used over and over again to establish the guidelines, and those studies are not holding up to serious scrutiny.

Ok. How would you summarise the evidence that puberty blockers aren't effective?