foodlock · HackerTrans

hace 2 añosdiscuss

You've know you've been called out on your bullshit and are attempting to deflect. That's fine, you can do that if you want. But there's really no point in continuing any sort of exchange with you on this, because it's very clear that you'd rather spread lies than discuss facts.

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

I'm directly addressing your claims, not arguing a point you didn't make.

You said:

> Because they set an unrealistic bar by excluding all research which wasn't double blind,

To which I replied with a BBC News article quoting Cass, which refutes this falsehood. While noting that you could also confirm this yourself by actually reading the publications you're so misinformed about.

The problem is that you'd rather listen to liars like Erin Reed and Alejandra Caraballo, who have apparently made it their mission to sow as much disinformation about the Review as they possibly can, and those who amplify their mendacious nonsense.

I mean, all you've been doing in this thread is further spreading their lies, and then doubling down when proven wrong. Are you really so in the thrall of these prevaricators?

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

No, the study you linked had ~2200 respondents who had temporarily detransitioned but later went back to identifying as trans.

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

The main discrepancy is that these have different survey populations.

Turban's study is based on an survey (which was also conducted online) of people who, for the most part, currently identify as trans, of which some had temporarily detransitioned in the past. Whereas Littman's and Vandenbussche's studies only surveyed detransitioners who no longer identify as trans.

What these suggest in aggregate is that these populations generally have quite different reasons for detransitioning.

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

No, they did not do that. This is disinformation. As Cass herself says in this BBC News article:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-68863594

> Dr Cass was asked about particular claims spread online about her review - one that "98% of the evidence" was ignored or dismissed by her, and one that she would only include gold-standard "double-blind randomised control" trials in the review.

> She said the 98% claim was "completely incorrect".

> A total of 103 scientific papers were analysed by her review, with 2% considered high quality, and 98% not.

> "There were quite a number of studies that were considered to be moderate quality, and those were all included in the analysis," she said.

> "So nearly 60% of the studies were actually included in what's called the synthesis."

> And on the "double-blind" claim - where patients are randomly assigned to a treatment or placebo group, getting either medicine or nothing - she said "obviously" young people could not be blinded as to whether or not they were on puberty blockers or hormones because "it rapidly becomes obvious to them".

> "But that of itself is not an issue because there are many other areas where that would apply," she said.

> "If you were doing a trial, say, of acupuncture, people would know exactly what treatment that they were getting."

You can of course confirm this yourself by reading the report and the systematic reviews commissioned to inform it, rather than listening to social media bullshitters.

Also, Cass has talked to a variety of different groups with different views. For example, this is a Q&A she did with The Kite Trust, an LGBTQ+ charity: https://thekitetrust.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Cass-...

Please try harder not to spread such easily disprovable falsehoods.

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

It's a carefully considered, in-depth and thorough evidence-based review of clinical policy from an independent expert group, led by an eminent paediatrician with decades of experience.

I'm baffled as to why you've decided it's an "unscientific hatchet job". Would you like to explain your reasoning?

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

The reasons given for detransition vary by survey. In these two papers, lack of support was a minor reason amongst those surveyed:

Vandenbussche, E. (2021). Detransition-Related Needs and Support: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey. Journal of Homosexuality, 69(9), 1602–1620. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2021.1919479

> The most common reported reason for detransitioning was realized that my gender dysphoria was related to other issues (70%). The second one was health concerns (62%), followed by transition did not help my dysphoria (50%), found alternatives to deal with my dysphoria (45%), unhappy with the social changes (44%), and change in political views (43%). At the very bottom of the list are: lack of support from social surroundings (13%), financial concerns (12%) and discrimination (10%).

Littman L. (2021). Individuals Treated for Gender Dysphoria with Medical and/or Surgical Transition Who Subsequently Detransitioned: A Survey of 100 Detransitioners. Archives of sexual behavior, 50(8), 3353–3369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02163-w

> The most frequently endorsed reason for detransitioning was that the respondent’s personal definition of male and female changed and they became comfortable identifying with their natal sex (60.0%). Other commonly endorsed reasons were concerns about potential medical complications (49.0%); transition did not improve their mental health (42.0%); dissatisfaction with the physical results of transition (40.0%); and discovering that something specific like trauma or a mental health condition caused their gender dysphoria (38.0%). External pressures to detransition such as experiencing discrimination (23.0%) or worrying about paying for treatments (17.0%) were less common.

One major problem in fully understanding this phenomenon is that there is currently inadequate follow-up by gender clinics to collect data on detransitioners.

As the Cass Review notes:

> 15.50 Estimates of the percentage of individuals who embark on a medical pathway and subsequently have regrets or detransition are hard to determine from GDC clinic data alone.

> There are several reasons for this:

> - those who do detransition may not choose to return to the gender clinic and are hence lost to follow-up

> - the Review has heard from a number of clinicians working in adult gender services that the time to detransition ranges from 5-10 years, so follow-up intervals on studies on medical treatment are too short to capture this

> - the inflection point for the increase in presentations to gender services for children and young people was 2014, so even studies with longer follow-up intervals will not capture the outcomes of this more recent cohort.

The Review also noted the problem of clinics not adequately sharing the data they do have:

> 15.55 An audit was undertaken at The Tavistock and Portman GDC on the characteristics of individuals who had detransitioned. Most papers on detransition are based on community samples, and questionnaire reports, but this was a case series of 40 patients who had all been examined by a psychiatrist.

> 15.56 Findings from the audit were discussed with the Review. The time for people to choose to detransition was 5-10 years (average 7 years). Common presenting features and risk factors such as high levels of adverse childhood experiences, alexithymia (inability to recognise and express their emotions) and problems with interoception (making sense of what is going on in their bodies) were identified in the audit, and this audit would be informative for clinicians assessing young people with a view to starting masculinising/feminising hormones. The Review asked to have access to this audit in order to understand some of the qualitative findings, but the trust did not agree to this.

foodlock

hace 2 añosdiscuss

> and having spent some time seeing their perspective they felt that transition would better resolve some internal tension

Thing is though, that during puberty there is a huge amount of internal tension as one's body goes through significant developmental changes. Especially for girls as they start to be sexualised by men. The idea that transition can be used to escape this makes for a tempting second option, and if there are peers who also think that way, it can be very encouraging.

We know that the number of detransitioners is on the rise, and their stories are very often along those lines. They became obsessively drawn to the idea of transitioning, often through social media and peers, and later, when they had the insights of adulthood and the obsession had faded, regretted what they'd done.

The problem is that transition isn't actually a change to the opposite sex, it just creates a poor facsimile at best, and the medical pathway of blocking puberty and taking cross-sex hormones causes irreversible harms to one's body. Loss of sexual function is a big problem. And of course, teenage girls who undergo mastectomy to affirm their idea that they should be boys, can't get those body parts back.

comments