Transgender

[Gralin]

Discussion continuing in Part 2 found here

Transgender - Part 2

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Seeds]

Unfounded hyperbole is so sciencey! I mean, it's like there's someone in a lab coat in the room with me.

No one is saying its evidence against it Chief. They are using this possible outcome as an argument to show its definately not evidence for it. More and better research is needed is the conclusion.

Do you not have a problem with how left wing medical researchers in the USA appear to be cutting corners to pretend science confirms with their pre concieved political views and then trying to shut down the debate and other research? I have a massive problem when right wingers do so on climate science. You need to be consistent with science. Either you advocate for its processes and conclusions or you dont.

 

[Chief]

Strange that they're leaning so heavily on the negative there.

Do they explore the likelihood that the kids got way worse and left to seek treatment?

I haven't read the article.

 

[mcnulty]

Even though the treatment for one is temporary as opposed to treatment for the other which must be life-long as I understand it I notice there is little to no furor from conservatives about giving precocious kids blockers as opposed to the far more rigorous debate over transgender kids being offered those same treatments.

One is about delaying the onset of puberty and the other is disrupting it altogether. Real concerns are emerging about the timing of the administration of these drugs during the critical teenage years. During the teen years bone density typically surges by around 10 percent a year. It seems increasingly likely these drugs are associated with deficits an in bone development, which could be potentially devastating for people in later years.

Think you are going to see this wound back more and more.

Medical ethics are one thing. Ethics and personal morality are another.

There are any number of drugs or products we are prohibited from consuming regardless of personal morality.

 

[mcnulty]

"Because U.S. medical groups don’t always use EBM, their conclusions can be based on studies whose fatal flaws are overlooked or ignored. Consider, as an example, a study done at Seattle Children’s Hospital and published last year. The study’s authors reported that use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones was associated with 60 percent lower odds of depression and 73 percent lower odds of suicidality. Leading mainstream publications, including Scientific American and Psychology Today, celebrated the findings. More recently, major U.S. medical associations cited the study in federal court proceedings.

American health care is a bit of free for all, and of course the pharmaceuticals are looking out only for themselves.

“Some leading American practitioners asked AbbVie and Endo Pharmaceuticals, maker of another blocker, to seek F.D.A. approval for the drugs’ use among trans adolescents. The drugmakers would have to fund research for a patient population that made up just a small part of their market. But the physicians argued that regulatory approval could help establish the safety of the treatment and broaden insurance coverage of the drugs, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars a year. In the end, AbbVie and Endo said no. The companies declined to comment on the decision.”

They Paused Puberty, but Is There a Cost? (Published 2022)

Puberty blockers can ease transgender youths’ anguish and buy time to weigh options. But concerns are growing about long-term physical effects and other consequences.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Chief]

the other is disrupting it altogether

Mostly. They have the option to discontinue.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

One is about delaying the onset of puberty and the other is disrupting it altogether. Real concerns are emerging about the timing of the administration of these drugs during the critical teenage years. During the teen years bone density typically surges by around 10 percent a year. It seems increasingly likely these drugs are associated with deficits an in bone development, which could be potentially devastating for people in later years.

Think you are going to see this wound back more and more.

If its impartial medical science and impartial medical science alone that is the deciding factor in querying these procedures so be it. I would just hate to see science weaponised just to prevent people from living their best lives in the skin they're most comfortable in

There are any number of drugs or products we are prohibited from consuming regardless of personal morality.

There are. There have also been movements throughout history such as the Temperance movement who weaponised the real science of alcohol intoxification to effect various Prohibition legislations in various nations to help fulfill religious objections.

Yeah, alcohol abuse is harmful. Prolonged excessive imbibing IS dangerous to body and mind. But its also recreational. It's social. It's fun. It's an escape after the working day or the working week.

Weaponising hard science with personal or religious morality is fraught with civil danger.

Temperance movement | Definition, Leaders, Facts, & Significance | Britannica

Temperance movement, movement dedicated to promoting moderation and, more often, complete abstinence in the use of intoxicating liquor. The earliest temperance organizations seem to have been those founded at Saratoga, New York, in 1808 and in Massachusetts in 1813.

www.britannica.com

 

[Episode IV]

I've been thinking, McNulty. There's another area of medical treatment that uses puberty blockers in treatments. It's been in use for decades. There's a condition called 'precocious puberty', basically early-onset puberty in children below the age of 9.

Even though the treatment for one is temporary as opposed to treatment for the other which must be life-long as I understand it I notice there is little to no furor from conservatives about giving precocious kids blockers as opposed to the far more rigorous debate over transgender kids being offered those same treatments.

Medical ethics are one thing. Ethics and personal morality are another.

A couple of points. You're comparing two separate issues.

Precocious puberty is a clear instance of abnormal development, with respect to the vast majority of physical development in children in modern societies. There are a quite a few physical medical conditions subject to quirks in development on record, usually extremely rare and treatments for which tend to be a band-aid of sorts, until the root cause can be identified.
However, in none of those cases is choice or a sense of "identity" a factor. In other words, I think you might be hard pressed to find an example of medical precociousness in which a child felt they belonged in the body of a mature person and decided they'd prefer to grow up faster, and the body responded accordingly. Well, not yet anyway.

When speaking about gender dysphoria, you're speaking about a mental condition or state in which the person doesn't identify with the body they were born with - regardless of the fact that, in most cases, you'd be speaking about a perfectly normal human body, and furthermore you're talking about children whose physical development would generally proceed normally otherwise. There is no impediment to natural physical development at all.
Basically, the lack of physical indicators or other hard evidence that gender dysphoria is a mental condition or a physical one (other than anecdotal, for which one can find arguments on both sides) ensures the medical profession must proceed or not entirely based upon faith in psychology.
It is, essentially, a treatment relying upon faith and assertion rather than physical evidence.

Secondly.
Several studies over several decades have addressed the subject of developmental differences in children of varying racial backgrounds over decades now, and that particular subject has been revisited quite often (saw one done by Berkely just a month or so back actually - won't go into that, although I did find some aspects of it amusing). They almost uniformly indicate that African and Latin children physically develop slightly faster than their Asian and Caucasian peers. Differing results in the studies done usually come in the form of a disparity in the average onset age or the length of time taken to maturity, but some more recent ones are suggesting that any such disparity is actually increasing, not decreasing.
Similar studies have been conducted on those of disparate economic backgrounds (poor kids develop faster). But while economic disparity is also a factor in physical development, it can not explain away the racial element entirely. Particularly not when such studies are usually conducted in the USA, which brings to bear a host of complications in data.

Interestingly, there are also studies that indicate (again, in the USA) that populations of African or Latin descent are more likely to identify as transgender than their Caucasian counterparts, as a percentage of their respective populations.
The more reputable appearing ones are similar otherwise, one example:

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Race-Ethnicity-Trans-Adults-US-Oct-2016.pdf

Not only transgender, but medical precocious puberty is also more likely in African Americans than others - and girls more than boys.
I'm not entirely certain what all of these things mean yet, because again we have to apply economic disparity and wotnot in order to test any hypothesis, tentative or otherwise. But one thing becomes quite clear - attempting to discuss any of this, the ramifications of it on a political or social level, and particularly in this environment, is not going to result in anything pretty.

As an adjunct to those studies, there are several more which study any potential link between medical conditions in later life (such as cardio-vascular disease, obesity, type-2 diabetes and the like). General results, on face value, indicate that yes. There is.

Race disparities in pubertal timing: Implications for cardiovascular disease risk among African American women - PMC

Compared to white girls, sexual maturation is accelerated in African American girls as measured by indicators of pubertal development, including age at first menses. Increasing epidemiological evidence suggests that the timing of pubertal ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

One example, seems fairly well researched but I haven't checked it out in any great depth (lot of links in there).

Lastly, in the light of all that above, why is it you think "conservatives" (whatever your particular definition of that is, and the answer to which I think might be the key to both your opinion and my assessment of it here) would be any more likely to cause a "furor" over treatments for medical preconsciousness than anyone else?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Lastly, in the light of all that above, why is it you think "conservatives" (whatever your particular definition of that is, and the answer to which I think might be the key to both your opinion and my assessment of it here) would be any more likely to cause a "furor" over treatments for medical preconsciousness than anyone else?

you've given me some food for thought. Thanks for the info. I'll definitely come back to it,

On the above, I think conservatives, particualrly religious conservatives, might see trans people as altering their own bodies and birth genders in direct defiance of how God ordained the condition of their birth.

It was God's will that Person A was born male and Person B female, and if either decide to change that they are openly defying God's own will.

Some religious groups like Jehovahs Witnesses, take this even further. Blood transfusions, for instance, are a violation of God's will.

The furor wouldn't be so bad if these beliefs stayed with the individuals who hold them. But they don't. God as Creator has jurisdiction over all regardless of belief, ergo the morality of the devout must be imposed on all regardless of their status as followers.

I strongly disagree with this point of view.

 

[Seeds]

you've given me some food for thought. Thanks for the info. I'll definitely come back to it,

On the above, I think conservatives, particualrly religious conservatives, might see trans people as altering their own bodies and birth genders in direct defiance of how God ordained the condition of their birth.

It was God's will that Person A was born male and Person B female, and if either decide to change that they are openly defying God's own will.

Some religious groups like Jehovahs Witnesses, take this even further. Blood transfusions, for instance, are a violation of God's will.

The furor wouldn't be so bad if these beliefs stayed with the individuals who hold them. But they don't. God as Creator has jurisdiction over all regardless of belief, ergo the morality of the devout must be imposed on all regardless of their status as followers.

I strongly disagree with this point of view.

So you disagree with religion. So do I. The only way to fix this is to start persuading people to stop being religious through education and government policies. Note I use the word persuade not force.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

So you disagree with religion. So do I. The only way to fix this is to start persuading people to stop being religious through education and government policies. Note I use the word persuade not force.

Conversion therapy might work for religion. Apparently they like that sort of thing.

 

[Seeds]

Conversion therapy might work for religion. Apparently they like that sort of thing.

well obviously a form of conversion therapy could work given religion is not biological. Its cultural. This conversion therapy is called public school education. Unfortunately it still fails too many and too many kids bypass it going to private religious schools.

This raises an interesting point. If being transgender can also be non biological then wouldnt it be theoretically possible for conversion therapy to change a persons identity from transgendered to another gender in such situations (Obviously it would not work for biologically transgendered people)? Im not advocating for conversion therapy by the way. Far from it. Im just trying to follow the logic of what a non biological transgendered person is. Note i havent given much thought to this at all.

Ironically the situation where a non biological transgendered person could not theoretically be converted to another gender through any type of conversion therapy is if spritualism was real and being transgendered could also be a spiritual determination.

Please read through what im saying here properly before you respond as I can see this post could be very easy to misinterpret.

 

[ShanDog]

Sorry, what's a biological trans person?

 

[Cmarsh]

4 Corners are televising a report on the debate around gender affirming care tonight on the ABC.

 

[Crankyhawk]

You're upset that I pointed out that the thread running through the "pumping the brakes" countries is conservative governments.

You're upset at the mere idea that anyone could suggest such a thing. You even tried to deny it, though the facts are there and have been discussed in this thread.

You want your Twitter post to go uncontested and will have a personal little crack at anyone who does contest it.

Emotional responses attempting to belittle and dismiss the person with an opposing view rather than tackling the argument.

A country's health policy very often reflects the politics of its government. Specially if it's a hot topic among conservatives in social media. Sad but true. This is likely the case with policy on gender-affirming treatments.

Deal with it and respond with some sort of argument rather than repeating the point with some added "fmd" as if that is an argument.

Is there evidence that the puberty blockers are fully reversible in the event of change of mind? Currently we do not allow children to sterilise themselves, so preventing them accessing puberty blockers would be seen as consistent with that if blockers haven’t been shown to be reversible (even if it takes a couple of years to reverse that would remove my objection)

 

[Crankyhawk]

Sorry, what's a biological trans person?

Biological intersex where at birth the external genitalia are not clearly male or female

 

[Crankyhawk]

If they're worried about the lack of data, wouldn't a lack of people on puberty blockers only lead to a greater absence of data? You need a pool of users to actually study before that study data becomes available.

I thought the quote included “ok to use as part of a research study”

 

[Crankyhawk]

I've been thinking, McNulty. There's another area of medical treatment that uses puberty blockers in treatments. It's been in use for decades. There's a condition called 'precocious puberty', basically early-onset puberty in children below the age of 9.



Even though the treatment for one is temporary as opposed to treatment for the other which must be life-long as I understand it I notice there is little to no furor from conservatives about giving precocious kids blockers as opposed to the far more rigorous debate over transgender kids being offered those same treatments.

Medical ethics are one thing. Ethics and personal morality are another.

This is a good point and perhaps the safety data could come from the use in this situation

 

[aj1992]

Biological intersex where at birth the external genitalia are not clearly male or female

Oh a hermaphrodite?

 

[Crankyhawk]

If its impartial medical science and impartial medical science alone that is the deciding factor in querying these procedures so be it. I would just hate to see science weaponised just to prevent people from living their best lives in the skin they're most comfortable in


There are. There have also been movements throughout history such as the Temperance movement who weaponised the real science of alcohol intoxification to effect various Prohibition legislations in various nations to help fulfill religious objections.

Yeah, alcohol abuse is harmful. Prolonged excessive imbibing IS dangerous to body and mind. But its also recreational. It's social. It's fun. It's an escape after the working day or the working week.

Weaponising hard science with personal or religious morality is fraught with civil danger.

Temperance movement | Definition, Leaders, Facts, & Significance | Britannica

Temperance movement, movement dedicated to promoting moderation and, more often, complete abstinence in the use of intoxicating liquor. The earliest temperance organizations seem to have been those founded at Saratoga, New York, in 1808 and in Massachusetts in 1813.

www.britannica.com

The movement you quoted I think was more complex - there were social harms coming out of excessive alcohol use in terms of poverty and violence against women who also at the time were disempowered politically.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Oh a hermaphrodite?

Yeah that’s my understanding though it includes those who have (for example)

• persons with 2x chromosomes in pair 23 but an adrenal issue causing excess testosterone (and low cortisol so it is a life threatening condition) and clitoral hypertrophy to resemble a penis
• persons with xy chromosomes but genetic testosterone resistance and so penis doesn’t develop in the usual way

 

[Festerz]

The Four Corners report Blocked airs tonight examines the bitter and polarised transgender debate.

In a sad but unsurprising sign of the (binary) times, the ABC has published a story effectively defending its decision to undertake the investigation before it even airs.

Why Four Corners had to investigate the bitter and polarised transgender debate

We wanted the story to reflect the weight of evidence, but were acutely aware that the science is new and evolving. We believe we got the balance right, writes Mark Maley.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Gralin]

The Four Corners report Blocked airs tonight examines the bitter and polarised transgender debate.

In a sad but unsurprising sign of the (binary) times, the ABC has published a story effectively defending its decision to undertake the investigation before it even airs.

Why Four Corners had to investigate the bitter and polarised transgender debate

We wanted the story to reflect the weight of evidence, but were acutely aware that the science is new and evolving. We believe we got the balance right, writes Mark Maley.

www.abc.net.au

The article itself is pretty on the nose.

I don't hold out high hopes.

 

[ShanDog]

The article itself is pretty on the nose.

I don't hold out high hopes.

We life in strange times when it's considered "on the nose" to go to extreme lengths explaining the ways an investigation did its best to be objective.

 

[Gralin]

We life in strange times when it's considered "on the nose" to go to extreme lengths explaining the ways an investigation did its best to be objective.

I'll be specific.

It was crucial that all sides of the debate were given an opportunity to present their views – including from interviewee Dr Spencer, who argues there should be no medical intervention before a child goes through puberty and advocates what's called "watchful waiting".

Psychiatrist lodges human rights complaint over transgender health care

A Queensland psychiatrist who was stood down from her position at a government hospital is lodging a human rights complaint

www.outinperth.com

I will wait to see how they are presented but when the article is talking about it being crucial to present all views and doesn't mention transphobia but does mention Spencer....

 

[ShanDog]

I'll be specific.

It was crucial that all sides of the debate were given an opportunity to present their views – including from interviewee Dr Spencer, who argues there should be no medical intervention before a child goes through puberty and advocates what's called "watchful waiting".

Psychiatrist lodges human rights complaint over transgender health care

A Queensland psychiatrist who was stood down from her position at a government hospital is lodging a human rights complaint

www.outinperth.com

I will wait to see how they are presented but when the article is talking about it being crucial to present all views and doesn't mention transphobia but does mention Spencer....

So if they introduced Spencer and add in a descriptor of "...who has been accused of transphobia," would that suffice?