Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To nominate the principle authors of the CASS review for this..

407 replies

NameChangeCass · 14/04/2024 09:47

“Advocates of evidence based medicine have criticised the adoption of interventions evaluated by using only observational data. We think that everyone might benefit if the most radical protagonists of evidence based medicine organised and participated in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the parachute.”

https://www.bmj.com/content/327/7429/1459.short?fbclid=IwAR0hTt57o-yFS61aJE-IGCpKSPaDs--rdrPlbiby_wBCF1czpAWDaCcAEcM_aem_ATiWMtvZxiSzw8pj9CX271gyDByuMHTOKwQskBcCXx9aZOj1IPusHJ_z79olcRiFlhE

Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Objectives To determine whether parachutes are effective in preventing major trauma related to gravitational challenge. Design Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Data sources: Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library...

https://www.bmj.com/content/327/7429/1459.short?fbclid=IwAR0hTt57o-yFS61aJE-IGCpKSPaDs--rdrPlbiby_wBCF1czpAWDaCcAEcM_aem_ATiWMtvZxiSzw8pj9CX271gyDByuMHTOKwQskBcCXx9aZOj1IPusHJ_z79olcRiFlhE

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
TheKeatingFive · 14/04/2024 10:47

However, I do not support the manipulation of evidence to promote the current political agenda to place further restrictions on a group of very vulnerable children’s access to vitally needed health services

This is not what's happening.

So what is your agenda that you're determined to present it as such?

Katspace · 14/04/2024 10:47

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

This!

NewGirlinClass · 14/04/2024 10:46

Have we seen any detailed explanation of why a particular 'disregarded' report should have been included?

Original poster
NameChangeCass · 14/04/2024 10:45

TheKeatingFive · 14/04/2024 10:35

Look, the Cass report is advocating to collect and assess evidence properly - like all other areas of medicine. To ensure that any treatment given to children is ethical and effective.

If you're arguing against that, then you will have to concede that the welfare of the children involved is not actually your first concern. That you are motivated by something else. What is it?

Oh don’t get me wrong I’m am all for collecting more and better evidence on trans medicine. And I think it’s an absolute disgrace that the Tavi completely failed to collect proper evidence on the children they were treating for so long. They could and should have done this- it was a terrible neglect. However, I do not support the manipulation of evidence to promote the current political agenda to place further restrictions on a group of very vulnerable children’s access to vitally needed health services .
Also it would not be ethical, nor practically possible, to conduct a double blinded randomised control trial on the use of PBs for this purpose. We already know they are effective in preventing puberty so at the very least it would be perfectly obvious who was receiving the placebo and who was not!

OP posts:
Pollyannamex · 14/04/2024 10:43

Cringing for you OP

Iamtheoneinten · 14/04/2024 10:43

I thought MNHQ stopped allowing threads spreading misinformation way back during COVID?

Rainbowshit · 14/04/2024 10:42

The BMJ also disagree with your assessment.

www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj.q837?s=08

Rainbowshit · 14/04/2024 10:40

Erm did you read a different thread?

It literally says they examined ALL the studies.

To nominate the principle authors of the CASS review for this..
Original poster
NameChangeCass · 14/04/2024 10:37

Rainbowshit · 14/04/2024 10:24

Cringing for you.

x.com/benryanwriter/status/1779003988647494097?s=46&t=AjtjSItRj-kgZwRzL-pdyQ

He declares it’s false and then literally nothing in his subservience justification demonstrates it’s false.

OP posts:
TheKeatingFive · 14/04/2024 10:35

Look, the Cass report is advocating to collect and assess evidence properly - like all other areas of medicine. To ensure that any treatment given to children is ethical and effective.

If you're arguing against that, then you will have to concede that the welfare of the children involved is not actually your first concern. That you are motivated by something else. What is it?

Original poster
NameChangeCass · 14/04/2024 10:32

BibbleandSqwauk · 14/04/2024 10:21

Which pediatric drugs other than those involved in transitioning are equally untested via the standard process please? I'm genuinely interested.

This would apply to almost paediatric drugs routinely prescribed to children “off label”. This is very common in paediatric medicine: it was also the basis on which PBs were being prescribed to trans children, although they are licensed for prevention of precocious puberty.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677268/#:~:text=Four%20studies%20further%20defined%20off,between%203.2%25%20and%2095%25.

Off-Label Medication use in Children, More Common than We Think: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Clinician prescribing of off-label medications is common due to a lack of pediatric-specific data regarding the dosing, efficacy and safety of medications regularly prescribed to children.This systematic review summarizes the published incidence of off...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677268/#:~:text=Four%20studies%20further%20defined%20off,between%203.2%25%20and%2095%25.

OP posts:
NewGirlinClass · 14/04/2024 10:31

I thought I was of average intelligence but, What in this context is a 'parachute'?

Rainbowshit · 14/04/2024 10:28

BibbleandSqwauk · 14/04/2024 10:24

@Rainbowshit I'm not going to click on a random link..gist please?

Twitter thread explaining why it's false to make claims like the OP has.

To nominate the principle authors of the CASS review for this..
CwmYoy · 14/04/2024 10:26

Embarrassing to write such piffle.

BibbleandSqwauk · 14/04/2024 10:24

@Rainbowshit I'm not going to click on a random link..gist please?

Rainbowshit · 14/04/2024 10:24

Cringing for you.

x.com/benryanwriter/status/1779003988647494097?s=46&t=AjtjSItRj-kgZwRzL-pdyQ

WibblyWobblyWeeble · 14/04/2024 10:24

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Me too.

Hermittrismegistus · 14/04/2024 10:23

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Octavia64 · 14/04/2024 10:21

The reason medicine does double blinded research trials is because drugs can do a massive amount of damage which is not necessarily immediately obvious.

A parachute does no damage.

My understanding of the cass review is that six of the seven adult units refused to release their data so there is in fact very little observational data either.

The medical profession has as it's guiding principle first do no harm so if there is suspicion the drugs or intervention harm people they should be carefully assessing the balance of risk and reward.

This has been applied to opioids and many many other drugs.

BibbleandSqwauk · 14/04/2024 10:21

Which pediatric drugs other than those involved in transitioning are equally untested via the standard process please? I'm genuinely interested.

MiddleagedMarbleGiants · 14/04/2024 10:20

Ok. I get where you're coming from. I'm not from a science background, so have no idea if that's a common approach in assessing the available data. Surely not all data carries the same weight though?

I would say it feels negligent that any routinely administered medical treatment isn't under constant review though. So I don't think the CASS review should be the final word. Isn't that the point of science?

Testina · 14/04/2024 10:20

“It's a ridiculous analogy and nowhere near as clever a "gotcha" as you seem to think.”

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Original poster
NameChangeCass · 14/04/2024 10:19

BibbleandSqwauk · 14/04/2024 10:15

Well yes...the same medical trials that any drug has to go through. The only circumstances in which that should be sometimes ignored is in cases of a terminal condition where an experimental drug, not fully tested can't do any more harm. That's absolutely not the case with these ones, and as easily pointed out, there are now young people in their twenties detransitioning, having realised that the issues that led them to it in the first place weren't actually about gender nor were those issues solved by transitioning. Surely if any group is to be protected from not properly tested drugs and therapies, it's children who cannot possibly be expected to understand the risks, side effects and future downsides.

the same medical trials that any drug has to go through

If that were genuinely the case (the standard required) we’d have to discount the majority of peadiatric medicine I’m afraid .

OP posts:
BibbleandSqwauk · 14/04/2024 10:18

A parachute is not a medical drug and it's efficacy does not take months or years to prove. Its effectiveness does not depend on invisible, internal factors that may be unknown. It's a ridiculous analogy and nowhere near as clever a "gotcha" as you seem to think.