Britain Is Leaving the U.S. Gender-Medicine Debate Behind

Comments

• Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I’m not going to start a free trial to read the whole thing, but I did look elsewhere to read about this report.

  www.cbc.ca/…/puberty-blockers-review-1.7172920

  There actually is a lot of evidence, just not in the form of randomized clinical trials," said Dr. Jake Donaldson, a family physician in Calgary who treats transgender patients, including prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy in some cases.

  “That would be kind of like saying for a pregnant woman, since we lacked randomized clinical trials for the care of people in pregnancy, we’re not going to provide care for you.… It’s completely unethical.”

  Donaldson called the systematic review paper and the broader Cass Review “politically motivated.”

  Dr. Tehseen Ladha, a pediatrician in Edmonton and assistant professor at the University of Alberta, says the review may be misleading and ignores the context of pediatric medicine — where there is often imperfect evidence.

  “That is the case in almost every sphere of medicine because the cost, time, feasibility and ethical ability to conduct what is considered a high-quality scientific trial, it is just not there,” she said.

  Getting that research done can be even harder when it comes to marginalized populations like trans youth, she said. “They haven’t been thought of as priorities or important.”

  Ladha wondered if the review was “coming from a place of bias.”

  “I think the framing of it really made it feel as though it was trying to create fear around gender-affirming care,” she said.

  So it reads to me like the Cass report is saying there isn’t enough evidence to support gender affirming care because there isnt enough research because we don’t do research on people we don’t like and want banned from existence.

  source

  • wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    So it reads to me like the Cass report is saying there isn’t enough evidence to support gender affirming care because there isnt enough research because we don’t do research on people we don’t like and want banned from existence.

    You may want trans people banned from existence but I don’t. I want to make sure they are receiving the correct treatment that is safe and effective.

    source

    • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t either but the report you reposted seems to suggest not treating anyone. Apparently there’s a lot of conservatives that don’t want anyone to recieve any treatment, and don’t want trans people to exist. Reposting antitrans propaganda appears to support that agenda.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Here’s another link to a piece about the same study.

  Interesting stuff. It’s still not a reason to oppose the transgender movement, though.

  source

  • wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    You think following the science is opposing the transgender movement? Evidence based medicine is the best approach. Now studies need to follow this to generate the evidence.

    I was shocked at the changes that were happening in the past as they defied previous studies and evidence based medicine.

    My only concern is there will be no follow up studies.

    source

    • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      You think following the science is opposing the transgender movement?

      No.

      Evidence based medicine is the best approach. Now studies need to follow this to generate the evidence.

      Interesting take given the conservative stance on masks during the pandemic. The evidence for masks as nuanced and complicated, and yet, conservative insisted masks were wholly ineffective, which is just false.

      In other words, I think “evidenced based medicine” is instrumental rather than a guiding principle for conservatives.

      That’s why I said this study still doesn’t mean anyone should oppose the transgender movement.

      I was shocked at the changes that were happening in the past as they defied previous studies and evidence based medicine.

      Isn’t that the conclusion of this study? The evidence is largely inconclusive and it’s not certain.

      source

      • -> View More Comments