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

The BMJ also disagree with your assessment.

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

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

Cringing for you OP

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!

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

This!

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?

I think the last thing very vulnerable children need is permanent changes to their physiology at an age they cannot possibly comprehend the implications of. They need protection and therapy to help them accept the reality of their biological sex until such times as they are sufficiently mature to take responsibility for their choices in this area.
If we could encourage more opposition to gender norms and stop telling little girls that if they don't like pink they must be boys, that might help.

Your assertion that studies were excluded for not being double blinded is also false.

yes examined and discounted for the reasons specified in my pp. Here’s a snapshot from the paper.

I'm not sure what you think your blurry unreadable picture shows but everyone is free to look through the Twitter thread I posted which shows the graphs of how the studies were included in the review. 🤷🏻‍♀️

This is not what's happening

well on that we will have to agree to disagree

Stop trying to pedal quackery. while the ‘kind’ lies held sway for a time, reality always catches up.

What is your point? Parachutes are nothing like puberty blockers.

Sorry I don’t know why it came out blurry. Will try to zoom out a bit and see if this works. The evidence from these studies was discounted on the basis of being judged “low quality” , largely on grounds that these studies were not blinded and had no control group. Hence my original posed Aibu reflecting on the feasibility of gathering blinded , randomised evidence in certain contexts , and obvious value in some cases of evidence, even if it is “only” observational.

The fact that 6 out of the 7 adult gender clinics refused to share follow up data on patients who had been treated as children is very suspicious don't you think?

Surely if it was absolutely clear that these treatments were vital and life saving then they would be keen to provide the evidence of that, no?

I don’t think comments like this really add to the debate personally

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

That's about the level of most trans rights activists, though.

The clinics are incompetent- I wouldn’t dispute that. They don’t have follow up data because they neglect to follow up.

You can disagree all you like, but as you're just a random username on the internet, going up against highly respected experts in clinical medicine, supported by the wider establishment like the BMJ - I'm sure you can see how weak that is.

I would be very interested to know what your agenda is. Is it connected to a child of your own for example?

Your argument is that because we can't do an ethical study on the effects of drugs on children we should just hand them out freely?

Puberty is essential to a person's physical and cognitive development. Preventing it has a permanent effect on that development, as well as causing problems that will have a long-term impact on their body.

The explosion in the number of children presenting with gender-related issues should be of massive concern to everyone.

Here's a thread unroll of Benjamin Ryan's patient response to the misleading claim that Cass 'discarded' 101 out of 103 studies:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1779306273701339548.html

If people in psychological distress were being prescribed parachute jumps, you might have a point.

As it is, I think you’re clutching at straws.

Why are you insistent on trying to undercover some nefarious personal agenda?

If you want to engage in a substantive debate reflecting on points raised, then engage in one. Trying to discredit me personally is a desperate tactic. And after all I am just “some random username on the internet”, so what on earth is the point? How is this advancing the conversation?