I think the key idea here is your phrase "potentially beneficial".
Sadly, medicine, especially in the US, is fraught with profiteering and advocacy. So I think the reality is that the current SOC was developed by advocates, and for political reasons, it will be hard to overturn. But I'd bet large amounts of money that these policies will be overturned, and we'll be left with thousands of people who were damaged for life in the hopes of "potential benefits".
In general, medicine doesn't work like that. But with this politically charged topic, for some reason everyone is willing to risk thousands and thousands of young people's lives for "potential benefits". That's not standard practice in medicine.
Well that’s America.
No offence but the rest of the world doesn’t treat medicine like you guys do. At least not to that extent
In fact my government won’t even buy supplies of medication (in general) until it all proves to be cost efficient first. Not even kidding. If it can’t, too bad. We have cheaper alternatives or we’ll make our own
Here all our collective taxes pay for medicine, doctors and even many specialists. I can’t even remember having to pay to see my GP. Hell I just recently had a bulk billed eye exam at my local optometrist, all paid for by my taxes so I left the place without so much as looking at a bill. It was already paid for.
Indeed I largely suspect that even the times I do pay, for prescription meds or even picking up some paracetamol/aspirin at the shops, I likely pay a fraction for it compared to my US brethren
I mean I suppose you can choose to pay a bit more for “skipping the queue” here. If you like
We literally require all our GPs to refer patients to specialists, if that is indeed required.
All this to say, puberty blockers are used by all universal health care models, as far as I’m aware. All paid for through tax and emphasise the methodical utilisation of various medical specialists, in this instance the Mental Health Sector specifically. I can’t exactly accuse European shrinks of pocketing big pharma money the way one could likely do to a US shrink. Again no offence. And I’m sure it happens, not saying otherwise.
I can understand being wholly skeptical of the US model of medicine and why one would question if it’s actually working around the scientific model correctly. Because well it doesn’t exactly have that reputation overseas, if you follow
(A bit sad, you could argue. Given the prestige and esteem many US hospitals and medical universities/colleges have in the actual field of medical science.)
But I would wager that the rest of the world finds the idea of putting profit ahead of health to be abhorrent. Regardless of political affiliation.
What’s that old meme?
If Breaking Bad were made in any other industrialised country, it would be a slice of life drama about a man getting cancer treatment
(Sorry I just couldn’t resist)
Sorry but the rest of the worlds doctors have already reached the conclusion. I can trust that multiple countries have followed the scientific model correctly, perhaps even rejecting payment lol
No but seriously if multiple countries have studies that basically say the same thing, then I will go with those guys. At least until a reevaluation proves them entirely wrong. Which can happen in science.
But like I said, no country had actually banned the drugs we currently prescribe to trans affected youth. They were actually just overwhelmed by the demand which contradicted their already very strict criteria and there clearly needs to be further study on the drugs overall. You know that’s what the article you linked to me literally said, right? Well the amendments that it made, but still. That’s from the Swedes.
Either way, such drugs have been deemed safe to use, only under very strict circumstances. And I am quite happy to let the experts figure out who exactly qualifies. Lord knows my drunk idiot self can’t lol