@bluesal89.bsky.social
P.S. - I appreciate your constructive responses to my replies. While we may not see eye-to-eye, I am grateful for the civility you have maintained. That’s rare on social media.
Here is a cute pupper dance as a sign of gratitude. (I hope my sincerity is coming across,)
Here is a cute pupper dance as a sign of gratitude. (I hope my sincerity is coming across,)
a small dog with a sign that says i am seld
ALT: a small dog with a sign that says i am seld
media.tenor.com
April 1, 2025 at 9:26 PM
P.S. - I appreciate your constructive responses to my replies. While we may not see eye-to-eye, I am grateful for the civility you have maintained. That’s rare on social media.
Here is a cute pupper dance as a sign of gratitude. (I hope my sincerity is coming across,)
Here is a cute pupper dance as a sign of gratitude. (I hope my sincerity is coming across,)
I don’t contest that there are ideologues that want a blanket ban on these treatments for minor, but at least at this time, Singal’s central thesis on reporting on this is issue, from what I’ve seen has been focus on adolescent natal females expressing gender distress. A relatively new change.
April 1, 2025 at 9:23 PM
I don’t contest that there are ideologues that want a blanket ban on these treatments for minor, but at least at this time, Singal’s central thesis on reporting on this is issue, from what I’ve seen has been focus on adolescent natal females expressing gender distress. A relatively new change.
What was the disinformation about Breen’s case? She might get proverbially pantsed during discovery or cross examination, but I’m not familiar with any rebuttals regarding the “double mastectomy at 14” claim.
April 1, 2025 at 9:19 PM
What was the disinformation about Breen’s case? She might get proverbially pantsed during discovery or cross examination, but I’m not familiar with any rebuttals regarding the “double mastectomy at 14” claim.
I never said they were untested at all. The focus was on precocious puberty in prior testings, not gender dysphoria. Off-label use is not uncommon, but it isn’t crazy to want to study it for this type of treatment.
The prior studies on HRT were focus on trans adults, not minors.
The prior studies on HRT were focus on trans adults, not minors.
April 1, 2025 at 9:15 PM
I never said they were untested at all. The focus was on precocious puberty in prior testings, not gender dysphoria. Off-label use is not uncommon, but it isn’t crazy to want to study it for this type of treatment.
The prior studies on HRT were focus on trans adults, not minors.
The prior studies on HRT were focus on trans adults, not minors.
FWIW, I don’t want the treatments banned, but I would prefer more caution and a stranger emphasis on assessments to be provided
April 1, 2025 at 9:07 PM
FWIW, I don’t want the treatments banned, but I would prefer more caution and a stranger emphasis on assessments to be provided
1. Medical treatments need to be studied to verify if treatment is addressing issue. That’s the purpose of evidence-based medicine.
2. We need more research, but treatments should be backed by solid evidence. Otherwise, we get laissez-faire approaches that fast-track unnecessary treatments
2. We need more research, but treatments should be backed by solid evidence. Otherwise, we get laissez-faire approaches that fast-track unnecessary treatments
April 1, 2025 at 9:04 PM
1. Medical treatments need to be studied to verify if treatment is addressing issue. That’s the purpose of evidence-based medicine.
2. We need more research, but treatments should be backed by solid evidence. Otherwise, we get laissez-faire approaches that fast-track unnecessary treatments
2. We need more research, but treatments should be backed by solid evidence. Otherwise, we get laissez-faire approaches that fast-track unnecessary treatments
2.Even in your AP fact check article, one of the authorities advised “to declare treatment for minors including hormones, puberty blockers and surgery as ‘exploratory’ or ‘experimental’”. That’s not a bad thing. It just means we need more research and should be cautious about these treatments.
April 1, 2025 at 8:52 PM
2.Even in your AP fact check article, one of the authorities advised “to declare treatment for minors including hormones, puberty blockers and surgery as ‘exploratory’ or ‘experimental’”. That’s not a bad thing. It just means we need more research and should be cautious about these treatments.
1. The linked fact check debunks the claim that Norway had a blanket ban on those treatments, not restrictions. Please see the attached highlighted area on the gifted NYT article for the relevant part.
April 1, 2025 at 8:49 PM
1. The linked fact check debunks the claim that Norway had a blanket ban on those treatments, not restrictions. Please see the attached highlighted area on the gifted NYT article for the relevant part.
Regarding all of Europe. The reviews from the medical authorities in countries like Sweden and Finland found the the studies bolstering such claims to be lacking. They have largely refined such treatments to clinical trials or urged caution.
www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/h...
www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/h...
Youth Gender Medications Limited in England, Part of Big Shift in Europe (Gift Article)
Five European countries have recently restricted hormone treatments for adolescents with gender distress. They have not banned the care, unlike many U.S. states.
www.nytimes.com
April 1, 2025 at 8:15 PM
Regarding all of Europe. The reviews from the medical authorities in countries like Sweden and Finland found the the studies bolstering such claims to be lacking. They have largely refined such treatments to clinical trials or urged caution.
www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/h...
www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/h...
While refining my response to your original question, I’d like to reiterate I’m against blanket bans. That is *especially* towards research in the field. We should have clinical trials like those in parts of Europe or at least have push harder for thorough assessments like the WPATH SOC recommends
March 29, 2025 at 1:59 AM
While refining my response to your original question, I’d like to reiterate I’m against blanket bans. That is *especially* towards research in the field. We should have clinical trials like those in parts of Europe or at least have push harder for thorough assessments like the WPATH SOC recommends
It may take some time because of the complexity of the field and its history.
In terms of complexity/contention, it is the “Israel/Palestine” of healthcare. I hope you’ll give me some time to reflect and respond. 2/
In terms of complexity/contention, it is the “Israel/Palestine” of healthcare. I hope you’ll give me some time to reflect and respond. 2/
March 29, 2025 at 1:58 AM
It may take some time because of the complexity of the field and its history.
In terms of complexity/contention, it is the “Israel/Palestine” of healthcare. I hope you’ll give me some time to reflect and respond. 2/
In terms of complexity/contention, it is the “Israel/Palestine” of healthcare. I hope you’ll give me some time to reflect and respond. 2/
I appreciate your good faith questions & will try to answer them as best I can. Given the partisan/toxic nature of discussing this topic, it was a minefield trying to navigate this info. Don’t claim to be an expert, but I can tell my journey. 1/
March 29, 2025 at 1:57 AM
I appreciate your good faith questions & will try to answer them as best I can. Given the partisan/toxic nature of discussing this topic, it was a minefield trying to navigate this info. Don’t claim to be an expert, but I can tell my journey. 1/
Expert opinion is subject to change based on the latest evidence. That includes systematic reviews that assess the strength of available evidence.
Are you asking how I became interested in this field in particular (drama et al)?
2/
Are you asking how I became interested in this field in particular (drama et al)?
2/
March 29, 2025 at 1:31 AM
Expert opinion is subject to change based on the latest evidence. That includes systematic reviews that assess the strength of available evidence.
Are you asking how I became interested in this field in particular (drama et al)?
2/
Are you asking how I became interested in this field in particular (drama et al)?
2/
A supposed example in the past was having infants avoiding peanuts to prevent developing an allergy. That was later backtracked when it was supposedly found early exposure to peanuts was shown to reduce development of an allergy.
1/
1/
March 29, 2025 at 1:31 AM
A supposed example in the past was having infants avoiding peanuts to prevent developing an allergy. That was later backtracked when it was supposedly found early exposure to peanuts was shown to reduce development of an allergy.
1/
1/
The qualm I have is that the supposed* expert consensus seems to deviate significantly from systematic reviews on the alleged strength of evidence available.
It doesn’t seem unfair to ask why.
*In the 2022 Bazelon article, there is contention on how much assessment is needed before moving ahead.
It doesn’t seem unfair to ask why.
*In the 2022 Bazelon article, there is contention on how much assessment is needed before moving ahead.
March 29, 2025 at 12:13 AM
The qualm I have is that the supposed* expert consensus seems to deviate significantly from systematic reviews on the alleged strength of evidence available.
It doesn’t seem unfair to ask why.
*In the 2022 Bazelon article, there is contention on how much assessment is needed before moving ahead.
It doesn’t seem unfair to ask why.
*In the 2022 Bazelon article, there is contention on how much assessment is needed before moving ahead.
I’m not sure I understand your question. Systematic reviews are essentially an audit of the available evidence (studies, et al) that assess how well we understand a treatment is providing the desired outcome.
I don’t want the treatment blanket banned, but better studied via clinical trials.
I don’t want the treatment blanket banned, but better studied via clinical trials.
March 28, 2025 at 11:59 PM
I’m not sure I understand your question. Systematic reviews are essentially an audit of the available evidence (studies, et al) that assess how well we understand a treatment is providing the desired outcome.
I don’t want the treatment blanket banned, but better studied via clinical trials.
I don’t want the treatment blanket banned, but better studied via clinical trials.
Regarding the efficacy of treatments, we would need systematic reviews of evidence, like the ones done in Sweden & UK . The led to clinical trials & more caution.
WPATH uses the consensus based approach, which is fine if there’s limited evidence. Just be honest it’s a fairly new field. 1/
WPATH uses the consensus based approach, which is fine if there’s limited evidence. Just be honest it’s a fairly new field. 1/
March 28, 2025 at 7:54 PM
Regarding the efficacy of treatments, we would need systematic reviews of evidence, like the ones done in Sweden & UK . The led to clinical trials & more caution.
WPATH uses the consensus based approach, which is fine if there’s limited evidence. Just be honest it’s a fairly new field. 1/
WPATH uses the consensus based approach, which is fine if there’s limited evidence. Just be honest it’s a fairly new field. 1/
It may not be perfect, but I do feel it is fair to point out that his reporting involved quoting clinicians within the field like Erica Anderson and Laura Edwards Leeper.
That’s why the a lot of the attacks on him & others (ex: Emily Bazelon’s 2022 article) give off a “shoot the messenger” vibe.
That’s why the a lot of the attacks on him & others (ex: Emily Bazelon’s 2022 article) give off a “shoot the messenger” vibe.
March 28, 2025 at 7:36 PM
It may not be perfect, but I do feel it is fair to point out that his reporting involved quoting clinicians within the field like Erica Anderson and Laura Edwards Leeper.
That’s why the a lot of the attacks on him & others (ex: Emily Bazelon’s 2022 article) give off a “shoot the messenger” vibe.
That’s why the a lot of the attacks on him & others (ex: Emily Bazelon’s 2022 article) give off a “shoot the messenger” vibe.
Also debates on how much assessment is needed for minors before moving forward.
Bazelon talked with WPATH clinicians for a 2022 NYT piece.
Here’s a gift article: www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/m...
Bazelon talked with WPATH clinicians for a 2022 NYT piece.
Here’s a gift article: www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/m...
The Battle Over Gender Therapy (Gift Article)
More teenagers than ever are seeking transitions, but the medical community that treats them is deeply divided about why — and what to do to help them.
www.nytimes.com
March 28, 2025 at 4:47 PM
Also debates on how much assessment is needed for minors before moving forward.
Bazelon talked with WPATH clinicians for a 2022 NYT piece.
Here’s a gift article: www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/m...
Bazelon talked with WPATH clinicians for a 2022 NYT piece.
Here’s a gift article: www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/m...
The debates were largely about how older trans patients were mostly natal males. Now a large cohort in recent years has been natal female expressing distress around. There are debates if it is just societal acceptance or do other social factors possible.
1/
1/
March 28, 2025 at 4:45 PM
The debates were largely about how older trans patients were mostly natal males. Now a large cohort in recent years has been natal female expressing distress around. There are debates if it is just societal acceptance or do other social factors possible.
1/
1/
If the systematic reviews in Europe, including the York SRs that informed the Cass Review, are flawed or have deviated from SR measurements, why not have members from WPATH et al submit rebuttals to the same peer-reviewed medical journals where SRs were submitted (ex: BMJ).
March 27, 2025 at 10:23 PM
If the systematic reviews in Europe, including the York SRs that informed the Cass Review, are flawed or have deviated from SR measurements, why not have members from WPATH et al submit rebuttals to the same peer-reviewed medical journals where SRs were submitted (ex: BMJ).
If the systematic reviews in Europe, including the York SRs that informed the Cass Review, are flawed or have deviated from SR measurements, why not have members from WPATH et al submit rebuttals to the same peer-reviewed medical journals where SRs were submitted (ex: BMJ).
March 27, 2025 at 10:22 PM
If the systematic reviews in Europe, including the York SRs that informed the Cass Review, are flawed or have deviated from SR measurements, why not have members from WPATH et al submit rebuttals to the same peer-reviewed medical journals where SRs were submitted (ex: BMJ).
If the systematic reviews in Europe, including the York SRs that informed the Cass Review, are flawed or have deviated from SR measurements, why not have members from WPATH et al submit rebuttals to the same peer-reviewed medical journals where SRs were submitted (ex: BMJ).
March 27, 2025 at 9:51 PM
If the systematic reviews in Europe, including the York SRs that informed the Cass Review, are flawed or have deviated from SR measurements, why not have members from WPATH et al submit rebuttals to the same peer-reviewed medical journals where SRs were submitted (ex: BMJ).