Fair enough. Go ahead and tell the people whose research I linked that they are wrong, and you're sure of it because 2 generations ago some doctors were wrong about the dangers of smoking. Let us know what their response is.
I get it. Looking at cases where researchers got it wrong in the past (while ignoring the vast majority of times they get it right, or at least improved our knowledge) is a great way to rationalize cases where one hopes this might be the case now. But without actual evidence that the current research in question is flawed, there's literally no way to tell if it is like one of the unusual cases in the past where the research was totally wrong or if it is part of the much more common situation where experts in the field are working their best to come to informed conclusions using the limited information at hand.
I'm really reminded of climate change deniers pulling out a single magazine cover from the 70s talking about a coming ice age as "evidence" that all of modern climate science is wrong. Or evolution deniers pointing to a misidentified fossil from a century ago as evidence that all of modern biology is flawed. It's not an exact parallel but feels much the same.
Except that entire countries have changed thier course. Even WPATH knows thier research is bad. This isn't a magazine cover of a single magazine. It's systematic reviews of many countries. It's contained in the Cass Report. Why even Canada admits the systematic reviews show the research is bad. So quit telling us there is no evidence. That is such bunk. It's time you to catch up.
Carl Heneghan, editor-in-chief of the British Medical Journal, and Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine from the University of Oxford performed a review of the literature for puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in children and adolescence. He concluded: “The current evidence base does not support informed decision making and safe practice in children.”
Three of the same gender professionals again said a year earlier in the AMA Journal of Ethics: “Transgender medicine presents a particular challenge for the development of evidence-based guidelines. First and foremost, data on health outcomes in transgender medicine are currently limited to retrospective studies, case series, and individual case
reports.”
The same authors go on to say that, even though there is no evidence, “The existence of guidelines in the field of transgender medicine both legitimizes the need for gender-affirming medical and surgical interventions and informs medical practitioners and policymakers on how to best meet these needs.” This statement could not show more clearly the harm low-quality medical guidelines can do—legitimize potential harm and lead other medical professionals to assume the guidelines were developed based on quality data and scientific rigor.
- Irreversible medication and surgery are permitted for children, even though “the number of studies is still low”, “there are few outcome studies that follow youth into adulthood” and “no clinical studies have reported on profiles of adolescents who regret their initial decision”. There is no evidence to support this decision.
- Children can move straight to cross-sex hormones – they will no longer be requested to start with a suppression of puberty. Although puberty blockers are damaging, cross-sex hormones are a good deal more harmful as they can permanently alter the body, the face, the genitals and the voice. There is no evidence to support this radical decision.
- Despite evidence that shows chest binding and genital tucking as significantly harmful to the body, WPATH ignores these dangers and instead advises clinicians to provide education on these so as to provide “comfort” to children.
A very short time after the document went public, a major unexpected “correction” was issued. However this wasn’t a “correction” this was an ideological turnaround. This change of heart was reported all over the world as it removed all minimum age requirements for ‘gender affirmative’ surgeries.
Genspect provides a brief overview on why many believe that WPATH’s release of their Standards of Care (Version 8) was a disaster. The eagerly awaited Standards of Care, Version 8 (SOC8) from the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) was recently published to widespread...
genspect.org
I think your claims have been debunked.
Ti's stuff is dangerous for kids and should be banned. There is NO evidence that it's effective in helping kids and much e idence its harmful.
