The evidence supporting "gender affirming care" is of very low reliability

[icehorse]

Below are links to articles and videos that would probably take several hours to read / watch.

Here are some summaries of the links below:

- Young people with gender dysphoria often have serious mental conditions like depression and suicidal thoughts. It's important to treat people with these conditions.

- When it comes to standard medical protocols for treating young people with gender dysphoria (GD), the Dutch protocol, created in 2011 and revised several times since then has become the de facto medical protocol throughout the West. The Dutch Protocol is largely what underlies what's often referred to as "gender affirming care" (GAC).

In a nutshell, the Dutch Protocol prescribes:
1 - talk therapy
2 - if necessary, the use of puberty blockers and hormones
3 - if necessary, surgeries

The Dutch claimed that by using this protocol, youths with GD had improved mental health outcomes, e.g., less depression, fewer suicidal thoughts.

- In may western countries such as the U.S., GAC is the standard approach to treat youths with GD.

- The Dutch protocol was adopted quickly across many countries because these countries were faced with a huge spike in youths with GD and had little experience in treating this condition.

- Now, after over a decade, the Dutch protocol is facing a replication crisis. Other countries following this protocol are NOT seeing the results reported by the Dutch.

_ Several European countries are now abandoning the Dutch Protocol.

- Recently several meta-studies have been conducted. These meta-studies review a wide range of existing studies to see if any patterns emerge.

- The results of these meta-studies are uniform in concluding that the evidence for the benefits of GAC / Dutch Protocol, IS OF VERY LOW RELIABILITY.

- Further analysis of the Dutch research is that THERE WERE NO CONTROL GROUPS.

CONTROL GROUPS are ESSENTIAL to medical research. For example, the Dutch should have had a control of kids that received no medical interventions. They should have had a control group that had only talk therapy, and so on. These control groups did not exist.

So when the Dutch claimed improved mental health, no one knows whether doing nothing or doing just talk therapy would have had similar or perhaps even better results.

==

Note: in this first link after the "www." are 5 characters - starting with "b" that refer to female dogs

https://www.*****ute.com/video/AEFZv6dqtERN/

‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’

My country, and others, found there is no solid evidence supporting the medical transitioning of young people. Why aren’t American clinicians paying attention?

www.thefp.com

The 2023 Dutch Debate Over Youth Transitions

Medical, legal, and cultural debate over the practice of youth gender transitions has come to the birthplace of the Dutch Protocol.

www.realityslaststand.com

Making the Case for the Other Side

Opponents of Texas’s proposed ban on “gender-affirming care” inadvertently prove why the ban is justified.

www.city-journal.org

https://ahca.myflorida.com/content/download/4864/file/AHCA_GAPMS_June_2022_Attachment_C.pdf

 

[Koldo]

And here I am... thinking that even if hormone therapy doesn't improve well-being, people's personal autonomy to make informed decisions about themselves and their bodies still takes precedence.

 

[icehorse]

And here I am... thinking that even if hormone therapy doesn't improve well-being, people's personal autonomy to make informed decisions about themselves and their bodies still takes precedence.

Just to be clear, this thread is about young people, not adults.

And, although it wasn't mentioned explicitly, it's also about doctors "doing no harm".

 

[Heyo]

Below are links to articles and videos that would probably take several hours to read / watch.

Here are some summaries of the links below:

- Young people with gender dysphoria often have serious mental conditions like depression and suicidal thoughts. It's important to treat people with these conditions.

- When it comes to standard medical protocols for treating young people with gender dysphoria (GD), the Dutch protocol, created in 2011 and revised several times since then has become the de facto medical protocol throughout the West. The Dutch Protocol is largely what underlies what's often referred to as "gender affirming care" (GAC).

In a nutshell, the Dutch Protocol prescribes:
1 - talk therapy
2 - if necessary, the use of puberty blockers and hormones
3 - if necessary, surgeries

The Dutch claimed that by using this protocol, youths with GD had improved mental health outcomes, e.g., less depression, fewer suicidal thoughts.

- In may western countries such as the U.S., GAC is the standard approach to treat youths with GD.

- The Dutch protocol was adopted quickly across many countries because these countries were faced with a huge spike in youths with GD and had little experience in treating this condition.

- Now, after over a decade, the Dutch protocol is facing a replication crisis. Other countries following this protocol are NOT seeing the results reported by the Dutch.

_ Several European countries are now abandoning the Dutch Protocol.

- Recently several meta-studies have been conducted. These meta-studies review a wide range of existing studies to see if any patterns emerge.

- The results of these meta-studies are uniform in concluding that the evidence for the benefits of GAC / Dutch Protocol, IS OF VERY LOW RELIABILITY.

- Further analysis of the Dutch research is that THERE WERE NO CONTROL GROUPS.

CONTROL GROUPS are ESSENTIAL to medical research. For example, the Dutch should have had a control of kids that received no medical interventions. They should have had a control group that had only talk therapy, and so on. These control groups did not exist.

So when the Dutch claimed improved mental health, no one knows whether doing nothing or doing just talk therapy would have had similar or perhaps even better results.

==

Note: in this first link after the "www." are 5 characters - starting with "b" that refer to female dogs

https://www.*****ute.com/video/AEFZv6dqtERN/

‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’

My country, and others, found there is no solid evidence supporting the medical transitioning of young people. Why aren’t American clinicians paying attention?

www.thefp.com

The 2023 Dutch Debate Over Youth Transitions

Medical, legal, and cultural debate over the practice of youth gender transitions has come to the birthplace of the Dutch Protocol.

www.realityslaststand.com

Making the Case for the Other Side

Opponents of Texas’s proposed ban on “gender-affirming care” inadvertently prove why the ban is justified.

www.city-journal.org

https://ahca.myflorida.com/content/download/4864/file/AHCA_GAPMS_June_2022_Attachment_C.pdf

So, it seems we are in a position of "nobody knows". That doesn't justify any bans, all it justifies is more and better studies (and maybe a refusal from insurance companies to pay for GAC).
There are "treatments" that are far beyond simple ignorance, treatments that are known to have no effect like homoeopathy and "faith healing", that aren't banned.

 

[Koldo]

Just to be clear, this thread is about young people, not adults.

And, although it wasn't mentioned explicitly, it's also about doctors "doing no harm".

Just to clarify your position: Do you think teenagers shouldn't be able to make the choice to take hormones on these cases even if they have been through therapy and have been made aware of the consequences of this choice?

 

[libre]

Gender affirming care saved my eldest sibling's life.
The evidence shows that GAC considerably reduces suicidality and depression.

The biggest threat to trans people is the marginalization and demonization of their community, such as your varied anti-trans contributions I've seen in the last week or so since joining this forum.

It's rather convenient that those who actively seek to ostracize the trans community are the most concerned about their medical treatment.

 

[icehorse]

So, it seems we are in a position of "nobody knows". That doesn't justify any bans, all it justifies is more and better studies (and maybe a refusal from insurance companies to pay for GAC).
There are "treatments" that are far beyond simple ignorance, treatments that are known to have no effect like homoeopathy and "faith healing", that aren't banned.

As discussed in the links provided, steps 2 and 3 in GAC are dangerous and to varying degrees irreversible.

Just to clarify your position: Do you think teenagers shouldn't be able to make the choice to take hormones on these cases even if they have been through therapy and have been made aware of the consequences of this choice?

As discussed in the links provided, the consequences are not yet well known.

Gender affirming care saved my eldest sibling's life.
The evidence shows that GAC considerably reduces suicidality and depression.

The biggest threat to trans people is the marginalization and demonization of their community, such as your varied anti-trans contributions I've seen in the last week or so since joining this forum.

It's rather convenient that those who actively seek to ostracize the trans community are the most concerned about their medical treatment.

For the record, I'm not anti-trans. But this thread is not about me, so it would be good if we can stick to the topic, thanks.

As discussed in the links provided, the doctors who are concerned about the efficacy of GAC are certainly NOT anti-trans! They are trying to find the best ways to help kids with GD.

As discussed in the links provided, many kids with GD, grow out of it naturally. And many of the kids that grow out of it end up being gay.

 

[We Never Know]

A little reality that I read last week....

Take 50 women and 50 men and put them on a deserted island. Go back in a 100 years and there will be a thriving population.

Take 50 transwomen and 50 men and put them on a deserted island. Go back in a 100 years and there will be 100 male skeletons.

 

[Koldo]

As discussed in the links provided, the consequences are not yet well known.

And therefore the public policy should be...?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It doesn't work, says the transphobe.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

A little reality that I read last week....

Take 50 women and 50 men and put them on a deserted island. Go back in a 100 years and there will be a thriving population.

Take 50 transwomen and 50 men and put them on a deserted island. Go back in a 100 years and there will be 100 male skeletons.

Actually we found among the oldest buriel sight skeletons that are male but burried like the female skeletons.
This means trams people have existed since pre-history, it's just bigots who have a problem with them as others have been ok with it for thousands and thousands of years. Even our pagan ancestors had deities who regularly cross dressed, gender bending amd even going from one sex to the other.
Amd way to ignore your OP being discussed in previous threads because it turns out they aren't quitting them. They're still doing them. You just hate transpeople and jumped the gun to assume it's a failure. But still your ignorance of the topic radiates from you.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As discussed in the links provided, steps 2 and 3 in GAC are dangerous and to varying degrees irreversible.



As discussed in the links provided, the consequences are not yet well known.



For the record, I'm not anti-trans. But this thread is not about me, so it would be good if we can stick to the topic, thanks.

As discussed in the links provided, the doctors who are concerned about the efficacy of GAC are certainly NOT anti-trans! They are trying to find the best ways to help kids with GD.

As discussed in the links provided, many kids with GD, grow out of it naturally. And many of the kids that grow out of it end up being gay.

The OP is clueless that the SOC has been revised several times over the decades, and that's how medicine works. It's all constantly reevaluated and reexamined and adjusted where necessary. Like where I work, it's existed for decades, I've been there a month and already a couple things have changed. Or we can look at the DSM. 5 made some significant changes from 4. 3 removed homosexuality as a disorder, which 1 amd 2 did include.
The OP's ignorance of the subject clouds his views amd approaches and presents arguments with many gaps, holes and bad arguments that could be easily fixed by learning the history of the subject. But he's ignored all that amd thus earned being called a transphobe.

 

[PureX]

I find this whole issue interesting in that it appears to me to be based on the old axiom that an option (choice) has to be perceived to be an option; to exist.

I doubt very much that human biology has somehow morphed so greatly in the last 40 years that we are now birthing a generation of young people with new forms of non-binary gender identities. So what is really causing this phenomenon, if it's not morphed biology?

My guess is that it's morphed gender cognition. It's not that young people today are any more confused or ambivalent about their sexuality than young people of the past were, it's that they they have become AWARE of their ambivalence, and have had some time to study and commiserate amongst each other about it (thanks to the internet) and they have devised labels and solutions for the various common aspects of it. Gender Dysphoria has become a REAL THING, cognitively speaking. I mean, it always was a thing, but it went under the cultural cognitive radar until now because there was no mechanism (or willingness) available to bring it to light. And now there is: via the internet.

So it's understandable that we don't know how to address it as a mental or physical health issue. It's new to us. But it's not make-believe. It's a real thing, now, and we really do need to find ways of accomodating and dealing with it. We can't just ignore it as we could in the past. The 'cat is out of the bag', now.

 

[We Never Know]

Actually we found among the oldest buriel sight skeletons that are male but burried like the female skeletons.
This means trams people have existed since pre-history, it's just bigots who have a problem with them as others have been ok with it for thousands and thousands of years. Even our pagan ancestors had deities who regularly cross dressed, gender bending amd even going from one sex to the other.
Amd way to ignore your OP being discussed in previous threads because it turns out they aren't quitting them. They're still doing them. You just hate transpeople and jumped the gun to assume it's a failure. But still your ignorance of the topic radiates from you.

"they aren't quitting them. They're still doing them"

Who are 'they' and what are 'them' that 'they're' still doing?

"You just hate transpeople"

So quoting a post that I read that's reality equals 'I hate transpeople? Lmao

And bravo for actually addressing what my post said

 

[icehorse]

The OP is clueless that the SOC has been revised several times over the decades, and that's how medicine works. It's all constantly reevaluated and reexamined and adjusted where necessary. Like where I work, it's existed for decades, I've been there a month and already a couple things have changed. Or we can look at the DSM. 5 made some significant changes from 4. 3 removed homosexuality as a disorder, which 1 amd 2 did include.
The OP's ignorance of the subject clouds his views amd approaches and presents arguments with many gaps, holes and bad arguments that could be easily fixed by learning the history of the subject. But he's ignored all that amd thus earned being called a transphobe.

As a poster, I'm only summarizing what expert doctors are saying. So are you making the claim that doctors like Dr. Kaltiala, the head of GD care in Finland, is a transphobe?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"they aren't quitting them. They're still doing them"

Who are 'they' and what are 'them'?

"You just hate transpeople"

So quoting a post that I read that's reality equals 'I hate transpeople? Lmao

And bravo for actually addressing what my post said

I have already addressed it in previous threads where you brought it up.
Amd its not just this thread. It's thread after thread after thread of yours that says nothing more than **** trans people.

 

[icehorse]

And therefore the public policy should be...?

Well the way medicine usually works is that valid scientific studies - that must include control groups - are done before new protocols are put into public use.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As a poster, I'm only summarizing what expert doctors are saying. So are you making the claim that doctors like Dr. Kaltiala, the head of GD care in Finland, is a transphobe?

It's called "peer review." You have to compare all the data amd not just a few points you agree with.

 

[We Never Know]

I have already addressed it in previous threads where you brought it up.
Amd its not just this thread. It's thread after thread after thread of yours that says nothing more than **** trans people.

Sure sure lol.

True or false... here's your chance to shine with your great knowledge...

Take 50 women and 50 men and put them on a deserted island. Go back in a 100 years and there will be a thriving population.
Take 50 transwomen and 50 men and put them on a deserted island. Go back in a 100 years and there will be 100 male skeletons.

 

[The Hammer]

Just to be clear, this thread is about young people, not adults.

And, although it wasn't mentioned explicitly, it's also about doctors "doing no harm".

If the maxim was "do no harm" they couldn't be doctors. Surgery, injections, etc are all inherently harming.

It's "minimize harm"