Helen Webberley

Tanner stage 2 is age 9 - 11. I can’t imagine the damage that could be done to future generations by “harvesting” sperm and eggs at ages 9 - 11. Are they even ready to be harvested if a child hasn’t started puberty????

In order to “harvest” the gametes you’d have to give a cocktail of sex hormones to “ripen” them, which would be the very opposite of what they want the puberty blockers for.

Sheesh. The woman has some serious gaps in her basic knowledge as well as a total lack of contact with reality.

And as for consulting with “lay colleagues” in order to assess her own medical competence? Next time I feel like performing open heart surgery, I think I’ll consult with the milkman first - I’m sure he will reassure me that my medical expertise is up to scratch. 🤦‍♀️

However, here in the UK in 2021 government statistics suggest that 17 million adults – 49 per cent of the working-age population of England – have the numeracy level that we expect of primary school children.

Last comment on this (on this thread). Yes, I missed that it said 'England'.

The quoted sentence seems to be comparing the total number of adults in the UK with poor numeracy to the working age population in England. Seems designed to be misleading.

They could have said: 'There are 17m adults in the UK with low numeracy. This is a figure equivalent to 49% of the working-age population of England.' If they had phrased it like this I wouldn't have an issue with it.

EmbarrassingAdmissions your interpretation seems to be that all those 17m are of working age and living in England. It doesn't actually say that, and 'here in the UK' implies that the 17m applies to the whole of the UK and includes all ages. They didn't provide a source as far as I could see, so I don't know whether this 17m is for all ages in the UK or working-age only in England, so I have no idea if your interpretation is correct or if mine is.

If you want to start a thread about this somewhere more appropriate and @ me I will be happy to contribute.

Most of all, I don't doubt you will have had some negative experiences with GPs or know of others who have had them. As do I.

I just wanted to point out that I don't believe it's true in general.

Can you imagine the trauma and pain harvesting eggs from a 11 year old girl. It has to be abuse and messing with science.

The sentence that I quoted: However, here in the UK in 2021 government statistics suggest that 17 million adults – 49 per cent of the working-age population of England – have the numeracy level that we expect of primary school children.

Old Crone wrote (anything in [ ] is my addition):

Unfortunately, that looks like a misuse of statistics as well as being numerically innacurate according to the figures on the ONS website. Ironic in an article about numeracy.

I can't find all the figures for 2021, so I'm using 2019 figures (not very different for overall population).

Total population: 67m [the UK, not England]
Adult (over 16) population: 54m [the UK, not England]
Working age population (16-64): 42m [the UK, not England]

The sentence I quoted frames it within the UK but gives estimates relating to England.

According to Table 2 of the ONS link:
the population of England is ca. 56, 300,000
the working age population is 62.4% of that or a rough 35,000,00.
So 49% of that is ca. 17,500,000 or thereabouts.

I wonder if there is a difference in interpretation of the quoted sentence in play because it was offering a way to frame the numbers: it's not a framing that works for you.

However, definitely not to be continued in this thread.

“”DRW: its very difficult to discuss fertility because the most effective interventions are at Tanner Stage 2 of puberty where it is very difficult to harvest sperm or eggs/embryos. This is a failure of modern medical science that we can't do this yet””

Tanner stage 2 is age 9 - 11. I can’t imagine the damage that could be done to future generations by “harvesting” sperm and eggs at ages 9 - 11. Are they even ready to be harvested if a child hasn’t started puberty???? It really is playing with nature.

Wot? It's a failure of medical science that we cannot yet harvest non-existent sperm?

I mean there are some ground-breaking endeavours on the go about harvesting gonadal tissue from which we would later hope to extract cells to transplant back into the testes. (This is of concern in boys treated for cancer which typically affects future fertility.)

But these young male patients are transitioning and after they are castrated, there is nothing to transplant tissue that might lead to sperm production into.

And the development of this gonadal tissue, frozen, stored and then grown in vitro, that one hopes to mature to sperm production, also in vitro, well, no one knows if that is even possible yet.

In any case, even if these options become possible in the future, what HW is talking about doing here in boys and girls, as if it were nothing, are invasive painful biopsies to remove this tissue. In children, who according to the evidence provided by the Tavistock, do not understand why they should be concerned about fertility preservation at all.

(IIRC, various articles I've read about fertility preservation in children with gender dysphoria whose bodies have matured enough to either be ovulating or producing sperm, uptake of that option is extremely low, at around 5%.)

Yes. It's all so fucking VAGUE.

The thing that strikes me is that HW’s concept of gender (fixed, innate, must relate to external appearance), is the polar opposite of Judith Butler’s, yet political parties are trying to come up with policies that somehow encompass both doctrines.

all doctors would like more data and big published studies with control groups etc. but we don't have that and we won't have that because it wouldn't be ethical to withhold treatment from a large group of GD children. This is why we don't have NICE guidelines. It would be nice to have this but its lack doesn't mean we should withhold treatment

It wouldn't be ethical not to use a treatment just because it's unevidenced? Is that really what she's saying?

most doctors are not well informed or not as well informed as their patients. Patients are 'informing' doctors about what best practice and good treatments are.

It's just like when I go to the doctors and tell them all about my innate need for opiates and they nod and hand me a prescription because they don't understand my inner desires as well as I do?

DRW: its very difficult to discuss fertility because the most effective interventions are at Tanner Stage 2 of puberty where it is very difficult to harvest sperm or eggs/embryos. This is a failure of modern medical science that we can't do this yet.

So ... it's difficult to discuss because the treatment is crap? And makes children infertile? So let's just not talk about it, then, okay.

Perhaps it's a transcription error, she says hopefully.

their biological gender is actually as valid as cisgender people

So not valid because cisgender people don't have an innate biological gender either?

What is biological gender?

WTF does 'valid' actually mean in this context? Real?

okay, trying to parse this: she means 'trans people feel their gender identity is as valid as biological sex'? Is that what she means?

someone who has an innate sense of a different gender to their genitals feels that their biological gender is actually as valid as cisgender people

their biological gender is actually as valid as cisgender people

'SJ: it is treatment that will affirm their biological gender in any event. DRW: we tread on dangerous ground here because someone who has an innate sense of a different gender to their genitals feels that their biological gender is actually as valid as cisgender people.'

Biological gender? Surely these people grasp the difference between sex and gender?

“DRW: an independent self appraisal. I discussed with lay colleagues”

I’m using that in my next pay rise chat. An independent self assessment and a chat with my colleagues has led me to believe that I deserve a pay rise.

I don't have any records and cannot recall.

Well, that's going to be my go-to answer next time I'm asked for my pronouns

Faffertea and CharlieParley I'll take back my generalisation about GPs, I can't back it up. My observations were anecdotal and obviously don't apply to all GPs, but like I say, I can't back it up so apologies.