Sunlight in Australia

[octaurpus]

I am very, very surprised to see this. Trailer for an upcoming news story in Australia on one of our commercial networks. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=877974177284537&ref=sharing

Completely ridiculous to compare regret in people who have had surgery related to treatment for cancer to those who have had regrets about surgeries related to gender transition.
Different issues, different populations, different ages, different circumstances, different regrets.

'your lack of access isn’t my issue'

Ah, well. If we can't access it, we are not going to be convinced by arguments based on it.

Yeah I’m sure that’s the reason you won’t be convinced…

Basing arguments on 'what someone on the internet says' is not the way this board works.

I clicked on the first three. None of those give the ages of the participants in the abstract.

I found a non paywalled link to the second one, but that turns out to be a 2010 paper about FFS in males, so not really relevant to this thread.

The third link is a review paper, but again there is no indication in the abstract of the age of the participants. The brief conclusion in the abstract, far from expressing certainty that this surgery is beneficial, indicates that more research is needed:

Although the data behind male-to-female gender-affirming surgery are more robust, there are significant gaps in the literature with respect to female-to-male surgery, surgical complication rates for genital surgery, facial masculinization and feminization, and patient-reported outcomes. We therefore present recommendations for further study.

Which of the links you gave show that teenage girls having mastectomies is beneficial to their mental health and quality of life 10+ years later?

A peer review studies is not ‘what someone on the internet says’, even if you’re only willing to access free to access studies.

Studies remain valid even if you choose to embrace ignorance of their findings.

'embrace ignorance' - you mean not pay to access them?

Why are you talking about teenage girls?

The subject of the OP was 26 when she had her top surgery.

That's a swerve.

Please post unhidden links. It is not a difficult thing to do.

And yes, your credibility is indeed reflected by whether we can access the study or not. Why do you not want to post links that either provide us with access or post studies that can be verified. What a ridiculous assertion. Post studies that no one can verify unless they either pay or have academic or employment access and believe you have fulfilled the claim of evidence? Yeah, righto. We will just assume you have nothing then.

Several women were mentioned in the programme. The videos are available on youtube and @Helleofabore described some of the content earlier in the thread. One of the women featured was Chloe Cole, who had a double mastectomy at 15.

Can I conclude from your reply to my post that you are as appalled as I am that such an operation was carried out on someone of that age?

Or access their findings through other free access lit reviews, or access through, for example libraries.

Complications such as necrosis, strictures, fistulas, bladder voiding issues, incontinence (with the possibility of lifelong incontinence for some poor souls).

The above does not sound like a recipe for long term mental health gains to me. When you (general 'you', not Planet specifically) suffer from long term health/physical issues or spend time with people who do, one of the things that becomes clear is the way these issues grind you down over time. The day after day and night after night of having a body that doesn't work properly. This is especially true if you are young and could live decades more. It is daunting. Just being alive and the issues never resolving or maybe even deteriating is daunting.

My heart bleeds for every person who has had these surgeries and suffered complications, especially for those where the complications are life long.

No it’s really not. Evidence doesn’t cease to exist because you can’t access it.

Well surely the fact that someone who had this done to them at 26 can live to regret it is a pretty compelling argument against doing it to girls half her age.

I do wonder what the argument will be if we start to see a lot more adults regretting.

I expect it will be that they weren't 'really trans' and that they should have known better and it's all their own fault.

But the people making this argument still won't be able to explain what makes someone 'really trans' and what is the difference between someone who believes they are 'really trans' but is mistaken and someone who believes they are 'really trans' and actually is 'really trans'.

A 'free access lit review' won't give access to the whole paper. And not everyone has access to a university library.

If doctors can't tell who is really trans and who isn't then perhaps they shouldn't be offering these interventions.

I did laugh at the suggestion I was duty bound to just nip along to my nearest academic library.

It's an interesting new technique by the PP. The usual approach is to demand that you produce evidence beyond all reasonable doubt.

Please ignore my last post. It is exactly the same approach. "I win because you can't prove that I'm wrong".

I still believe that the child in the red cardigan is the second-oldest child of the Saccone-Joly family (youtubers). If so, he is now 9 years old and has been pushed down a path towards gender confusion for years, since he was wanting to wear princess dresses like his older sister. This is all very very contrived, and for the views; the poor child cannot know what he is being pushed into.

I now have a slightly clearer head after a cold virus and have made it back to my desktop. I have looked at the following links that I have 'unhidden' because there was no way I was clicking on hidden links on my phone.

First study under the Psychosocial link.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29422399/

What planette neglected from their cut and paste (and yes, it is a paywalled study so I cannot access it) is that it was published 31st January 2018 and the respondents had their double mastectomies between April 2015 and June 2016. I take it that planette believes that that is long enough to judge long term improvements to mental health. However, we know that some patients experience euphoria (as has been told by detransitioners) and that regret takes longer. I have seen studies that show that it is more common from about 5 years on. I have no idea where to find those studies, but I will look.

This is also a 'self-reported' survey and has not been a qualitative piece of work. Perhaps planette could post the collection mechanic so we can see the methodology? I don't expect that they will though.

Under the the link is yet another paywalled study.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20461468/

Can you explain this statement for us planette please from the results of this study that you posted:

"There was no statistically significant difference in the mental health-related quality of life among transgendered women who had GRS, FFS, or both."

Have I read this incorrectly? I am still a bit fuzzy headed to be honest.

This study you posted was titled:

Quality of life of individuals with and without facial feminization surgery or gender reassignment surgery

I don't consider FFS to be in the same realm as GRS. Do you? Why? That is a male getting an extreme face lift. Any male can go and get an extreme face lift and may be happy.

But please clarify that statement that there was no statistically significant difference in mental-health for us so we understand why you included this. Despite the fact we cannot assess either the timeline or the information collection mechanic or the data.

Under the Patients link is this study. Again paywalled.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33741180/

We cannot access the data, the methodology and very little about this review paper. It does say this though, and it was a review from 2021.

"There are very few patient-reported outcome measures specific to gender-affirmation surgery.". These researchers don't share your confidence here I am afraid.

Under the hidden link After is this study:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8082431/

Relating to this survey:

https://www.ustranssurvey.org/reports

"an anonymous, online survey for transgender adults (18 and older) in the United States, available in English and Spanish."

Why have you included this? This is an omnibus survey.

Under GD decreased is this one from de Vries

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25201798/

Again... behind a paywall.

However, we know about this one. It is

"Young adult psychological outcome after puberty suppression and gender reassignment" by de Vries et al from 2014. As discussed in person on this podcast.

https://gender-a-wider-lens.captivate.fm/episode/66-pioneers-series-where-it-all-started-the-dutch-researchers-steensma-de-vries

And it has been written about here:

https://genspect.org/the-dutch-model-is-falling-apart/

The main information being:

Our interview with de Vries and Steensma, on Gender: A Wider Lens revealed strange anomalies in this study. The study began with 70 participants in 2011, and 15 were excluded from the follow-up study in 2014 for reasons such as diabetes and obesity. Why is there no research available to show what happened to these 15 participants?

One of the participants tragically died as a result of what is now called “gender-affirming” surgery – why did this not put an immediate end to this terrible experiment on children?

Why did the researchers switch the questionnaires post-transition – so that biological girls received a questionnaire for boys and vice-versa – and thereby ruin any credible analysis of their efficacy as a treatment for gender dysphoria?

The Dutch studies were certainly inventive, but it is amazing that they have ever been considered a model to emulate.

The Dutch journalists note other issues in the research; “This research has since been put through the wringer in numerous publications, not only because of the lack of a control group and a random sample (from the total of 196 children treated), but also because of the use of incomparable questionnaires. Conclusion: this is not a sound evidence base.”

“To date, De Vries results have not been replicated. An attempt by a research team at the Tavistock clinic failed, with the results disappearing in a desk drawer . Only recently were they released by order of the British court.”

“And if this treatment has such a solid scientific basis, why did De Vries recently receive an NWO grant for a five-year study into the “missing evidence base ”? Has irreversible, life-changing treatment been carried out on De Boelelaan in Amsterdam for more than twenty years without an ‘evidence base ‘?”

Yes, sadly, and almost unbelievably, it has.

“The Dutch trans clinicians stick their heads in the sand. At her installation recently as professor of Gender and Sex Variations at the Amsterdam UMC, Baudewijntje Kreukels accused critics of being ‘opponents of […] transgender care’ and that opinions are more important than scientific findings. What you call gossip. It is precisely the existing transgender care that would benefit from less wishful thinking and more science. The [critics] are stirring precisely because they are in favor of transgender care. But responsible, proven care.”

“The Netherlands has long been a guiding country in this respect. That status creates obligations. Before the capacity of Dutch trans health care is drastically expanded, the existing health care must be critically and independently evaluated. All reasons for the Health and Youth Care Inspectorate to take action.”

Finally, the truth of the Dutch mess is being revealed, and we give thanks to journalist Jan Kuitenbrouwer, sociologist Peter Vasterman and NRC for exposing the rot at the heart of this harmful and experimental treatment.

end

Would you like to address the issue of the gaps here planette? And why the collection mechanism was switched from male to female with transition?

I mean.... this is exactly WHY we like to analyse the studies that you present. Because it is things like this that diminish the quality of the study. 15 missing out of 70 is quite significant I would think.

I am still working through these links. But frankly, if you have only posted links that are behind paywalls, it is a waste of my time. But, I have enough questions arising from simply reading the conclusions and what I can access. I would not have that supreme confidence that you have shown based on what I have read.