Nope. That’s not true. The NY Post article ran on October 14, 2020. after that you couldn’t find it ANYWHERE. It was verboten on social media and MS news outlets. Twitter even blocked the NY Post page. Jack Dorsi has said that this was a mistake. Glen Greenwald left The Intercept because of it and moved to Substack. The NY Times didn’t acknowledge it until March, 2022! So you are very wrong about this.
its also harder to find cites that the moon landing was faked then those that support the majority notion that it was real. Perhaps there is a reason that it is a minority opinion.
How come I just found it in 1 second?
NYT article about the laptop from October 2020.
I think he may have meant that you couldn’t find it mentioned anywhere except for the New York Post. For example that you couldn’t find any information about it on say the Washington post
(responding to squeegee ninja’d by Miller)
So, given her background and years of work in the field—agreeing with your position—you don’t find her credible. Or her credibility is overshadowed by a progressive magazine who is interested in pushing the position that the left favors. Hell, it’s not e even a scientific publication.
Yes, I did read the article. I don’t think the individual experiences of 20 people are near enough to discount the 5 years the woman spent as a case worker. And, again, she started out with beliefs probably identical to yours. She’s a queer woman married to a trans man. Does it not give you pause that her 5 years of experiences caused her to change her outlook?
I trust my site more than yours for two reason. One is that I find the woman to be very sympathetic to trans people and her real-life experiences as a case worker caused her to change her mind. And I’m kinda shocked that you think a piece in the New York Magazine would trump that. Especially since I probably could have told you what the article was going to say just hearing that they were going to write about her.
What, and Free Press is?
It’s the “individual experience” of ~20 people who also worked at the same clinic. If working a this clinic makes her an expert on trans issues, then everyone disagreeing with her in that article has exactly the same expertise.
Well, okay, not everyone, because a lot of the interviewees were parents of patients. Who are even better placed to speak authoritatively on how the clinic serves its patients than she is.
I am, for the record, totally unmoved by possibility that she’s queer. I know a lot of queer people. It doesn’t automatically make a person smarter, saner, or more honest. If I see a queer person spouting off a bunch of shit I already know to be false, I’m not adjusting my views just because they like matching parts in the sheets.
And I had a pretty good guess what yours was going to say before I read it, too. What does that prove, except we’re aware of each other’s general positions on LGBT rights?
Pot, the kettle just called.
As opposed to “The Free Press” which is as unbiased as the morning snow havings todays headlines including
A Racist Smear. A Tarnished Career. And the Suicide of Richard Bilkszto.
Anthony Fauci’s Deceptions
Confessions of Canceled Priests
No you trust it for the same reason that yuo9 accuse us of. You found it agreed with your point of view, so that one person’s anecdotes outweigh an investigation of the facts. Have any other these patients who were the subject of the horror stories, or any of the othe nurses, come out to support her narrative.
Of course I’m still curious why your gut feeling about this issue about children you never met who are suffering from a condition you are clearly not well informed about should take precedence over those of the children, the parents, their doctors or the medical establishment at large?
In the US, Republicans (in general) were brutally and hatefully wrong about gay people and gay rights. And now, not surprisingly, they’re using the exact same playbook for trans people. Hatred is a part of it, but it’s also because they think hatred of the “other” is good politics.
If I thought @magellan01 had enough functional brain cells to feel embarrassment, I’d pity him for these burns.
Do you want me to show you the Fox News articles from Oct 14th, 19th, 20th, 21st and 22nd of 2020? Just in case the liberal media offend you?
Associated Press “explainer” article on the topic, from October 29th, 2020:
NBC News article, from October 30, 2020, on why they hadn’t been pursuing the story – it comes down to (1) they were not given access to the emails, and (2) the Wall Street Journal, and Fox News, which had been given access to the emails, found that they did not support the narrative that the Post, and the Trump campaign, had been pushing.
…magellan01: you’ve been away from the boards for a while so I just thought I’d point out some of the things that have changed in board culture since you were last here.
Trans rights are human rights. Trans women are women. Trans men are men. These things aren’t up for debate here any more. Those are lines in the sand. The absolutely worst of the transphobes have gone, either because they got themselves banned, or because they couldn’t accept these very basic truths.
This thread is about the Republican war on transgender people, and to a larger degree its about the global trend toward trans genocide. There are people out there that want trans people to no longer exist. And they are passing laws that make it almost impossible for young people to access trans-affirming care. And trans-affirming care doesn’t mean “surgery.” It can mean something as simple as respecting your chosen pronouns. And it won’t stop with trans youth. And it won’t stop with trans people.
You are getting very boring now. I couldn’t give a fuck about Bidens laptop. Not when they are forcing people to de-transition, not when trans people are being forced back into the closet, being forced into leaving their homes, into stockpiling medicine.
You are cherry-picking transphobic articles and transphobic studies and buying into transphobic rhetoric and we just don’t tolerate that around here any more. You are on the wrong side of history.
It doesn’t have to be that way though. If you accept that trans people have the right to exist, that trans people should be able to access the healthcare that they need, that they shouldn’t be ostracised and cast out from society, then we have some common ground. At the moment you are on the road to radicalization that typically starts with “just asking questions” and almost always leads to frothing-at-the-mouth bigoted transhobia. But it doens’t have to be that way.
If your only quibble is with trans affirming care for young people, then, and I say this with as much charity as possible, your sources are garbage. All of them. I’ve just done a deep-dive into the Daily Wire article and I don’t even think they got the basic facts right: Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala is the chief psychiatrist at Tampere University Hospital, not chief psychiatrist at Tampere University. Tampere University doesn’t appear to be Finland’s largest pediatric gender clinic, in fact it doesn’t appear to have a pediatric gender clinic at all, that would be something that was at the University Hospital, and I’m not sure its the largest, the one in the capital city seems bigger and more prominence. And calling her “Finland’s leading expert on pediatric gender medicine” seems like editorial puffery.
And her claims about “four-out-of-five” children growing out of it is at odds with the study I cited earlier, that finds “more commonly, transgender youth who socially transitioned at early ages continued to identify that way.”
Outside of the gender-critical propaganda machine, the evidence almost overwhelmingly shows that trans-affirming care is not harmful. That young trans people benefit from that care and when it is withheld that they suffer.
If you care about trans kids at all, then you would be wanting them to not be suffering. Because trans joy is a beautiful thing.
The bigots don’t deserve to win.
From 22:35.
Which has nothing to do with the trans topic, since that’s about science, not what’s written in the media.
As I’ve said, I’m not against the use of puberty blockers completely. I’m against misleading statements about them.
All of medicine has a cost/benefit aspect to it. Not every treatment is worth the cost (and obviously I’m not just talking about money here). Thus it’s incredibly important to have a clear picture of both.
Claims about complete reversibility imply that the costs are minimal. If the claims were true, we might decide that treatment is warranted even with minimal or unknown benefits. And likewise, claims about significant benefits could outweigh even high costs. More realistic views on each lead to better outcomes.
So yes, all the factors you mentioned and more weigh into the decision. And I have no doubt that option 2 is genuinely the best option in many cases. But at the same time, someone like the dysphoric man you mentioned, who might have decided on transitioning, ended up deciding against it–and probably ended up in a healthier place as a result. Undoubtedly, some of those reasons included the downsides of medical transitioning. Making the best decision will depend on having the best possible data.
From what I understand, the eggs aren’t affected by the hormones. So a surrogate can be used at the least.
I think the evidence is too weak to claim that puberty proceeds normally when the blockers are ended. This isn’t my claim–it’s what the NHS says, too.
For instance, on the subject of bone density:
A major concern is the impact of GnRHa on bone development. Administration of GnRHa slows the pubertal growth spurt. This can represent an advantage for natal males, as it reduces their likely final height and makes it more likely for them to achieve an ultimate height within the normal female range. However, the question is whether reduction of the rate of growth has any effects on bone formation and metabolism and whether these effects persist after the end of the treatment (Haraldsen et al., 2007). GnRHa inhibits the production of endogenous sex hormones and thereby impacts negatively on the formation of bone mass, by delaying the increase in bone mass during the pubertal growth spurt. There is some evidence from follow up studies that adolescents treated with GnRHa and later cross sex hormones may not reach the same peak bone mass as they would have reached if untreated (Klink et al., 2015) and this issue has been identified as one of the priority issues for further research (Olson-Kennedy et al., 2016). The findings are difficult to interpret, since the available evidence on bone density and mass in transgender persons receiving gender-affirming hormonal treatment as adults is ambiguous (Wiepjes et al., 2019).
It would be rather remarkable if puberty proceeded normally under all conditions. What if they’re ended at age 20? Age 40? Age 80? There must be some limit where it’s no longer true that they’re benign. Obviously, numbers much past 20 are unrealistic (except in the rare case of patients that never want to go through puberty at all); my point is that unless these questions can be answered confidently, then we can’t say that the risks are well understood. Puberty blockers were developed for cases of precocious puberty, and the early safety data is based on delaying puberty to the normal age–not well past it. There’s no reason to believe that it should behave in exactly the same way.
This sounds like a problem for those who chose to take cross-gender hormones, not those who decide to go through same sex puberty a little later. At least, that’s how i read those words.
If you do want to transition medically, there are enormous advantage to not having undergone the wrong puberty already. It’s probably worth some bone density. But if course there are a lot of costs to medical transition.
Sure, lots of people are better off not medically transitioning. My friend with an adrenal tumor was better off not getting chemotherapy. When i saw an orthopedic surgeon about a shoulder problem, the receptionist whispered to me that i should be cautious about surgery, because from her observation point, the people who presented with symptoms like mine and had shoulder surgery didn’t do very well.
But there’s no movement to outlaw chemotherapy or shoulder surgery. That’s what we’re talking about here, outlawing transition therapy. (And in some cases, outlawing supportive talk therapy, and outlawing using a kid’s preferred pronouns.) Do i think kids who question their gender should race into medical treatment? No, absolutely not. But i think the kids, their parents, and their doctors are better positioned to decide what’s best for the kids than some politician.
The NHS may say that, but your cite doesn’t:
That’s specific to people who go directly from hormone blockers to hormone replacement, not to people who stop hormone blockers and allow their natural puberty to continue.
Thanks for letting me know what the guidelines are for wrong-think. I’ll keep them in mind lest the profound love and admiration the posters on this board have for my contributions on this board might be diminished by even a scintilla. But yes, my interest in this goes to treatment of children. I support adults being able to do what they want with their own bodies. That even includes tribal band tattoos.