South Carolina OKs ban on gender affirming care.

[Laniakea]

When people pursue legilation against LGBT, of course it's about exerting power and curtailing freedom.

Freedom to recruit children to buy into it? Freedom of doctors to perform unnecessary procedures on children, depriving them of their childhood and even the ability to have children in the future? Freedom of pharmaceutical companies to sell more drugs to inject into children to disfigure their body? Freedom of LBTG school teachers to push their views onto children and keep secrets from the parents?

 

[icehorse]

I don't think your experience in writing Tables of Contents gives you the expertise needed to draw meaningful medical conclusions from a set of headlines.

Can you read the single page I asked you to? 'Detransition rates in a national UK Gender Identity Clinic', which I provided the page number for.

Consider it read. Now I mean this with respect.. so what?

This study considers ONLY people who went thru GAC.

How about finding a study that compares regret for people who grew threw their GD without drugs or surgeries?

==

Now as a second point: The document YOU provided is loaded with studies that address the variety of medical problems associated with these drugs and therapies. Can we at least agree that these drugs and surgeries are dangerous and irreversible?

 

[Father Heathen]

Sure, anything to demonize your opponent.

An ironic accusation to make in a thread about the trangender witch hunt.

 

[Left Coast]

A strong gender identity needs more than that because it seeks to actualize and fully dominate the self. The gender specialists need more than that because they derive their meaning through full transition. The kids are simply on the ride.

How many gender specialists do you know who have told you this?

 

[Laniakea]

An ironic accusation to make in a thread about the trangender witch hunt.

Witch hunt?
Hyperbole!!!

 

[icehorse]

No, it doesn't assume that. We have data demonstrating that GAC improves gender dysphoria. Thus why clinical professionals endorse and prescribe it.

No you do not. Your data only shows that lots of kids with GD ended up feeling better. Your data in NO WAY demonstrates that the reason they felt better was because of GAC.

A lot of kids with GD grow through it, full stop.

You're advocating that GAC literally be banned for minors. If you're conceding that GAC is effective at least sometimes, shouldn't it be up to licensed medical professionals to determine when and how various GAC interventions are appropriate for a given patient?

Correct, that's what I'm advocating. In general I'd say that dangerous interventions should not be used until their efficacy is proven.

The reality is that we do not yet have any perfect approaches to GD.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

I think I spoke too soon on not being called a bigot or transphobe in this thread. It’s coming in 3.. 2.. 1..

 

[icehorse]

This is silly reasoning. No licensed medical professional is just randomly "trying something out" when they prescribe hormones or puberty blockers or recommend surgery for a trans or non-binary patient. They're using established clinical protocols that we have empirical evidence are effective.

Again, there is no good evidence.

Find me a meta study that compares the efficacy of drugs / surgeries compared to talk therapy only.

 

[icehorse]

When people pursue legilation against LGBT, of course it's about exerting power and curtailing freedom.

And what legislation are you talking about here? Banning GAC is NOT anti-LGB and it's not even anti-T.

 

[Left Coast]

No you do not. Your data only shows that lots of kids with GD ended up feeling better. Your data in NO WAY demonstrates that the reason they felt better was because of GAC.

This is basic inference from experimentation. If we compare a group who got an intervention to a group who didn't, and the group who got the intervention improved, that's evidence that the intervention improved the condition. If you don't comprehend that concept, I can't help you at this point.

A lot of kids with GD grow through it, full stop.

A lot of kids who get GAC improve after they get GAC, full stop.

Correct, that's what I'm advocating. In general I'd say that dangerous interventions should not be used until their efficacy is proven.

The efficacy of GAC HAS been proven. I'm not continuing on this merry go round with you.

The reality is that we do not yet have any perfect approaches to GD.

Since when do we need perfect approaches? That is never the standard in medicine.

 

[Father Heathen]

Freedom to recruit children to buy into it?

"Recruit" children to "buy into" what? That LGBT people exist?

Freedom of doctors to perform unnecessary procedures on children, depriving them of their childhood and even the ability to have children in the future? Freedom of pharmaceutical companies to sell more drugs to inject into children to disfigure their body?

These tired strawmen have been thoroughly addressed multiple already on this forum, if not this very thread.

Freedom of LBTG school teachers to push their views onto children

Teaching children to empathetic and critical thinkers is an essental part of a quality education.

and keep secrets from the parents?

Outing a child to homophobic/transphobic parents would very likely subject them to abuse.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

As you have already been shown, the article says that it's TRANSITIONERS WHO CHANGED THEIR SEX FROM WHAT THEY WERE BORN WITH that have the regrets.

I don't think it'll do any good explaining to you how you're misreading that study again. I've even given links to the actual scientist responsible for the study speaking about his research. If you ever feel like expanding past a single sentence you're getting hung up on, the resources are available.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I'll ask you all again:

If a kid has GD, what's the goal of any therapeutic or medical intervention?

We'll answer you again:

As with any medical condition, to address and alleviate it.

And if that isn't satisfactory, then I think maybe we should go the whole 9 yards -- ban every sort of treatment until a person of age to make an informed opinion about whether they want it or not! I mean, maybe the kid doesn't like the hare-lip or cleft-palate today, but can you be positive they wouldn't like it when they're of age? It's easy enough to opine that conjoined twin babies might wish to grow up separated -- but what if they regret, later in life, that they'll never be that close to anybody ever again?

Yeah, yeah, that was hyperbole -- but the only reason this is an issue should be clear as day to anyone with eyes to see --- it's about SEX which frightens whole congregations of religious folks to death.

 

[icehorse]

This is basic inference from experimentation. If we compare a group who got an intervention to a group who didn't, and the group who got the intervention improved, that's evidence that the intervention improved the condition. If you don't comprehend that concept, I can't help you at this point.

Again, we're agreed.

Now all you have to do is show us the meta study that compares GAC to talk therapy only

 

[Father Heathen]

And if that isn't satisfactory, then I think maybe we should go the whole 9 yards -- ban every sort of treatment until a person of age to make an informed opinion about whether they want it or not! I mean, maybe the kid doesn't like the hare-lip or cleft-palate today, but can you be positive they wouldn't like it when they're of age? It's easy enough to opine that conjoined twin babies might wish to grow up separated -- but what if they regret, later in life, that they'll never be that close to anybody ever again?

Yeah, yeah, that was hyperbole -- but the only reason this is an issue should be clear as day to anyone with eyes to see --- it's about SEX which frightens whole congregations of religious folks to death.

I wonder how many of these guys oppose infant circumcision.

 

[Treasure Hunter]

This is basic inference from experimentation. If we compare a group who got an intervention to a group who didn't, and the group who got the intervention improved, that's evidence that the intervention improved the condition. If you don't comprehend that concept, I can't help you at this point.



A lot of kids who get GAC improve after they get GAC, full stop.



The efficacy of GAC HAS been proven. I'm not continuing on this merry go round with you.



Since when do we need perfect approaches? That is never the standard in medicine.

The most recent study I’ve seen still has over 40% with suicidal ideation (down from 70%) post GAC. That is a clear sign of a bandaid treatment, and the benefits are due to (unintentional) affirmative care of the self; not affirmative care of the gender identity.

Again, affirmative care is needed, but not GAC.

 

[icehorse]

And if that isn't satisfactory, then I think maybe we should go the whole 9 yards -- ban every sort of treatment until a person of age to make an informed opinion about whether they want it or not! I mean, maybe the kid doesn't like the hare-lip or cleft-palate today, but can you be positive they wouldn't like it when they're of age? It's easy enough to opine that conjoined twin babies might wish to grow up separated -- but what if they regret, later in life, that they'll never be that close to anybody ever again?

Yeah, yeah, that was hyperbole -- but the only reason this is an issue should be clear as day to anyone with eyes to see --- it's about SEX which frightens whole congregations of religious folks to death.

GD is a mental condition, correct? The goal is to make kids with GD feel better mentally, correct?

As with all good interventions, we should constrain ourselves only to those that are effective, and as safe as possible. GAC has no proven efficacy and is not safe.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I wonder how many of these guys oppose infant circumcision.

80% of American baby boys are circumcised. In Canada, it's now under 30%.

 

[libre]

Consider it read. Now I mean this with respect.. so what?

You asked me for my source for why I was saying people were overwhelmingly satisfied with GAC.
I provided a survey indicating that the overwhelming majority of transitioned people surveyed did not regret receiving their care.
The few people who were unsatisfied and decided to go back did so because of societal backlash, not because of the medical treatment. Most only detransitioned temporarily and went back to their identified gender.

This study considers ONLY people who went thru GAC.

It would be awfully difficult for people who did not go through GAC to report their satisfaction with receiving GAC treatment.

 

[libre]

Now as a second point: The document YOU provided is loaded with studies that address the variety of medical problems associated with these drugs and therapies. Can we at least agree that these drugs and surgeries are dangerous and irreversible?

If there is a specific part of that document that you would like to discuss, go ahead and name which part and we can go through it.

I'm personally not confident that I can draw nuanced conclusions from the table of contents and headlines as you are.