Study find trans kids thrive after early transition

[Wakame]

pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/09/02/peds.2013-2958

A study has found that young adults who transitioned in childhood through puberty suppression and cross sex hormones are thriving. Here's an excerpt:

"After gender reassignment, in young adulthood, the GD was alleviated and psychological functioning had steadily improved. Well-being was similar to or better than same-age young adults from the general population. Improvements in psychological functioning were positively correlated with postsurgical subjective well-being."

It's a small study, but of course, when the results are so unambiguous, they become statistically significant even with smaller studies. You can of course counter this study with more science - just find a larger study that shows the opposite.

R0wantrees Ahh I apologise, I think I partly misunderstood you and partly poorly explained myself (most likely the latter..)

What I meant is that having had a community of trans people having been to various bars and clubs and spoken to a great many trans people (biologically male and female) of a variety of ages (though all adults) and stages in their transition as well as a vast array of starting points and also with various goals with their transition, what I meant is that in the same way you have experienced what you have been through and having been to conferences and the like, I think that whilst I understand the risks of long term HRT, I see it to be life saving.

Of course if there comes a point in my life that it is deemed too dangerous for my health for me to continue taking estrogen then I will stop. I just hope that people such as yourself, who have been through an ordeal such as you have don’t see my use of hormones as trivial. In the sense that they were the easiest choice in the world, I too am worried about the long term affects, despite reading what I have ready about the safety of them for trans women at least. I would never want to cheapen your experience by claiming they are benign, they are very much a double edged sword.

Natluc As I said, I respect your decision entirely.

My concerns are much more general and specifically for young people who I understand would have to take the hormones for such a long time. I imagine that there would be extreme distress if they then had to stop taking them on medical grounds.

I have seen today following the Social Policy conference how some people take issue with Dr Polly Carmichael's speech and the GIDs approach. Also that there are quite insistant calls to speed up the process through bridging prescriptions for blockers. It seems that some of the calls for better healthcare could lead to children and young people starting medication quicker and with less support.

None of the discussion about hormones affects my personal experience or feelings. I do though bring some knowledge and experience to the discussion which I think has relevence.

I and many other women who have had hysterectomies do feel deeply upset and sometimes angry when some TRAs use this experience as a way of 'proving' themselves similarly women but that's a different issue.

Trying to remove a persons 'need' to transition through therapy is no different to conversion therapy.

This is an interesting point but I’d argue the opposite. Trying to channel a child who may be gay into ‘being the opposite sex’ is conversion therapy.

Bowlof
I thought being gay was about who you wanted to get with not what you're doing during the day

God this is grim. I remember wakame when they used to try to overtake the guardian comment is free in a similar way. I am gutted that they are now here

God this is grim. I remember wakame when they used to try to overtake the guardian comment is free in a similar way. I am gutted that they are now here

I said almost exactly the same thing a couple of days ago when they first appeared Gorgon...but they won't go unchallenged here unlike the Guardian with its policy of modding anything GC.

terry
Why would you go to an online newspaper to post comments and talk to others? I remember reading a 2015 article from The Guardian about how well fitting bras were hard to find in UK shops and while I was grateful seeing those 500 comments from people at the bottom to get different takes it just seems weird to go talk in threads on articles written by people of went to Calgary University.

I used to love reading comments and posting on the Guardian website, there used to be some great posters who I learned a lot from on a whole range of subjects but the rightthink, dudebros and anti-GC policy did it for me and I ended up here

Everyone could just collectively agree not to encourage Wakame to keep posting here by not engaging. Though at that point they'd just go bother some other group of feminists.

said almost exactly the same thing a couple of days ago when they first appeared Gorgon...but they won't go unchallenged here unlike the Guardian with its policy of modding anything GC.

This.

I've RTFT and I'd make a few observations.

Firstly, as much as someone like the OP might try and derail, this "study" has been published in Pediatrics, which is one of the most well known and prestigious paediatric journals around. So I think it does warrant discussion. BUT

1. Top journals often make mistakes with their publications. The best example being the Lancet and their grave error with Wakefield's fraudulent shit.

2. the fact it's in Pediatrics is very surprising because as has been pointed out already, as valid research it's a pile of shit low quality. It was also published in 2014.

3. the American Academy of Pediatrics is the proper one, not the crazy Christian one. But they commonly don't get things right. For example, they are ok with male circumcision despite every other paediatric organisation around the world being against it. So even though the AAP is the "respected" element of paediatrics in the USA, they do seem to have a hard time condemning unnecessary surgery on children's genitals.

4. Controls are absolutely necessary and could have easily have been used. It's not "denying therapy" when you're trying to prove if the therapy works or not.

5. I'd like to reiterate that teenage boys cannot go through female puberty. No hormone treatment will increase the endometrial lining of their non-existent uterus.

6. I think this is an area where comparison with intersex is actually valid. For years, the sex of intersex babies was assigned at a young age based on what their chromosomes were and what the surgeons thought they could make work in terms of appearance. This meant if there wasn't much of a penis, it was deemed better to remove the testes and construct a vagina. Equally if there was significant clitoromegaly it was deemed better to "make" a penis. Recently this has been (correctly in my view) to be inappropriate as it is adults deciding for children and any definitive surgery or treatment should be only undertaken as an adult. It is therefore completely contradictory that a different set of rules be applied here and adults should still be undertaking definitive procedures on children when they can't fully understand.

I think this study is the equivalent of Mermaids and quack Weberley publishing a study based on their own self selected patients while ignoring any information from the Tavistock clinic. I.e. It's bullshit.

said almost exactly the same thing a couple of days ago when they first appeared Gorgon...but they won't go unchallenged here unlike the Guardian with its policy of modding anything GC.

This.

terry
You just latched onto the posters who were more aligned to what you thought

Everyone could just collectively agree not to encourage Wakame to keep posting here by not engaging. Though at that point they'd just go bother some other group of feminists

I'm sure they are doing that as well...

Terry yes it's heartening to see the very articulate and knowledgeable posts challenging them.

Thanks, NotBad - very thorough and considered response!

Everyone could just collectively agree not to encourage Wakame to keep posting here by not engaging. Though at that point they'd just go bother some other group of feminists.

I agree.

But I'm glad Wakame is posting here. I find it useful. I wouldn't have come across those studies otherwise.

If you don't want to engage, don't. But please stop policing those of us who do.

I think that's fair enough, and as pointed out, we don't have the woke Guardian modding to contend with so can properly challenge Wakame in a way that wasn't possible there.

If you don't want to engage, don't. But please stop policing those of us who do

I think this impetus comes from a range of recent goady OPs who have been posting merde in the hope to antagonise us and get some good screen shots to take out of context and twat on twatter ...

Where are the controls?
Exactly this. And they'd need to be randomised.

All this gender stuff is like "ethnic cleansing" of gay people.

It seems it's no longer ok to be a man that is attracted to men or a woman that is attracted to women. If you are attracted to the same sex, it must be becasue you were "born in the wrong body" . What a pile of shite. There is no such thing as the wrong body. Your body is your body, whether you feel attraction to the opposite sex or same sex or both is fine. Aside from the tiny proportion of people with genuine dna issues who need to have the full range of available treatments, others need to be offered appropriate psychiatric treatment. If we stopped putting people into boxes then maybe most of these issues wouldn't be issues. There is nothing wrong with Sophie liking to play with trucks and football or with Harry liking pink or Dave liking to wear a dress and getting his nails done. Who cares? None of these things mean you are in the wrong body, there is no wrong body, just your body.

Your sex is what it is, it can't be changed. That doesn't stop you living a full and happy life.

If you don't want to engage, don't. But please stop policing those of us who do

I think this impetus comes from a range of recent goady OPs who have been posting merde in the hope to antagonise us and get some good screen shots to take out of context and twat on twatter ...

Absolutely this. I know this particular poster wakame from my time on the guardian comment boards. I know that they are a one-issue poster who pretends to be interested in debate but actually never engages with anything that anyone else says. It's not discussion they want, it's completely one-sided.

I know this particular poster wakame from my time on the guardian comment boards. I know that they are a one-issue poster who pretends to be interested in debate but actually never engages with anything that anyone else says.

Yes but so far, I've seen posts from wakame on studies that I wouldn't have come across otherwise.

I don't think we're going to change wakame's mind, but hearing the arguments other people put forward is interesting and useful. Plus, people googling the study may well come across this thread and the criticism of it - MN ranks well on Google.

It's not discussion they want, it's completely one-sided. - the same could be said for half the OPs on MN!

If this poster was just posting goady fuckery then I'd agree. But I find putting up studies for us to debunk really useful, and I'm glad these threads are here.

Just because you don't see any practical use in them, doesn't mean others don't find them useful.

sleeping I am also glad that people have effectively critiqued it, but I also think it's worth people understanding who is posting it and why.