Life expectancy of medically transitioned young people

[porridgecake]

I am sure I read on here that children and young people who start puberty blockers and then continue on cross sex hormones long term have a greatly reduced life expectancy.
Does anyone have any information on this?

@porridgecake

I am sure I read on here that children and young people who start puberty blockers and then continue on cross sex hormones long term have a greatly reduced life expectancy. Does anyone have any information on this?

I should think that there will be substantial differences depending on the maturity of the healthcare system involved and the occupation of the transitioned person.

I doubt there's much research evidence as it's all so new. I suppose people with the relevant expertise may be able to collate evidence from research tracking other groups who've had the same or similar treatments.

I think one of the difficulties is that there hasn't been enough time passed. Sadly if it does prove to be true it is likely to feed into the 'most oppressed' narrative rather than being a lightbulb moment of the damage caused by the ideology.

I guess we won't know until the current generation of teens hit their 30's about the true extent of permanent damage on young bodies taking high doses of hormones they weren't designed to deal with, especially those who didn't go through puberty/had blockers.

The middle aged males will be fine and dandy though because they had their testosterone fueled puberty and weren't made sterile.

Off the top of my head, the likely issues are:

Untreated mental health issues, because a full MH assessment has not been made, and other treatments/therapies have been sidelined because transition has been assumed to be a cure all - sadly, this may not be the case, so increased risk of self-harm, harmful behaviours etc

Osteoporosis leading to fractures and reduced mobility

Infection risk from operations

Risk of death from complications of general anaesthetic

Females put on testosterone may end up with an increased risk of heart disease

There will be others. If you have a body which from a few weeks after conception is expecting high levels of one hormone, or a combination of hormones, and it suddenly doesn't get that, surely there are going to be issues. Your body will be fighting the drugs trying to suppress production of those hormones and the sudden rise in other hormones which your chromosomal makeup means your body is not expecting.

If you look at Exulansic's videos on YT, transitioners who've had various kinds of surgeries seem to be experiencing horrific levels of side-effects, but it seems nobody is collating that data either at the individual or the population level.

It is surprising because usually with pioneering new treatments, collecting information and documenting progress would be a matter of course. I thought there would at least be some planned collation of outcomes.

@porridgecake

It is surprising because usually with pioneering new treatments, collecting information and documenting progress would be a matter of course. I thought there would at least be some planned collation of outcomes.

You'd think but if the Tavi aren't collecting that data, individual surgeons in the US (who don't work in MDTs in the UK way) definitely won't be. Assume HW & co won't be collecting that data either, not unless it shows what they want it to show.

Financial conflicts of interest going on all over the place.

‘The middle aged males will be fine and dandy though because they had their testosterone fueled puberty and weren't made sterile.’

No the middle aged men are not fine and dandy. They have an increased risk of heart attack and stroke if they are on artificial hormones.

A transwoman friend of mine- healthy, around 40s, no obvious other causes- died of a sudden heart attack last year.

Around 40 I mean, not 40s.

Anecdotally I know of one young person who has liver problems. It has been suggested their issue may be related to artificial testosterone. This is a 21 yr old

I believe the question is being deliberately avoided, recording such data would no doubt be considered transphobic.

Given the shorter average life expectancy of autism by 16 years and their prevalence within the group. In addition to the horrific impact of hormones and suppression of natural body processes, I wouldn't like to guess 😬

@porridgecake

I am sure I read on here that children and young people who start puberty blockers and then continue on cross sex hormones long term have a greatly reduced life expectancy. Does anyone have any information on this?

There's a number of different issues here. Blockers cause serious medical problems. Cross sex hormones have side effects, as mentioned earlier both sexes appear to have increased risk of heart disease. Exulansic mentioned thickening of cartilage on testosterone (hence frog voice, because the larynx doesn't actually grow) and that this affects heart valves too. I haven't seen any studies on it but the theory makes sense. And then finally we have all the TRA nonsense about life expectancy anyway. The average lifespan being 35 (it isn't), the 41% or one in ten or one in four or whatever it is this week claimed suicide rate, and the one in ten being murdered (which isn't true). There is so much misinformation about the lifespan of transsexuals, trans identified people, and people with gender identities (enbies claiming they will die at 35 on Tumblr for example!) that it is safe to assume that lifespan is closer to what it is for other people than to what they claim. Add to this the fact the "trans umbrella" is indiscriminate - if we are strictly talking about transmeds then yes perhaps there is a difference, as cross sex hormones do a number on the whole body, and the surgeries have poor outcomes and high rates of complications. But that's a minority of "trans people" anyway. So in answer to your question OP, it depends.

With regard specifically to children, the Dutch protocol only started being adopted worldwide fairly recently, so if it were the case that the blockers then hormones route led to early death, we would only start seeing it in the next few years.

Have a look at this thread

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4226475-Effects-of-cross-sex-hormones-on-natal-females-blood-pressure

Information on mortality in Stats for Gender

www.statsforgender.org/mortality/

I have a friend who was identified male at birth and transitioned to female in her 30s. She's early 50s now and has been advised that her life expectancy is now 65-70 years.

She has had all surgeries, including facial surgeries, and has frequent infection issues, especially vaginally. She needs to take a lot of antibiotics as well as the high-dose hormones. The risks she's been made aware of are heart attack, stroke, and cancer - all significantly raised vs gen pop.

Her body has been through such a lot and it's incredibly detrimental to health. She was not advised about the shorter life expectancy before transitioning. I am really shocked that it's not more widely spoken about.

People only started transitioning in large numbers in 2017 so it's too early to tell. I got a medical magazine this week with an article by a London urologist on F to M genital surgery. The article was generally pro the surgery with pictures of how good the results can look. The statistics were grim though. The new technique for phalloplasty reduced the rate of urethral complications from 75% to 43%. No other non essential op would proceed with a stat like that. 90% got erogenous sensation in the phalloplasty, meaning 10% don't. The 5 year device survival was 78% which again seems low for major non essential surgery. Also only people who had had an orgasm before they had the surgery got an orgasm after it. Considering many of these people are put on puberty blockers before they are sexually active and females orgasm on average later than males because it's more complex I wondered what percentage of people having phalloplasties could orgasm. These ops are only done because the trans lobby says the young people will kill themselves if they don't get what they want. Scary and depressing statistics.

I had repeated surgery as a child. Carrying risk that could be long term consequences.

Recover each time was slow and there was a lot of pain etc.

The way surgery is presented and seen when it comes to this really really bothers me. Especially because I know how brutal mine were, and they were on limbs. When it comes to groin area it's an area with massive blood supply, loads of nerves. After head is next area we automatically protect when threat of injury.

Other surgeries as well. Breast implants have been around a long time and are common, have been issues but on the whole safe and successful results.

The surgeries are commonly referred to as cosmetic. Simply a reshaping for aesthetic radio reasons.

While the aesthetics are the reason or the main one. This has connotations of pretty low risk, fairly low risk etc in people's minds generally.

Thing is that description gives the wrong impression.
Breast removal involves total removal of healthy body parts that have a specific function. Sure idea is that individual will never want to BF. Or reverse their gender identity. Of course some women have breasts removed that's for serious illness. This is for choice.
It's not reversible. In USA where private healthcare is the norm, it's being done as young as 14 FOURTEEN.

@WoolyMammoth55

I have a friend who was identified male at birth and transitioned to female in her 30s. She's early 50s now and has been advised that her life expectancy is now 65-70 years.

She has had all surgeries, including facial surgeries, and has frequent infection issues, especially vaginally. She needs to take a lot of antibiotics as well as the high-dose hormones. The risks she's been made aware of are heart attack, stroke, and cancer - all significantly raised vs gen pop.

Her body has been through such a lot and it's incredibly detrimental to health. She was not advised about the shorter life expectancy before transitioning. I am really shocked that it's not more widely spoken about.

Clarity of language is important, especially in a thread talking specifically about genital surgeries and the impacts these have on human health.

Your friend does not have a vagina, but a surgically created facsimile. I'm sorry if this causes discomfort or pain to read, but it needs to be said. A vagina cannot be created with surgery, it is a female organ, and only a female organ.

'bottom' surgery must be absolutely horrific. And the risks? Results, how good?

The other thing is scar tissue is not normal skin. On surface it's so itchy healing. The surgical scars are red and very obvious for a long time. Mine took maybe 15 years to fade. They're quite a nice shiny silvery look now (imo!) but anyone who notices them flinches. They're long. They are still noticed even though they 30+ years old now.

And inside it took about 5 years to fully heal. To be totally no pain if pressed hardish. Plus things like adhesions. And a if need to cut same place it heals worse each time and the area without normal function grows.

And this is groin. Mtf it's grossly invasive.

To underplay any of this is really upsetting to me personally.

In a 2018 paper entitled Chest Reconstruction and Chest Dysphoria in Transmasculine Minors and Young Adults: Comparisons of Nonsurgical and Postsurgical Cohorts by Johanna Olson-Kennedy, there were two thirteen year old patients who had surgery.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29507933/

And decent stats?

USA providers have huge incentive to try and give most positive picture possible.

NHS ? Not sure, this must be tracked. Private providers? No idea Overseas OPs? Imagine none.

And it would need to be through patients follow up and for their lives. To know about complications, patient satisfaction etc.

The tavistock were doing no follow up on their patients once they passed think 18. So no long term info on the long term efficacy/ results/ overall outcomes for the counseling, or drug therapies they provided. NHS standards people were shocked, this is fundamental esp with newer treatments.

The way that less scary sounding euphemisms are used. Top/ bottom surgery.
The fact that top surgery somehow has become seen by so many as a natural step that female trans people with a masculine - or even NON BINARY (why why why? Rhetorical) gender ID will want/ have this.

The way 'passing' is discussed by trans people so often as the ultimate result. The people who say males having full genital surgery means ok in women's spaces. I can understand this view (don't agree with it) but that too must increase motivation for this massively instrusive risky painful surgery.

In the end probably because of experience it worries me so much. Many of these people are vulnerable. Spending so much time online with others on this topic. Normalising, wanting the these things.

For those who have sex dysphoria then it needs to be on the table and done after a lot of consultant, counseling, and with full knowledge and understanding of what it involves.

And blockers hormones have a myriad of risks issues as well.

However the main trans orgs. Rather than sensibly saying option huge step. Risky irreversible (bar implants). Long term risks. Should be last option and only if medically indicated will reduce ongoing serious distress.

They say it should be available to children, all of it. Free. On request essentially. Other things must not be looked at eg past experiences etc. I will look at one in sec to see what said about risks by them.

And an active approach of. Rejecting any studies that are not totally positive as transphobic lies. Ensuring medical data for trans population is not available. Citing dodgy stats that support these views as standard.

And actively v attacking anything and anyone who feels any concern at all as bigots who want trans people to die.

What they want has nothing to do with ordinary trans people. I have not seen any action at all to suggest they care about them at all. And I really wish they did because many of these people are very vulnerable for various reasons.

This situation is so appalling I just can't believe it but here we are.