Ohio Governor's Transgender Decision

[Kfox]

My opinion, which I found is most unpopular for some reason, is that until such time as the politicians can present their medical credentials in related fields, they should keep their big fat noses out of everyone elses business.

How about if the politicians can present other medical professionals that agree with what they are proposing?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How about if the politicians can present other medical professionals that agree with what they are proposing?

Wait, the person that wants to transition has multiple doctors? Well if the politician had the opinions of those other doctors of that patient they might have a valid argument. Do you have any examples?

 

[Kfox]

Wait, the person that wants to transition has multiple doctors?

No; I'm suggesting the politician is getting his views concerning policy from multiple doctors and professionals, and those doctors and professionals don't always agree

 

[Subduction Zone]

No; I'm suggesting the politician is getting his views concerning policy from multiple doctors and professionals, and those doctors and professionals don't always agree

Yeah, that is not the way that it works. One can always cherry pick doctors. He would have to go with the current consensus and the current consensus is in support of transitional care.

 

[Kfox]

Yeah, that is not the way that it works. One can always cherry pick doctors. He would have to go with the current consensus and the current consensus is in support of transitional care.

there is not a consensus of everything we put under the umbrella of what we call transitional care

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

there is not a consensus of everything we put under the umbrella of what we call transitional care

IOW, the medical standard of care allows for a range of treatment options for trans kids.

We shouldn't be legally prohibiting treatments within the medical standard of care.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The topic is GAC for people under 21. Once a person turns 21 they should have agency as long as they're not hurting others.

So you want dead trans kids.

 

[Kfox]

IOW, the medical standard of care allows for a range of treatment options for trans kids.

We shouldn't be legally prohibiting treatments within the medical standard of care.

But what should or should not be under the medical standard of care is not agreed upon; otherwise, Europe would not be in the process or scaling back their trans youth care model.

 

[Subduction Zone]

there is not a consensus of everything we put under the umbrella of what we call transitional care

Then one has to go with the physicians for that particular patient. Sorry, but you do not get to cherry pick doctors to match a political position. If one wants to support a political position one has to go with the consensus if it exists, or the patient's doctors recommendations.

 

[Kfox]

Then one has to go with the physicians for that particular patient. Sorry, but you do not get to cherry pick doctors to match a political position. If one wants to support a political position one has to go with the consensus if it exists, or the patient's doctors recommendations.

If that were true, Michael Jackson's doctor would not have been sent to prison

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But what should or should not be under the medical standard of care is not agreed upon;

As is normal. Standards of care are always evolving based on new information.

otherwise, Europe would not be in the process or scaling back their trans youth care model.

Sounds like you're operating from a bunch of assumptions that I wouldn't think are reasonable and I have no interest in debating them as if they are.

 

[F1fan]

From f1fan and libre:



Yes, we hear that claim frequently. But step back and consider what's required to come to such a conclusion. I'm happy for the good result reported above, but without control groups IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW why the good outcome happened. It could have also been a good outcome if the only intervention was talk therapy.



The topic is GAC for people under 21. Once a person turns 21 they should have agency as long as they're not hurting others.



The topic is youth with gender dysphoria. We do not know whether they will end up trans or not. Many end up going through puberty and being gay.

As for my "anti-trans contributions" - find one. My only issue is with doing irreversible medical interventions on youth, when we know that many such youth will grow past GD.

You have opinions that you think should be authorized legally, but your opinion lacks expertise. In my way of thinking I defer to what experts understand, and how they deal with their patients. There are medical boards that review treatments and medical ethics, and I leave it to them to set the standards under the law, and within individual rights to privacy and pursuit of happiness.

It's ironic that liberals are the one's advocating for individual right, autonomy and agency while the conservatives are playing big government, nanny state control over citizens bodies and lives.

 

[icehorse]

Thanks -- I noticed it the first time. I'm still unclear concerning the subtext of your thought experiment.

Ah got it. This is not the first time I've criticized the standard "gender affirming care" approach. Defenders of GAC often say to me that we should "trust the doctors", so I brought up the opioid crisis as a sort of preemptive answer to that argument.

 

[icehorse]

You have opinions that you think should be authorized legally, but your opinion lacks expertise.

I've said nothing about legality, and I base my opinions on the links provided and many more sources I could point to.

And zooming out, isn't this entire forum designed for people to debate?

There are medical boards that review treatments and medical ethics, and I leave it to them to set the standards under the law, and within individual rights to privacy and pursuit of happiness.

Not as much in the US as in Europe, and in Europe the GAC is being undone in country after country. And indeed, Europe's health care system is far better than the US's so I think it's quite valid to consider Europe's lead on this issue, no?

 

[icehorse]

It's ironic that liberals are the one's advocating for individual right, autonomy and agency while the conservatives are playing big government, nanny state control over citizens bodies and lives.

On this point, I largely agree. This serious medical condition has - sadly - become a political hot potato

 

[F1fan]

No; I'm suggesting the politician is getting his views concerning policy from multiple doctors and professionals, and those doctors and professionals don't always agree

Like climate change, where big business and conservatives will look for the few fringe experts whose work and conclusions are questionable, and then present these opinions as if they represent the consensus when it doesn't? That's why the much larger majority has a louder voice, because it has a broader coalition of experts who bring in more work, more data, and better conclusions.

Medice has numerous boards that monitor and regulate drugs, treatments, and ethics. It's an ongoing debate, and as experts we shoul defer to them, not right wingers who want control over citizens bodies and rights.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's ironic that liberals are the one's advocating for individual right, autonomy and agency while the conservatives are playing big government, nanny state control over citizens bodies and lives.

That's how it's always been. There's that old joke about how conservatives want a government small enough to stuff in a vagina.

 

[icehorse]

So you want dead trans kids.

There is no good evidence that the GAC protocol reduces suicides or suicidal thoughts.

If you think there is, please provide links to studies that use control groups to come to this conclusion. The Dutch protocol, upon which the GAC was designed, failed to use control groups.

NO conclusions of efficacy can be made without control groups, correct?

 

[icehorse]

Like climate change, where big business and conservatives will look for the few fringe experts whose work and conclusions are questionable, and then present these opinions as if they represent the consensus when it doesn't? That's why the much larger majority has a louder voice, because it has a broader coalition of experts who bring in more work, more data, and better conclusions.

Medice has numerous boards that monitor and regulate drugs, treatments, and ethics. It's an ongoing debate, and as experts we shoul defer to them, not right wingers who want control over citizens bodies and rights.

We should all be demanding to see good quality data. Sadly, the GAC has been rammed forward without good quality data to support it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Defenders of GAC often say to me that we should "trust the doctors", so I brought up the opioid crisis as a sort of preemptive answer to that argument.

It sound like a right-wing conspiratorial reframing of making the perfect the enemy of the good.

But tell me: Who would you suggest we (provisionally) trust and why? BTW, are you vaccinated?