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

[Debater Slayer]

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.

It's a hypothetical that will never happen, though, so sans context that would clarify its purpose, I suspect the person who originally came up with it might have just wanted to incite anti-trans feelings in their target audience.

Besides, many cisgender people are infertile due to natural causes, health issues, voluntary surgery, or old age. Fertility is only one aspect of our sexuality, after all (and some fertile people also opt to be childless anyway).

 

[The Hammer]

First, do no harm - Harvard Health

...

www.health.harvard.edu

"As an important step in becoming a doctor, medical students must take the Hippocratic Oath. And one of the promises within that oath is "first, do no harm" (or "primum non nocere," the Latin translation from the original Greek.)

Right?

Wrong."

 

[icehorse]

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

Which is EXACTLY what doctors like Dr. Kaltiala are doing, peer review. All I'm doing is summarizing what these doctors are saying. You are welcome to review the links I provided.

Think about what Dr. Kaltiala has gone thru. For years she supported and used the Dutch protocol. She wants to help kids with GD. And now she's saying that she was wrong. That takes a lot of courage.

 

[Soandso]

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.

Says "reality" then goes on to explain a scenario that will never ever happen in reality

 

[We Never Know]

It's a hypothetical that will never happen, though, so sans context that would clarify its purpose, I think the person who originally came up with it might have just wanted to incite anti-trans feelings in their target audience.

Besides, many cisgender people are infertile due to natural causes, health issues, voluntary surgery, or old age. Fertility is only one aspect of our sexuality, after all (and some fertile people also opt to be childless anyway).

Who are cisgender people?
There are...
males and transgender males
females and transgender females

Why does anyone need to say...
Bob is a cismale
Bill is a transgender male

When this is pretty clear..
Bob is a male
Bill is a transgender male

No label needed to keep them separated, no confusion.

 

[We Never Know]

Says "reality" then goes on to explain a scenario that will never ever happen in reality

Its not a matter of if it happens.... Its a matter of how it would turn out if it did.

 

[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.

"Amd its not just this thread. It's thread after thread after thread of yours that says nothing more than **** trans people"

Btw, this is not my thread. Most of my threads were about transgenders in sports. @Saint Frankenstein (or someone else) pointed out even though they were different threads, they weren't bringing anything new. Therefore I haven't posted a thread about transgenders in a while.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Who are cisgender people?
There are...
males and transgender males
females and transgender females

Why does anyone need to say...
Bob is a cismale
Bill is a transgender male

When this is pretty clear..
Bob is a male
Bill is a transgender male

No label needed to keep them separated, no confusion.

The label "cisgender" is used to distinguish people whose gender aligns with their birth sex from people whose gender doesn't. It has to do with gender rather than sex, so while "man" is an umbrella label that includes all men, "cisgender" and "transgender" give further information that "man" alone doesn't.

It's true that the vast majority of people are cisgender, so using "man" or "woman" without a prefix usually suffices and leaves no ambiguity. The labels are useful in some contexts where the distinctions are necessary, though, such as in some medical contexts.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Who are cisgender people?
There are...
males and transgender males
females and transgender females

Why does anyone need to say...
Bob is a cismale
Bill is a transgender male

When this is pretty clear..
Bob is a male
Bill is a transgender male

No label needed to keep them separated, no confusion.

I personally think the "cis" thing is stupid, myself, and stopped using it. It's just making language clunkier. It's not something you'd use offline, anyway, unless you travel in certain circles (which I don't and prefer not to). If you're a man, you're a man. If you're a woman, you're a woman. I don't even go around calling myself a trans man.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I personally think the "cis" thing is stupid, myself, and stopped using it. It's just making language clunkier. It's not something you'd use offline, anyway, unless you travel in certain circles (which I don't and prefer not to). If you're a man, you're a man. If you're a woman, you're a woman. I don't even go around calling myself a trans man.

I've never needed to use it offline, although I think it's useful in certain contexts (mainly medical ones), as I said in my previous post.

 

[We Never Know]

I've never needed to use it offline, although I think it's useful in certain contexts (mainly medical ones), as I said in my previous post.

In medical how is Bob is a male and Bill is a transgender male confusing to where cis is needed?

 

[Debater Slayer]

In medical how is Bob is a male and Bill is a transgender male confusing to where cis is needed?

It's not so much about confusion as precision and the relevance of gender to certain situations. For example, the therapist of one of my friends asked him whether he was trans in the context of the sessions because, where I'm from, that would have meant a significantly different set of techniques would have been needed in my friend's treatment, since trans people face far more legal, social, and religious challenges than cis ones.

No one I know, trans or not, goes around declaring a prefix before their gender every time they mention their gender, but the above situation is an example of a context where the distinction is necessary.

 

[Koldo]

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.

And therefore... ?
Would you say that trans teenagers shouldn't have access to hormone therapy until there is further research?

If so, I disagree. In case of ambiguous or inconclusive evidence, it should be up to personal choice.

 

[libre]

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.

I don't think they are necessarily hateful, but I think one should be very careful when considering how some wish to 'help' LGBT people.
The Christians who would send us queers to conversion therapy want to 'help' us after all, but this does not reassure us.

This study found that 'pubertal suppression for transgender adolescents who want this treatment is associated with favorable mental health outcomes.' Pubertal Suppression for Transgender Youth and Risk of Suicidal Ideation

I've also spoken enough with doctors about GAC personally that I am confident the links in your article do not represent the dominant position in the field. Transition regret is incredibly low at under a percent, and the dominant reason for transition regret is because of social pressure against trans people.

The dominant mental health threat to trans kids is transphobia, not with medical transition. Unfortunately, the politically charged media isn't going to as emphatically defend the children against transphobia as it will 'protect' them by advocating against medical treatment.

 

[Koldo]

I personally think the "cis" thing is stupid, myself, and stopped using it. It's just making language clunkier. It's not something you'd use offline, anyway, unless you travel in certain circles (which I don't and prefer not to). If you're a man, you're a man. If you're a woman, you're a woman. I don't even go around calling myself a trans man.

It is handy as a common denominator. Trans men, in general, wouldn't be called as simply 'men' by most people.

 

[icehorse]

This study found that 'pubertal suppression for transgender adolescents who want this treatment is associated with favorable mental health outcomes.' Pubertal Suppression for Transgender Youth and Risk of Suicidal Ideation

I think you need to read this study more carefully, it's far from conclusive. For example, I saw no mention of the use of "talk therapy only" control groups.

I've also spoken enough with doctors about GAC personally that I am confident the links in your article do not represent the dominant position in the field. Transition regret is incredibly low at under a percent, and the dominant reason for transition regret is because of social pressure against trans people.

As has been discussed several times, the links I provided are newer. In general, when a doctor is presented with a condition unfamiliar to her, she will tend to trust the prevailing protocols. As the links I provided show, the prevailing protocols are now coming under harsh criticism.

The dominant mental health threat to trans kids is transphobia, not with medical transition. Unfortunately, the politically charged media isn't going to as emphatically defend the children against transphobia as it will 'protect' them by advocating against medical treatment.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I have never seen evidence of that claim.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Which is EXACTLY what doctors like Dr. Kaltiala are doing, peer review. All I'm doing is summarizing what these doctors are saying. You are welcome to review the links I provided.

Think about what Dr. Kaltiala has gone thru. For years she supported and used the Dutch protocol. She wants to help kids with GD. And now she's saying that she was wrong. That takes a lot of courage.

And I can furnish far more that says otherwise. But, in other threads you have consistently dismissed it.
You aren't interested in debate or learning. You are clearly only interested in attacking transpeople.
And to remind you, your agenda harms ciswomen the most.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I personally think the "cis" thing is stupid, myself, and stopped using it. It's just making language clunkier. It's not something you'd use offline, anyway, unless you travel in certain circles (which I don't and prefer not to). If you're a man, you're a man. If you're a woman, you're a woman. I don't even go around calling myself a trans man.

I've not known anyone who uses it unless it's necessary to clarify things.
Like, pointing out to a certain member who claimed only trans people use prefered pronouns, but I noticed my boss opted to have she/her added to her name tag, amd in this case it becomes necessary to point out she's a ciswoman to counter the claim of it just being something trans people do.
Other than that it's something I just don't use or see or hear. It's very context specific and heavily confined to specific uses.
It does seem, especially here, the transphobes use it TONS more than trans, allies and everyone else combined.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

In medical how is Bob is a male and Bill is a transgender male confusing to where cis is needed?

Actually learn about it and your confusion will clear up.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

"Amd its not just this thread. It's thread after thread after thread of yours that says nothing more than **** trans people"

Btw, this is not my thread. Most of my threads were about transgenders in sports. @Saint Frankenstein (or someone else) pointed out even though they were different threads, they weren't bringing anything new. Therefore I haven't posted a thread about transgenders in a while.

Sorry, I seem to have confused you two horses again.