Misogynistic and Selfish, Edinburgh's Rape Crisis Centre's CEO is a trans-woman, i.e. a man !

[icehorse]

You said the NHS agrees with you. What specifically were YOU referring to?

That WPATH's GAC protocol lacks good evidence, and that they decided to back way off of using it.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

That WPATH's GAC protocol lacks good evidence, and that they decided to back way off of using it.

Yeah, that's false. They still use gender affirming care, so they categorically don't "agree with" you. They also disagree with your assertion that trans women aren't women, that GAC is harmful to trans youth, that puberty blockers are the same as castration, that minors with GD are immediately being given GAC, and that trans people or the inclusion or their rights into law in any way imposes an increased risk on women or children.

Don't you dare ever try and suggest that an organisation I have been working for for over ten years in any way agrees with your or your transphobic nonsense.

 

[icehorse]

Yeah, that's false. They still use gender affirming care, so they categorically don't "agree with" you. They also disagree with your assertion that trans women aren't women, that GAC is harmful to trans youth, that puberty blockers are the same as castration, that minors with GD are immediately being given GAC, and that trans people or the inclusion or their rights into law in any way imposes an increased risk on women or children.

Don't you dare ever try and suggest that an organisation I have been working for for over ten years in any way agrees with your or your transphobic nonsense.

They have dramatically changed how they apply GAC.
Of course puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are dangerous, doh!
I never said "immediately given"
I never said the NHS claimed anything about self Id laws.

Do not put words in my mouth if you want to be credible. It's not a good look if you have to strawman me.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

They have dramatically changed how they apply GAC.

In what way? And since they still apply it, even to minors, in what way do they "agree with" you?

Of course puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are dangerous, doh!

Practically all medication has dangers. That's why we have doctors determine when it's usage is appropriate, not people like you who don't know anything about medicine. Ay caramba.

I never said "immediately given"

You see to operate under that assumption.

I never said the NHS claimed anything about self Id laws.

Then the NHS, which supports trans inclusion and GAC, does not "agree with" you, and what you said was false.

Do not put words in my mouth if you want to be credible. It's not a good look if you have to strawman me.

Everything I said was true. You have done all of those things. And you DID say the NHS agrees with you. The hundreds of NHS doctors I work with every week categorically do not agree with you or practically any of your baseless assertions about medicine, and for you to in any way imply that your perspective is representative of the NHS is laughable.

 

[icehorse]

Everything I said was true. You have done all of those things. And you DID say the NHS agrees with you. The hundreds of NHS doctors I work with every week categorically do not agree with you or practically any of your baseless assertions about medicine, and for you to in any way imply that your perspective is representative of the NHS is laughable.

NHS commissioning » Implementing advice from the Cass Review

 

[ImmortalFlame]

NHS commissioning » Implementing advice from the Cass Review

Which says nothing like what you have been saying.

It seems a common theme with you. Make claim, suggest claim is true, present source that doesn't actually mirror your claim, insist it does, repeat.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And SOMETIMES that happens, and that's a good thing.

Even in California I have had issues getting a prescription for hormones, obtaining those hormones and consistently have them. From doctors to pharmacies that's why I go to the LBGT Center in LA for treatment. Just about every trans person here does (or they go to the Bay Area). As for those who get treated here, there's one doctor who treats most of those (if they have insurance that isn't Medi-Cal, that is, because he doesn't accept it).

 

[Magic Man]

The context here is crucial. GAC is a protocol for GD, correct? GD can be a serious mental health condition, no doubt, correct?

Now perhaps - and for now just perhaps - IF GAC improved the mental health of kids suffering from GD, you might have an argument for using dangerous drugs with irreversible side effects and then even more radically, cutting away healthy tissue.

But there is no good evidence that any of these interventions improve the mental health of kids with GD.

You're misrepresenting so much here.

1) The "insufficient evidence" referenced in the Cass report is related to puberty blockers and hormone therapy.

2) Gender-affirming care includes a lot more than just puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgery.

3) There is plenty of good evidence that gender-affirming care improves mental health in young people with gender distress.

Again, GD is a mental health condition. Kids with GD don't typically have unhealthy tissue. So when surgeries are done in the name of GAC, doctors ARE removing healthy tissue. I'm not using loaded words, that's the reality. It simply IS horrific.

Again, this is extremely loaded and misleading.

1) Surgeries are rare, especially in young people.

2) They're not horrific. That's your personal reaction to them. Considering your transphobia, it's not surprising you would call them horrific. But that's not an objective view of them.

3) Just the fact that you frame it as "removing healthy tissue" is problematic. It's a clear attempt to paint it in as bad a light as possible, rather than just mention it neutrally.

I provided a downloadable file as evidence.

Sorry, I'm not downloading a file from here. If you have a link, present it. I'm not all that confident anything you provide will actually support your claims anyway. Nothing you've provided so far has.

If you will not look at the evidence provided, stop posting in this thread.

I've looked at all of your attempts to provide evidence. I even did the work you should have and looked into the "WPATH files". If all you're going to do is continue to make incorrect and misleading transphobic claims, stop posting.

Nope. Along with other meta studies, the Cass report determined what I said. There is no good evidence that GAC is effective.

Nope. The Cass report did not determine what you said. First, it didn't say there's no good evidence that gender-affirming care is effective. Second, that's not what you've been saying here. You've claimed there are confused kids being maimed and sterilized.

Since you are defending GAC then YOU are on the side making the claim that it's effective. We know it's dangerous, so YOU need to provide good, scientific evidence that it is effective. This is on you. When we do GOOD MEDICINE, we do not do dangerous things to patients without good evidence.

Where is your good evidence that GAC is helpful??

My claim here is that your claims are not only wrong, but harmful and transphobic. So, my claim is correct.

As for your continued cries of "propaganda", perhaps you're projecting here? You sound just like a trans activist

It's amusing to watch someone not only project, but then accuse others of being the ones projecting. You're posting propaganda. I realize you're not going to see it or admit it, but it's still true.

The report includes an hour long video of high ranking members of WPATH discussing GAC. There is plenty of context, and what they say is shocking. For the sake of argument, let's say the reporter is biased. Who cares? The video speaks for itself. WPATH has not responded to the release of the WPATH files. If the video and these internal documents paint an inaccurate picture, then why hasn't WPATH done anything to try to restorre its reputation?

Please explain how an uncontested hour long video of a discussion between WPATH officials "has no credibility".

That seems like an extraordinary claim, please provide evidence.

The hour-long video is edited. What they say is not at all shocking. They're talking about their concerns relating to patients and their parents sometimes not really understanding the procedures. In one part one of them says "it's like talking about diabetic complications to a 14-year-old. They don't care". That's perfectly reasonable. I'm not even sure what the problem is here. Essentially, young people and their parents come to them for this kind of thing sometimes without fully understanding it, and they want the patients and parents to be fully informed and to fully understand the procedures they want done. That makes sense.

There is not plenty of context. It's snippets and comments. They expressly tell you it's screenshots from message boards.

If WPATH hasn't responded, it's because there's no use. People like you won't accept anything they say. Anyone else, who isn't already buying into the propaganda about them, won't think anything of the "report".

The problem with the source here is not just that they're biased. It's that they're specifically on a campaign against transgender people and gender-affirming care, and they've shown they have no qualms with presenting false and misleading info about subjects. As I said, it's much like plenty of other right-wing propaganda from the past 15 or so years, like Project Veritas.

If this was truly legitimate, why would it only be reported by 2 anti-trans activists and an anti-trans activist group? Why wouldn't there be an investigation into it from legitimate sources?

 

[Magic Man]

Which says nothing like what you have been saying.

It seems a common theme with you. Make claim, suggest claim is true, present source that doesn't actually mirror your claim, insist it does, repeat.

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[icehorse]

It's amusing to watch someone not only project, but then accuse others of being the ones projecting. You're posting propaganda. I realize you're not going to see it or admit it, but it's still true.

We disagree about the quality of the evidence I've provided.

But we can all see you're supported protocols that make extraordinary claims and you've provided zero evidence.

So, I bring evidence, you do not, but you say I'm the one who's fallen for propaganda, ha!

 

[Magic Man]

Here's a pretty good article from ABC News (a reliable source of news) about the Cass report. Here are highlights:

Among her recommendations, she urged the NHS to increase the available workforce in this field, to work on setting up more regional outlets for care, increase investment in research on this care, and improve the quality of care to meet international guidelines.

They want more outlets, a bigger workforce and more investment into care for trans youths. So, far from moving away from gender-affirming care, this advises to increase its reach.

The NHS has said it will halt routine use of puberty blockers as it prepares for a study into the practice later this year.

Note the "routine". Emphasis mine. They're not halting them altogether, only as a routine. And only so they can study them more.

The key with the Cass report is that the "insufficient evidence" is regarding effects of puberty blockers and hormone therapy. But that's only part of gender-affirming care. There's much more to it that the report doesn't say is lacking in evidence.

 

[Magic Man]

We disagree about the quality of the evidence I've provided.

Correct. Because the evidence you've provided either doesn't say what you claim it does or is essentially propaganda from unscrupulous, biased sources. Yet you keep pretending it's reliable evidence that supports you.

But we can all see you're supported protocols that make extraordinary claims and you've provided zero evidence.

We can? Like what?

So, I bring evidence, you do not, but you say I'm the one who's fallen for propaganda, ha!

You bring things you call evidence, but they are not. You have yet to provide evidence that confused kids are being maimed and sterilized, for instance. The things you have provided are the Cass report and the "WPATH files". The former doesn't support your claims. The latter is propaganda. So, yes, that's why I say you're the one who's fallen for propaganda, because you have.

You're trying to turn this around on me and distract from your lack of evidence now. Sorry, but that's not how it works. You're making claims here. You either support them or retract them.

 

[icehorse]

You're making claims here. You either support them or retract them.

By defending GAC, you are supporting claims.

My evidence is sound, you have provided zero evidence.

 

[Magic Man]

By defending GAC, you are supporting claims.

You're making the claims here. I'm trying to get you to support them. You have steadfastly failed to do that.

My evidence is sound, you have provided zero evidence.

Your evidence is the opposite of sound. The only legitimate thing you've pointed to is the Cass report, and that doesn't support your claims at all.

I don't need to provide evidence. I'm not the one making the claims here.

Again, trying to turn it around on me won't work. You started the thread, you've been on the anti-trans tirade, you've made the claims. It's up to you to defend your claims and position. The fact is you can't. I'll lay it out one more time:

You've claimed confused kids are being maimed and sterilized.

Either support that, or stop claiming it.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

3) Just the fact that you frame it as "removing healthy tissue" is problematic. It's a clear attempt to paint it in as bad a light as possible, rather than just mention it neutrally.

Which itself shows a lack of understanding of healthcare. Myself, if I have a mole in a problem spot, like the back of my shoulder where I'm prone to scratching it off, I will go to the doctor to have that healthy bit of skin removed. I've also had some sections of toe nail removed, with the nerve ending killed, as a preventive measure because by then those where the only ones left I hadn't had worked on for ingrown toenails.
And of course waxing and threading and tweezing is removing healthy hair tissue. That's not really medical though, just entirely cosmetic.

 

[Magic Man]

Which itself shows a lack of understanding of healthcare. Myself, if I have a mole in a problem spot, like the back of my shoulder where I'm prone to scratching it off, I will go to the doctor to have that healthy bit of skin removed. I've also had some sections of toe nail removed, with the nerve ending killed, as a preventive measure because by then those where the only ones left I hadn't had worked on for ingrown toenails.
And of course waxing and threading and tweezing is removing healthy hair tissue. That's not really medical though, just entirely cosmetic.

Right. "Dangerous drugs", "removing healthy tissue", etc. It's just a way to try to make them sound scary, when really it's just describing regular healthcare. All drugs are dangerous. Removing healthy tissue is perfectly normal. But it doesn't sound bad enough to just say "medical drugs" or "routine procedure".

It's all part of the propagandistic mindset. It's about fearmongering, not honest assessment of facts. Anything you can do to create a negative emotional response.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Right. "Dangerous drugs", "removing healthy tissue", etc. It's just a way to try to make them sound scary, when really it's just describing regular healthcare. All drugs are dangerous. Removing healthy tissue is perfectly normal. But it doesn't sound bad enough to just say "medical drugs" or "routine procedure".

It's all part of the propagandistic mindset. It's about fearmongering, not honest assessment of facts. Anything you can do to create a negative emotional response.

Yup. Better tell them Advil has a warning on the box.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yup. Better them Advil has a warning on the box.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'm a fan of talk therapy, and I've said so countless times on this forum.

But GAC goes far beyond talk therapy into the use of dangerous irreversible drugs and sometimes surgeries on healthy tissues.

The problem is that WPATH created / popularized GAC and GAC is simple bad medicine. Look to the previous post to learn about the scandal that is WPATH and the degree to which WPATH uses pseudo-science and bad medicine.

You're just repeating your mantra at me again, while ignoring the content of my post. without responding to the content of my post.

 

[Kathryn]

Here's a pretty good article from ABC News (a reliable source of news) about the Cass report. Here are highlights:



They want more outlets, a bigger workforce and more investment into care for trans youths. So, far from moving away from gender-affirming care, this advises to increase its reach.



Note the "routine". Emphasis mine. They're not halting them altogether, only as a routine. And only so they can study them more.

The key with the Cass report is that the "insufficient evidence" is regarding effects of puberty blockers and hormone therapy. But that's only part of gender-affirming care. There's much more to it that the report doesn't say is lacking in evidence.

What is "routine use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy?"