The L / G / B / T divide

Discuss the news, current events, politics, etc.

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 6 April 2021, 19:55

Brenden wrote:
Derek wrote:medical gatekeeping

In other words, following the proper medical procedure of diagnosis and conservative treatment options before prescribing body- and mind-altering, irreversible drugs and surgery. You know, like what is done for every other medical intervention.

You're just throwing out terminology made up by the very extremist activists we're discussing. The kinds of people like Mermaids, who want prepubescent children to be prescribed puberty blockers.

(Note that, as I have already brought up and cited many times, the vast majority of gender dysphoric children and adolescents desist by adulthood.)

I’m lost, are you for or against the following of proper medical diagnosis and conservative treatment options? Because you open with a quite pro-tone and then seem to take a tone that suggests that the people at Mermaids are worse than crack dealers for wanting children to be properly diagnosed and prescribed conservative treatments?
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 6 April 2021, 20:03

Brenden wrote:Also, I do not hate trans people. This is exactly the problem with all of this bullshit that this thread is about — anyone who has any criticism whatsoever gets labeled a transphobe or bigot or hateful person. It's the same as with 'homophobia' and 'misogyny' etc. You're just trying to shut down open discussion and opposing opinions. It's unbecoming.

I mean, surely you can see where Derek might draw the notion that you dislike trans people? You’ve never, not once, come close to referring to them in a tone that wasn’t dismissive. You see them as mentally delusional and fundamentally no different to schizophrenics, and have asserted more than once that they should be treated like schizophrenics, i.e, medicated into compliance and repeatedly told that their perception of themselves is wrong until they come to accept it.

I would never genuinely describe you as hating trans people because I genuinely don’t think you believe they exist, and who genuinely hates something they genuinely don’t think is real?
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Brenden » 6 April 2021, 20:10

Marmaduke wrote:
Brenden wrote:
Derek wrote:medical gatekeeping

In other words, following the proper medical procedure of diagnosis and conservative treatment options before prescribing body- and mind-altering, irreversible drugs and surgery. You know, like what is done for every other medical intervention.

You're just throwing out terminology made up by the very extremist activists we're discussing. The kinds of people like Mermaids, who want prepubescent children to be prescribed puberty blockers.

(Note that, as I have already brought up and cited many times, the vast majority of gender dysphoric children and adolescents desist by adulthood.)

I’m lost, are you for or against the following of proper medical diagnosis and conservative treatment options? Because you open with a quite pro-tone and then seem to take a tone that suggests that the people at Mermaids are worse than crack dealers for wanting children to be properly diagnosed and prescribed conservative treatments?

Puberty blockers are not a conservative treatment, transition is not a conservative treatment. A first-line conservative treatment for childhood gender dysphoria is THERAPY, since the vast majority of gender dysphoric children naturally desist by adulthood and live healthy lives as natal-gendered homosexuals, bisexuals, and even heterosexuals.

This is why the NHS and the BBC no longer direct parents to Mermaids, and why (as the second article I linked to above says) the NHS is reviewing the use of puberty blockers.

Marmaduke wrote:
Brenden wrote:Also, I do not hate trans people. This is exactly the problem with all of this bullshit that this thread is about — anyone who has any criticism whatsoever gets labeled a transphobe or bigot or hateful person. It's the same as with 'homophobia' and 'misogyny' etc. You're just trying to shut down open discussion and opposing opinions. It's unbecoming.

I mean, surely you can see where Derek might draw the notion that you dislike trans people? You’ve never, not once, come close to referring to them in a tone that wasn’t dismissive. You see them as mentally delusional and fundamentally no different to schizophrenics, and have asserted more than once that they should be treated like schizophrenics, i.e, medicated into compliance and repeatedly told that their perception of themselves is wrong until they come to accept it.

I would never genuinely describe you as hating trans people because I genuinely don’t think you believe they exist, and who genuinely hates something they genuinely don’t think is real?

Where have I said they should be "medicated into compliance"?

This is ridiculous. You are just forming wild straw men in your heads.

It is a mental disorder, just like every other mental disorder, the vast majority of which are best treated first by therapy before pharmaceutical or other intervention.

Just because someone has a perception of themselves as something doesn't make it so. This is why I have compared it to body dysmorphic disorder and anorexia nervosa (not schizophrenia).
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8896
+1s received: 3375
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Derek » 6 April 2021, 20:10

Brenden wrote:Why don't you give his piece a read?

I have. I've read quite a bit about this issue.

This is exactly the problem with all of this bullshit that this thread is about — anyone who has any criticism whatsoever gets labeled a transphobe or bigot or hateful person. It's the same as with 'homophobia' and 'misogyny' etc. You're just trying to shut down open discussion and opposing opinions. It's unbecoming.

To be clear, that was a specific accusation. I don't want to have this argument with you. We've been down this road before.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6837
+1s received: 2653
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby harel » 6 April 2021, 20:57

I do not understand any criticism towards transpeople, if it is not related to health. (I mean that the surgerical procedures are risky to health.) I have heard and read the discussion of transmen and I find it charming that they want to look and behave like men, i.a. they find advantageous the characteristics, which some men (usually, not me) do not appreciate at all. For example, low voice, facial hair etc. Most transmen wear packers every single day, whereas when I try on a pair of trousers, I do not buy them, if there is a big bulge from the zipper line or buttons.

Eryx wrote:Of course I still get angry at unfair wages, domestic abuse and abortion laws, but I'm not being vocal about it, the most I do is vote.
The main purpose of feminism is not to convince you to fight for the above. The main achievement of feminism is that you are aware of the areas where females are discriminated against, while the areas where men are discriminated are completely out of the agenda.
* Boys who perform equally as well as girls on tests are graded less favorably by their teachers: https://dx.doi.org/10.3368%2Fjhr.48.1.236
* Women receive prison sentences that were shorter, on average, than those of men who committed comparable offences: https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12333
* Retirement age
* Gender gap in disease prevention etc.


Eryx wrote:But that was still a problem, because to some I needed to engage more, and to some I shouldn't even be called an ally, but just a man.
Note that if you start mentioning about any discrimination against men, then you will be considered an enemy by feminists. Just because you mention not only women, while speaking about discrimination. Believe, I have checked it out. When I was a teenager, I believe that I was a feminist too.

I am sorry for the language mistakes: if Esperanto was an international language, we would have equal chances. :P
User avatar
harel
 
Posts: 74
+1s received: 13
Joined: 9 May 2020, 14:48

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby René » 6 April 2021, 21:05

I believe what concerns Brenden is the fact that some people argue for children to be given medications just because they ask for them, without appraisal of their appropriateness by qualified professionals.
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
René
Administrator
 
Posts: 7633
+1s received: 2774
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Maryland, USA / Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 6 April 2021, 21:06

I’m not going to get into a whole post tree, I really can’t be bothered with it, I’m posting from iOS. Who has the time? Can we just be adults, talk to each other without constantly referencing back to what we just said? If people are interested, they’ll read it and follow it.

My argument would be that puberty blockers are a conservative treatment. Whether or not their usage is under review by the NHS is ultimately meaningless until the NHS reaches a determination. It could decide that they’re to be more widely used, that no change is warranted or that stricter diagnostic criteria need be met before they are used. Until more information is made public as a result of the review, the position of the NHS is the same in practical terms as no formal guidance has been issued. The review is not concluded. You’re asserting it’s mere existence and supportive of the argument either way. It’s not.

I will absolutely concede that transition is not a conservative treatment, it’s exactly the opposite. It’s transformative, and in significant part irreversible. Point conceded. But puberty blockers aren’t that. Puberty blockers conserve the condition of the individual as best as possible in reference to their gender, because puberty - like transitioning - is a transformative and largely irreversible process. Puberty blockers provide the time for psychiatric therapy to be effectively undertaken in order to establish a baseline of the patient and determine if transitioning is a prospectively positive course of treatment, free of the condition of dysphasia being made more and more acute by an irreversible natural process that can be paused. Yes, there are causes for concern in that pausing. Reduced bone density, reduced growth in general, but medicine is rarely without a balance of cost versus benefit. And sure, whilst some of those that enter the process may end up passing through it and coming out the other end happy with their natal gender, some will not. Another medication with increasing evidence to suggest it causes reduced bone density in under 30s is PrEP, but outside of a hereditary bone condition existing in the family history it is almost always prescribed when asked for because the gains to be had from the benefits far outweigh the consequences of the risks. The balancing of that risk versus reward rests with the attending physician. Your argument to me seems to forget that, as if to suggest that attending physicians are overwhelmingly more-often-than-not grossly negligent in their factoring of that risk versus reward. And the NHS and BBC didn’t stop referring to mermaids because they had or have any views one way or the other about treatment. They stopped because the Mumsnet brigade kept flooding them with complaints, and the BBC upheld a farcical complaint that it shouldn’t offer trans support referrals at all on grounds of impartiality, and so outrageously it doesn’t offer any at all anymore.

But no, you’re right, I don’t believe you’ve ever advocated that transsexuals be medicated into compliance. That’s more an artistically licensed reference to the treatment of schizophrenia. I think comparing it to body dysmorphic disorder or anorexia nervosa is equally as overly-simplistic and dismissive as comparing it to schizophrenia, and I think I’d genuinely bet money that Dr. Marcus Evans would share that assessment. Even body dysmorphic disorder and anorexia nervosa are pretty universally listed under separate classifications of disorders, body dysmorphic disorder being a somatoform dissociative disorder, anorexia being psychoform dissociative disorder. These are purely psychiatric conditions. Gender dysphoria is widely accepted to be a result of as-yet undetermined genetic and biological factors.

I think you, like everyone else on the internet that seems so endearingly committed to saving the children from the horrors of systematic medical negligence in response to what is surely just a phase and was obviously the result of environmental factors and poor parenting, seem to exclusively refer to the treatment of transsexuals as surgical transition. You seem to view the issue as being black and white, and in your abject inability to discern shades of grey you dismiss everything not porcelain white as black to one extent or another.

Yes, many transsexuals undergo hormone therapy and surgical reassignment. Many do not. For many, simple support and guidance in accepting different ways of expressing themselves is enough. For others, counselling or psychotherapy is enough to help them resolve any dissonance they feel and live happily.

I think your problem personally in discussing this topic is not your response to treatments, nor your suggestion that most transsexuals should simply stick with counselling until they feel better about being the gender listed on their birth certificate, but rather that you cannot discern the grey. You cannot accept or appreciate that to some, gender is not a binary. Because you have not experienced it, you cannot reconcile it and so it must be wrong. There are only penises and vaginas and so the issue is a binary and that’s all there is to be said about it. Because you cannot seem to wrap your head around it at the broadest conceptual level, you certainly present as someone constantly striving to grasp minority opinions to justify his own prejudice because it’s easier than actually trying to reconcile an experience outside of your own into your understanding of the world around you and the people in it.
Last edited by Marmaduke on 6 April 2021, 21:12, edited 5 times in total.
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 6 April 2021, 21:07

René wrote:I believe what concerns Brenden is the fact that some people argue for children to be given medications just because they ask for them, without appraisal of their appropriateness by qualified professionals.

I don’t think anyone, anywhere, is arguing that children be given medications of any sort without the involvement of qualified medical professionals. If there are, Brenden should be concerning himself with the fact that morons are left in the custody of children, not what the morons are saying.
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby René » 6 April 2021, 21:17

Marmaduke wrote:
René wrote:I believe what concerns Brenden is the fact that some people argue for children to be given medications just because they ask for them, without appraisal of their appropriateness by qualified professionals.

I don’t think anyone, anywhere, is arguing that children be given medications of any sort without the involvement of qualified medical professionals. If there are, Brenden should be concerning himself with the fact that morons are left in the custody of children, not what the morons are saying.

At issue, I believe, is not that anyone argues there should be no involvement of qualified medical professionals, but rather that some insist the involvement of qualified medical professionals should be limited to the acquiescent prescribing of said medication following a request to do so, with any checks by e.g. mental-health professionals to make sure the treatment makes sense for the patient in question being decried as 'gatekeeping'.
ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
René
Administrator
 
Posts: 7633
+1s received: 2774
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Maryland, USA / Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 6 April 2021, 21:26

René wrote:
Marmaduke wrote:
René wrote:I believe what concerns Brenden is the fact that some people argue for children to be given medications just because they ask for them, without appraisal of their appropriateness by qualified professionals.

I don’t think anyone, anywhere, is arguing that children be given medications of any sort without the involvement of qualified medical professionals. If there are, Brenden should be concerning himself with the fact that morons are left in the custody of children, not what the morons are saying.

At issue, I believe, is not that anyone argues there should be no involvement of qualified medical professionals, but rather that some insist the involvement of qualified medical professionals should be limited to the acquiescent prescribing of said medication following a request to do so, with any checks by e.g. mental-health professionals to make sure the treatment makes sense for the patient in question being decried as 'gatekeeping'.

So we’re swinging all the way to the other side and apparently assuming that everyone that begins treatment must have slipped through the net somehow because “the vast majority “ of presenting cases will eventually be absolutely fine reconciling their gender to their sex at birth given enough counselling? You’ve got to agree, the tone here would seem to make the tacit suggestion that anyone prescribed gender reassignment surgery has probably been failed by a negligent doctor that just acquiesced to the trifling whims of the PC brigade?
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Derek » 6 April 2021, 21:41

René wrote:At issue, I believe, is not that anyone argues there should be no involvement of qualified medical professionals, but rather that some insist the involvement of qualified medical professionals should be limited to the acquiescent prescribing of said medication following a request to do so, with any checks by e.g. mental-health professionals to make sure the treatment makes sense for the patient in question being decried as 'gatekeeping'.

"Gatekeeping" legislation like the bill in Arkansas would make any form of medical transition illegal for minors, including hormones and puberty blockers. People say healthcare is politicized, then turn around and attempt to literally legislate it.

I guess we're living in a fantasy world where gender dysphoric minors aren't already undergoing therapy and social transitioning prior to medical transitioning, so it's impossible for a legitimate diagnosis to ever occur? Marmaduke is absolutely right. It's an unfalsifiable theory. If a kid doesn't transition, it's because their dysphoria was just a phase. If they do transition, it's because their doctors failed them in the name of a PC ideology which has warped scientific consensus itself. If there is such a thing as a trans youth, their treatment will have to wait because most cases of gender dysphoria in young people desist. Instead, they need therapy... which could never legitimately result in the conclusion that they should transition, which is something we know as experts without degrees or experience.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6837
+1s received: 2653
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Brenden » 6 April 2021, 22:44

A transgender clinic has been hit by 35 resignations in three years, as psychologists warn of “overdiagnoses” of gender dysphoria among children.

The whistleblowers said too many children were being put on puberty-blocking drugs when they should not have been given the diagnosis.

Former staff said they were unable to properly assess patients over fears they will be branded "transphobic".

The concerns were raised by six psychologists who have resigned from London's children's gender-identity service in the past three years.

One psychologist, who wished to remain anonymous, said: "Our fears are that young people are being over-diagnosed and then over-medicalised.

"We are extremely concerned about the consequences for young people... For those of us who previously worked in the service, we fear that we have had front row seats to a medical scandal."


Thirty-five psychologists have resigned from London's Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust since 2016, the investigation by Sky News reveals.

One psychologist said: "The alarm started ringing for me... I didn't feel able to voice my concerns, or when I did I was often shut down by other affirmative clinicians. Looking back there are young people who I now wouldn't necessarily put on medication."

Data shows the number of children treated at the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) has risen more than thirty-fold in a decade - from 77 to 2,590

The GIDS in Camden, north London, is where children with gender dysphoria are treated on the NHS.

The service had 2,590 young patients referred to them last year, compared with just 77 patients a decade ago.

It sees children under the age of 18 and, in rare cases, some as young as three.

In a statement, the GIDS said it supports every young person on a case-by-case basis, as an individual.

“GIDS takes a considered and thoughtful approach, and supports clinicians to engage openly and supportively with patients and parents.

'We have conducted exit interviews with all departing staff to understand their motivations and identify any areas of concern.

'The work is demanding and the pressures of operating in a busy service facing a high level of unfair criticism are intense, their motivations are as individual as they are.”

People with gender dysphoria experience discomfort or distress because they feel there is mismatch between their biological sex and identity.

Almost half of children treated at the GIDS are prescribed hormone-blockers that halt puberty, which resumes when the patient stops taking the drugs.

This gives children the time to consider whether they truly want to make the transition to the opposite sex.

But the drugs interfere with natural hormone production and can cause mood swings.

The next stage is hormone therapy. It sees youngsters take testosterone, if transitioning to a male, or oestrogen, if switching to female. This is normally not given to people under 16 because it is irreversible and can eventually make patients infertile.

Gender-reassignment surgery, the final step in transitioning from one sex to another, is reserved for patients over 18.

Thomasin, who spent most of her teen years identifying as male, switched back to being a female this year at the age of 19.

She was diagnosed with gender dysphoria by the Tavistock at 17 but was never prescribed medication.

Thomasin de-transitioned this year after realising she was struggling with her sexuality as a lesbian.

She said she was glad she never took irreversible steps to become male.

She said: “Mainly the thing that was fueling me was that I didn't fit in and then I was slowly drip fed this idea that you could change sex.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/1 ... ree-years/
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8896
+1s received: 3375
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Brenden » 6 April 2021, 22:50

The only NHS gender clinic for children is risking a “live experiment” by sending hundreds for life-changing medical intervention without sufficient evidence of its long-term effects, experts have warned.

The Times has spoken to five clinicians who resigned from the service because of concerns over the treatment of vulnerable children who come to the clinic presenting as transgender.

They believe that some gay children struggling with their sexuality are being wrongly diagnosed as “transgender” by the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) clinic.

All five former staff were responsible for deciding which trans-identifying youngsters should be given hormone blockers to halt their sexual development. The vast majority of those who begin blockers go on to irreversible cross-sex hormones once they reach 16.

The NHS specialists warned that vulnerable children and teenagers had been sent down the path towards transition before experts had time to assess the causes of their gender confusion.

An Oxford professor has also raised concerns about the safety of drug therapies used by the clinic, saying the treatments were “supported by low-quality evidence, or in many cases no evidence at all”.

The number of young people referred to the clinic in north London has soared. In 2010 there were 94 referrals. By last year there were 2,519. The youngest was aged three. The five clinicians are among at least 18 clinical staff who have resigned over the past three years.

In an internal review, seen by The Times, the GIDS admitted it needed to improve its referral system and the way it obtained and recorded informed consent before young people were sent for life-changing medical intervention.

“I felt for the last two years what kept me in the job was the sense there was a huge number of children in danger. I was there to protect children from being damaged,” one clinician said.

“This experimental treatment is being done on not only children, but very vulnerable children,” another said.

All five said they believed that transgender charities such as Mermaids were having a “harmful” effect by allegedly promoting transition as a cure-all solution for confused adolescents. The charities deny the allegation.

The clinicians said they were often under pressure to refer young people for life-altering treatment, even though they did not always believe it was in the individual’s best clinical interests.

The clinic said it used licensed precocious puberty drugs whose long-term effects were known and insisted that its service was safe and that, “in the growing evidence internationally on the outcomes . . . there is little reported evidence of harm”. “We always place a young person’s wellbeing at the centre of our work,” it said.

The specialists expressed concern that many children decided they wanted to change gender after suffering homophobic bullying. Yet these young people were still referred down the route of hormone treatment, they claimed, without clinicians always exploring the possibility they may simply be gay. One clinician said that she feared the use of hormone therapy for such children could result in a scandal.

The GIDS denies the claims, saying it offers a “safe” service that recognises and respects the complexity of its cases.

Under the clinic’s rules, a young person who has already started puberty may be referred for hormone blockers. These are physically reversible, insofar as the body will continue to develop if they are discontinued, but the long-term effect on brain development is unknown. Irreversible cross-sex hormones can be prescribed from 16.

Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre of Evidence-based Medicine at the University of Oxford, said: “Given paucity of evidence, the off-label use of drugs [for outcomes not covered by the medicine’s licence] in gender dysphoria treatment largely means an unregulated live experiment on children.”

The service insisted that its internal review “did not identify any immediate issues in relation to patient safety or failings in the overall approach taken by the service”.

The GIDS said that time and care was taken at every stage to ensure that individuals grasped the potential consequences of their choices. It said that its staff had no preconceptions as to the appropriate treatment and that discussions around sexuality “now form a more explicit part of our approach to assessment and exploration”.

Addressing concerns over the scarcity of evidence, it added: “It is only in recent years that the number of young people attending specialist services worldwide has dramatically increased. Prior to this the numbers have been small and it has therefore been difficult to collect sufficient evidence to fully evaluate treatment pathways. We and other specialist services worldwide are actively engaged in research to better understand the characteristics and needs of young people attending specialist services.”

The Department of Health said that “the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust is subject to inspections, monitoring and regulation”.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/call ... ion=global
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8896
+1s received: 3375
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Brenden » 6 April 2021, 22:51

The experts with first-hand experience are screaming and you all are just putting your fingers in your ears because you've bought into an ideology. It's honestly sickening.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8896
+1s received: 3375
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Derek » 6 April 2021, 23:51

Okay, since we're just listing articles now...

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/health/t ... index.html

The latest study, though, found that 16.9% of those who were part of a survey of the transgender community wanted pubertal suppression as a part of their gender-related care. Of those who were surveyed, only 2.5% got this treatment.
Those who underwent the puberty-blocking treatment had lower odds of lifetime suicidal ideation and past-month severe psychological distress, compared to those who wanted the treatment but did not receive it


https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25201798/

A clinical protocol of a multidisciplinary team with mental health professionals, physicians, and surgeons, including puberty suppression, followed by cross-sex hormones and gender reassignment surgery, provides gender dysphoric youth who seek gender reassignment from early puberty on, the opportunity to develop into well-functioning young adults.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223813/

Despite the limitations of the published literature, this review concludes that overall transgender people display poorer QoL than the general population, particularly pre-GAT, and that QoL improves once people are on CHT.

When specifically looking at the different dimensions of QoL (vQoL, sex-related QoL, and body image-related QoL), findings of the systematic review suggest that transgender people display poorer QoL than the general population, independent of the QoL domain investigated. As per general QoL, all dimensions of QoL have been shown to improve post-GAT. However, as the effect of GAT is linked to gender, a more positive vQOL was found for transgender men than transgender women at post-GAT, whilst opposite findings were obtained for sex-related QoL.


https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.e ... er-people/

This search found a robust international consensus in the peer-reviewed literature that gender transition, including medical treatments such as hormone therapy and surgeries, improves the overall well-being of transgender individuals. The literature also indicates that greater availability of medical and social support for gender transition contributes to better quality of life for those who identify as transgender.


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... 09.03625.x

Pooling across studies shows that after sex reassignment, 80% of individuals with GID reported significant improvement in gender dysphoria (95% CI = 68–89%; 8 studies; I2 = 82%); 78% reported significant improvement in psychological symptoms (95% CI = 56–94%; 7 studies; I2 = 86%); 80% reported significant improvement in quality of life (95% CI = 72–88%; 16 studies; I2 = 78%); and 72% reported significant improvement in sexual function (95% CI = 60–81%; 15 studies; I2 = 78%).


The overwhelming body of evidence - evidence, not anecdotes and individual concerns - shows that transitioning is the best treatment for people who identify as trans. Are there exceptions? Cases taken too far? Obviously. But goddamn, how do you look at something like the suicide rate among trans youth and conclude that they should be denied the most effective treatment? If the negatives outweigh the positives, make a fucking case, don't just list the same "concerns" over and over.

Because despite what you say, the experts are not screaming in agreement with you. Most are screaming the opposite. That's why every major medical organization - the AACAP, the AMA, the AAP, the ACOG - have spoken out in opposition to the bill (now law as of three hours ago) in Arkansas.

Your entire position is to pretend that scientific consensus doesn't exist. It doesn't matter how many meta-analyses there are, because all that matters to you is the handful of stories that align with what you already believe. It will always come back to an unfalsifiable conspiracy theory rooted in your own prejudice and irrational anger. I believe you when you say you're sickened, but I don't buy your moralizing for a second.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6837
+1s received: 2653
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby betonhaus » 7 April 2021, 05:19

I think for me the problem might be more fundamental: How much of you is you, and how much of it is instilled with your interactions with society? I have heard that more then a few peoplx - trans or not - have found with social interactions moving online and less face-to-face, their self-identity seems to have kinda blurred or became less defined in some aspects. And I'm reminded of psycolological observations of things like parents who let their children be anything they want to be find those kids grow up to be poorly self-motivated, while those that hold their kids to impossible standards and push them to the breaking point get similar results. How much of who we are is purely biological, worn in overtime, or glitched in with a chance encounter that completely took your identity down a different path?
Here's thing thing: I don't think anyone really knows the truth, and the ones who are blindly confident in their interpretation of reality is simply following the path of the people of history that came to the conclusion that they completely figured out how people work, only for their conclusions to be radically different from the people that came after.

I do believe that we have reached a point where we are breaking how the human mind down into such tiny and specific parts that we lose sight of how the various parts work together. A personality trait that used to be an odd or secret quirk now becomes this massive alien thing that completely redefines the person all around that specific trait, when before it would've been balanced and cancelled out by other traits.

Some people like to act like boys, fine. Some people like to act like girls? Fine. But if you are introducing medical procedures to change or freeze the core biological makeup of your body irreversibly - and no, puberty blockers aren't 100% reversible - you better be damn sure the person undergoing the change is doing so because they believe it is the best thing for themselves. And google Munchausen's Syndrome and Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy and ask yourself if that could be a plausible diagnosis for some people, or the parents of trans children.
User avatar
betonhaus
 
Posts: 243
+1s received: 98
Joined: 14 January 2019, 00:09

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 7 April 2021, 05:42

I think you, like Brenden, may be forming arguments based on a fundamental misunderstanding and oversimplification of who a transsexual person is. The diagnostic test is not to ask them if they prefer “acting like a boy” and then checking if they have a penis to make sure everything matches. Everyone involved in the diagnosis and treatment of trans people is doing the best they can to be “damn sure” that the irreversible treatments they’re prescribing are right for their patients. Please try and credit the medical professionals working in the field with a somewhat more acute and informed perspective on the issue and the needs of their patients than you, rather than suggesting that their patients and the parents of their patients are lying for attention. Your understanding of the issue would seem to be “I don’t really know, but I don’t think anyone else does either” and from that basis I would probably be hesitant to throw my oar in on any topic.
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Brenden » 7 April 2021, 12:02

Marmaduke wrote:, like Brenden,
Marmaduke wrote:Everyone involved in the diagnosis and treatment of trans people is doing the best they can to be “damn sure” that the irreversible treatments they’re prescribing are right for their patients.

Did you even glance at the articles I posted? The medical professionals' hands are being tied.

Marmaduke wrote:Please try and credit the medical professionals working in the field with a somewhat more acute and informed perspective on the issue and the needs of their patients than you, rather than suggesting that their patients and the parents of their patients are lying for attention.

Here we go with the straw men again. I'm not saying children or parents are "lying for attention".

In a survey of Dutch psychiatrists in 2003, among 46% of their gender identity disorder (the DSM term at the time) patients "cross-gender identification was interpreted as an epiphenomenon of other psychiatric illnesses, notably personality, mood, dissociative, and psychotic disorders."
appi.ajp.160.7.1332.pdf


And that's even before the huge explosion in the number of gender dysphoric adolescents which has all the hallmarks of a social contagion (clustering).

These children desperately need psychological treatment, not for their often transient mental states to be taken at face value.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8896
+1s received: 3375
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Brenden » 7 April 2021, 12:26

Derek wrote:The overwhelming body of evidence - evidence, not anecdotes and individual concerns - shows that transitioning is the best treatment for people who identify as trans. Are there exceptions? Cases taken too far? Obviously. But goddamn, how do you look at something like the suicide rate among trans youth and conclude that they should be denied the most effective treatment? If the negatives outweigh the positives, make a fucking case, don't just list the same "concerns" over and over.

God, you are insufferable. This just proves that you haven't actually been reading what I've been writing for years and are just arguing against straw men. As if I don't cite evidence to back up my reasoning and only ever post anecdotes (something I rarely ever do).

Derek wrote:Because despite what you say, the experts are not screaming in agreement with you. Most are screaming the opposite. That's why every major medical organization - the AACAP, the AMA, the AAP, the ACOG - have spoken out in opposition to the bill (now law as of three hours ago) in Arkansas.

What bill in Arkansas?

Also, some of those organisations support infant male genital mutilation, so I'll just take what they say with a grain of salt and go back to looking at the actual evidence.

Derek wrote:Your entire position is to pretend that scientific consensus doesn't exist. It doesn't matter how many meta-analyses there are, because all that matters to you is the handful of stories that align with what you already believe. It will always come back to an unfalsifiable conspiracy theory rooted in your own prejudice and irrational anger. I believe you when you say you're sickened, but I don't buy your moralizing for a second.

A meta-analysis of poorly-designed studies is only worth as much as the average quality of those studies. And here we go again with the straw-manning about me only posting "handful[s] of stories".

Derek wrote:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... 09.03625.x

Pooling across studies shows that after sex reassignment, 80% of individuals with GID reported significant improvement in gender dysphoria (95% CI = 68–89%; 8 studies; I2 = 82%); 78% reported significant improvement in psychological symptoms (95% CI = 56–94%; 7 studies; I2 = 86%); 80% reported significant improvement in quality of life (95% CI = 72–88%; 16 studies; I2 = 78%); and 72% reported significant improvement in sexual function (95% CI = 60–81%; 15 studies; I2 = 78%).

"All the studies were observational and most lacked controls."

"Conclusions: Very low quality evidence suggests that sex reassignment that includes hormonal interventions in individuals with GID likely improves gender dysphoria, psychological functioning and comorbidities, sexual function and overall quality of life."

Do you even read what you post yourself? LOL!

Derek wrote:https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.e ... er-people/

This search found a robust international consensus in the peer-reviewed literature that gender transition, including medical treatments such as hormone therapy and surgeries, improves the overall well-being of transgender individuals. The literature also indicates that greater availability of medical and social support for gender transition contributes to better quality of life for those who identify as transgender.

Oh, wow, the "Center for the Study of Inequality" at Cornell. I'm sure the makers of the intersectional "Inequality Quotient" are super rigorous and scientific and not at all biased by their woke politics.

Derek wrote:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223813/

Despite the limitations of the published literature, this review concludes that overall transgender people display poorer QoL than the general population, particularly pre-GAT, and that QoL improves once people are on CHT.

When specifically looking at the different dimensions of QoL (vQoL, sex-related QoL, and body image-related QoL), findings of the systematic review suggest that transgender people display poorer QoL than the general population, independent of the QoL domain investigated. As per general QoL, all dimensions of QoL have been shown to improve post-GAT. However, as the effect of GAT is linked to gender, a more positive vQOL was found for transgender men than transgender women at post-GAT, whilst opposite findings were obtained for sex-related QoL.

'Quality of life of treatment-seeking transgender adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis'

"From 94 potentially relevant articles, 29 studies were included within the review and data extraction for meta-analysis was available in 14 studies. The majority of the studies were cross-sectional, lacked controls and displayed moderate risk of bias."

Also, wow, people with mental health disorder have low QoL? QoL improves moderately with some kind of treatment? Wow! Amazing! Who'd have thunk it? MORE NEWS AT 11!

Derek wrote:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25201798/

A clinical protocol of a multidisciplinary team with mental health professionals, physicians, and surgeons, including puberty suppression, followed by cross-sex hormones and gender reassignment surgery, provides gender dysphoric youth who seek gender reassignment from early puberty on, the opportunity to develop into well-functioning young adults.

Yet another poorly-controlled, low-n, longitudinal study. :yawn:


The fact remains: there hasn't been a single clinical trial for cross-sex hormone therapy or surgery for the treatment for gender dysphoria.

This is the same situation as, e.g., breast cancer 70 years ago, when they were ripping out women's whole chests including ribs because that seemed like the best course of action and hey, it got rid of the cancer!
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8896
+1s received: 3375
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: The L / G / B / T divide

Unread postby Marmaduke » 7 April 2021, 12:41

No, he said suggested transexuals are as likely to be suffering with Munchausen’s as to be genuinely suffering with gender dysphoria.

Mine is less an issue with your opinion of prevailing treatments around transsexual people. Mine is an issue with your constant and deliberate side-stepping and avoidance of addressing them as anything other that deluded persons that need to be steered back towards conformity with their natal sex and the societal norm of a hard gender binary, where one MUST be one of the other.

Mine is an issue that you use the impression of simply caring about what’s best for them to steer the topic away from your persistence in denying the validity of their condition.

Mine is an issue that you consistently and absolutely continue at any opportunity to outspokenly liken them to anyone else suffering with any other dysmorphic disorder, and you do that wholly without articles or minority opinions from medical professionals or any ilk.

Mine is an issue that you will not or cannot even consider the notion that somebody may not feel comfortable conforming to the sex they were assigned at birth, and that condition may cause them significant distress. Even less are you able to conceive of a notion of somebody that may not wish be comfortable conforming to a binary gender model. Mine is an issue that you think people simply need to be counselled back to conformity with what your societal expectations of them are.

Mine is an issue that were I to log in to this forum by another name and take a similar tact in addressing homosexuality, that it’s in no way a biological or genetic issue and is simply a psychological abnormality and a matter of steering people back to hetereosexuality, and rolled out all the pro-conversion therapy articles written by qualified medical professionals that genuinely believe in it, you’d rightly label me a homophobe. I’d be outright denying the validity of how you identify yourself and calling you mentally deranged to even humour the notion of loving someone of the same gender. Yet even the suggestion that the fundamental basis of your position is a transphobic assumption rolls us back to you asserting that you are simply the defender of children and that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is disgusting. (And yes, I fully appreciate that you have used the word sickening, I’ve chosen a synonym that doesn’t suggest you’re about to vomit at the idea of transexuals in a rare and off-character moment of winding down the hyperbole).

Mine is an issue that you’re being a prick, for the what you perceive to be the right reasons or otherwise is irrelevant.

I’d genuinely have less of a problem if you just stopped dancing around the point and came out and said it. Stand behind it. “My name is Brenden and I don’t believe transexuals are real. They’re just mentally deranged people that need help.” I could happily write that off as you being a run-of-the-mill asshole bigot and move on, never broaching the topic with you again. But you don’t. You take an irritating line of holding an imagined moral high ground whilst outright refusing to accept people’s own experience of their own lives. No less, you do so on a platform where trans people might look for support and from a position of leading that platform. You’ve openly stated you don’t think trans people should be included with gays, lesbians and bisexuals because you perceive LGBT as being some sort of temple owned exclusively by cisgendered persons who engage in same-sex relationships.

I’d almost prefer you dig up the old GFN headed and adjust it to read “No trans allowed” and put that up, because then at least we could stop labouring under the obvious falsehood that you aren’t transphobic.

I look forward to seeing which objection to use of language you find in this post that will offer you an opportunity to retort without actually addressing any of the key points. Perhaps you can say “straw men” again?
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8176
+1s received: 3027
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

PreviousNext

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 54 guests