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

[NameChangeCass]

“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

What? How about you just explain your thoughts on Cass?

What is with all the mystery? Just ask what is on your mind.

Maybe if you added a bit .ire about what you actually mean...

Ok for some context. The CASS review has made recommendations that puberty blockers (and other medical treatments for trans children) should no longer be routinely be available on the NHS on the grounds that there isn’t enough evidence on their efficacy. In reaching this conclusion they chose to discard evidence from around 100 studies on the grounds that these studies weren’t double blinded , randomised control trials.

So I’m asking - WIBU to nominate these excellent scientists to participate in a double blinded randomised control trial of the of the parachute? To see if they work? We only have observational evidence so far… 🤔

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 grownups have taken the reigns back love. Thankfully. It is in everyone's interest to move forward with an evidence based approach.

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.

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 .

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

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

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?

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

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.

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

Me too.

Cringing for you.

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

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

Embarrassing to write such piffle.

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

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

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.

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?

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

Erm did you read a different thread?

It literally says they examined ALL the studies.