• Frenchfryenjoyer (she/her)@lemmings.world
    365·
    4 days ago

    What a pos. nobody is “pushing” these medicines on kids. it’s ultimately the kid’s decision about whether they want these medications or not and I’m not aware of any cases to the contrary. also these medications have been used for literal decades so how can they be experimental? how do you expect people to trust you when you lie so blatantly? glad he got banned.

    Happy Pride Month ❤️

    • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
      1110·
      4 days ago

      also these medications have been used for literal decades so how can they be experimental?

      Honest answer: the drugs are being used off-label. It’s not even experimental, it’s basically a wildcat way of using them. An experiment would involve control groups and a double-blind trial, among other things.

      I’m saying this because this is what rightoids are saying as criticism and you need to be able to counter that with facts. Right now, there just isn’t enough information and that’s what they’re capitalizing on.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        161·
        4 days ago

        there just isn’t enough information and that’s what they’re capitalizing on.

        40 years of using hormone blockers for precocious puberty. “Not enough info.” Fuck the whole way off.

        double-blind trial

        No. The data is fine. It doesn’t need to be perfect.

        • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
          41·
          4 days ago

          This is the exact opposite of what the reports out of the UK, Netherlands, Sweden, etc. are saying. They’re all very seriously restricting their youth transitioning clinics because the quality of the available data is so poor it cannot be relied on. Beyond the replicability crisis, there are ideological actors on both sides making absolutely junk studies.

          Hence the need for proper experimental data.

          • foxglove (she/her)@lazysoci.alEnglish
            1·
            2 days ago

            Yet they don’t revoke the use of puberty blockers for cis children with precocious puberty, they only are concerned about the lack of data for trans kids - it’s motivated by transphobia, not actual clinical concerns.

            Trans kids aren’t having poor outcomes from gender affirming care, quite the opposite actually - and the “we don’t have enough data” argument is a false concern used to plausibly deny a more than sufficiently demonstrated clinically safe and effective treatment.

            EDIT: might be interested in reading: https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/

            We should be clear, the medical establishment is not woke (quite the contrary, actually) nor is every single major medical association recommending gender affirming care for trans youth on ideological grounds or because they have been forced to by some LGBT+ lobbying, but because the evidence we have points to that care being life saving and effective while also being low risk and in the case of puberty blockers even reversible.

            EDIT2: you should also know the Cass Review has been found to be biased in its recommendations, e.g. this demand for high evidence in the case of trans care but not other areas of care have been pointed out as motivated by prejudice, might be worth reading more about the criticisms of the Cass Review:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Review#Reception_by_academics_and_researchers

            Several scholars and organisations have criticised the Cass Review’s conclusions and the evidence base used to support them. Researchers Cal Horton and Ruth Pearce have said of the Cass Review, “its most controversial recommendations are based on prejudice rather than evidence”. Cal Horton criticised the Interim Report and other documents for prioritising research on aetiology of trans identities, saying: “Research into the causation of trans identities has a pathologized history, running parallel to efforts to prevent or cure transness.” Cal Horton also criticised the Interim Report’s support of exploratory therapy and its use of the terminology of “desistance”.

            Various scholars also criticised the emphasis on high and moderate quality evidence, saying that paediatric care often relies on low quality evidence in other areas; that in downgrading qualitative research, the patient voice was minimised; and that the highest quality evidence (such as from randomised controlled trials) may be difficult or unethical to obtain in this area.

            Forcing trans kids to undergo the wrong puberty under the demands double-blind trials is as wrong as forcing a cis child to undergo the wrong puberty for the same purpose (like David Reimer was forced to), it’s an unreasonable expectation given the clinical context of the treatment being so low risk and the outcomes being so positive.

        • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
          31·
          4 days ago

          I want the strongest possible set of information for this and any other question so we can make informed decisions. Right now there are more questions than answers.

          It’s just like intelligent design and the “god of the gaps” arguments, where the space God/gods could have done their work slowly shrinks as our understanding of the world around us improves. I have no clue if we’ll ever close all the gaps, but every time intelligent design takes a hit, more people jump ship.