Reddit thread by a Psychiatrist about youth gender medicine studies

[miri1985]

https://www.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/15hhliu/the_chen_2023_paper_raises_serious_concerns_about/

Saw this linked elsewhere and thought it was really interesting and well written

Pmk

I'm a therapist myself, moderately light tough register re all things woke, but pretty active in strongly supporting patient/client complaints, and the ASA are very prescriptive in telling us what we can and can't advertise. No complaints from me here.

Every patient I have to think about possible negative outcomes, despite having a good track record in the field. Indeed my whole profession has next to zero issues or excitement, lol. But the worries are always there.

But gosh, do I have to be careful how I promote myself, and how I convey potential risks to patients, and critically know what I can't reasonably treat, when to decline patients, when to cut treatments short.

To the point where I can't mention in my promotional material the simple uncontroversial everyday ways that all of us pick up the things I treat. And I really mean uncontroversial.

Yet, YET...medical professionals can literally say they can help you change from one sex to another, and accept the word of desperately unhappy teens as proper permission to make them sterile, anorgasmic, or at the very least, osteoporotic well before menopause/middle age.

Yet, YET...I can't mention sneezing or picking up your socks!

The mind boggles.

That study by Chen et al is extremely concerning in how its positive conclusion will be picked up and used as support for GAC.

Despite how its positive conclusion is a) contradictory for boys and b) without consideration of girls being more likely to provide the researchers with socially desirable answers and c) despite the actual results of wide variation in those not clearly explained graphs. All suggestive that the researchers ‘found’ evidence to fit a pre determined conclusion.

Thank you for posting this link, what an interesting read.
From the article:
"If we say we care about trans kids, that must mean caring about them enough to hold their treatments to the same standard of evidence we use for everything else." Exactly.

https://archive.ph/Nax6n

Archive. You can post archive links; sometimes they are autohidden, but usually they come through once a mod has had a look at it.

Jesse Singal has written a really long, two part analysis of this study going into the detail behind what this reddit post summarises. It's open to non-subscribers if anhyone is interested:
https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/on-scientific-transparency-researcher

Thanks for the Jesse Singal link, Kesstrel. I noted in my post yesterday how few variables were reported in the study but I just assumed it was because they hadn't collected any information about, for example, self esteem or social relationships. It's a bit mind-blowing to read about the things that weren't reported, presumably because the differences weren't significant.

Thanks for sharing, I'll have a look at this.

Now that two studies have failed to report meaningful benefit we can no longer say, as we could as recently as 2021, that the short-term benefits are so strong that they outweigh the potential long-term risks inherent in permanent body modification. Some non-trivial number of patients come to regret these body modifications, and we can no longer claim in good faith that there are enormous short term benefits that outweigh this risk.

The gender affirming clinicians had two bites at the apple to find the benefit that they claimed would justify these dramatic interventions, and their failure to find it is much greater than I could have imagined two years ago.

A definitive answer to those who feel that good intentions and a lot of sentimental saviourism is all that is needed.

It's a worrying summary from a professional. He can however take a running jump with his last bit about 'but anyway, down with transphobia in all its forms' which as we all know means, 'strip women of equality, access and the right to be a recognised sex class', which is grim. But I suppose that part doesn't directly affect him as actively participating in transitioning children to long term harm does, and as we increasingly see, so many people can only manage to care when they have direct skin in the game.

If we say we care about trans kids, that must mean caring about them enough to hold their treatments to the same standard of evidence we use for everything else.

This is what needs to be repeated. Why do medical ethics and best clinical practice disappear within this medical field?

There are an unusual number of people on the spectrum of psychopathology in surgery.

Which is not necessarily a bad thing, some jobs require people who can act without excessive emotional content or without being distracted by empathy in high risk and dangerous situations. Surgery being one of them. But it's why a lot of surgeons aren't great at understanding patient goals around outcomes, they can't easily predict how people will feel about what happens.

I have never heard if there are a lot of psychopaths in psychology, but to be honest it wouldn't surprise me. Along, perversely, with people who become overly emotionally engaged.