‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’ - Article in The FP

[UtopiaPlanitia]

I’m reading this article and thought it would be of interest to FWR. I’m impressed by Dr Kaltiala and the interviews she has done in recent years, she very much has protection of children and adolescents at the heart of her speaking out.

‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’
https://www.thefp.com/p/gender-affirming-care-dangerous-finland-doctor

Thalidomide too.

However, it appears that the studies published by the company developing the drug, Chemie Grünenthal, were not rigorous: there was no placebo group and no indication of how long treatment had gone on for. None of the studies were double-blind. There was also no measurement of how much thalidomide there was in the blood or tissue of the patients taking it. Widukind Lenz, one of the doctors who investigated thalidomide in the aftermath of the tragedy, said “The papers published in 1956 … on animal experiments and … on clinical experiences with thalidomide have so little scientific value that in my opinion they should not have been accepted for print.”

Big Pharma are wily enough not to be blatant in their pushing of drugs for this purpose - that would open them up to be legally liable. Instead we have things like Ferring Pharmaceuticals (a producer of ‘puberty blockers’) giving donations to political parties (Lib Dems) to support the use of their drugs.

I sometimes wonder if this is a weird mirror universe.

The best healthcare is rigorously researched evidence based medicine. Affirmitive health care for children (Dutch protocol) is not rigorously evienced based. Can you imagine if, for example, cancer treatment for children wasn't rigourously researched EBM? The world would be (rightly) up in arms!

So why is the incredibly poorly evidenced Dutch protocol pushed by the TRA's? Why do they not push for EBM? Do they think that these children deserve lower quality healthcare? I don't understand it.

If I was brave enough, I would ask (the next time that someone tells me that the Dutch protocol is the best way forwards) why they hate these children so much that they deserve such low quality medicine. It would probably set the cat among the pigeons, but maybe it would shock them into actually thinking for a second.

In the original Dutch study, the contributors had conflicts of interest with the drug manufacturers of puberty blockers, so I do think we can blame the drug companies.

Eliza Mondegreen in Unherd

https://unherd.com/thepost/americas-trans-surgeons-could-learn-from-european-whistleblowers/

There are some quotes from 2022 WPATH Conference. They put me in mind of one of Terry Pratchett's books (I forget which one), he was writing about the mugs that the torturers used. They had slogans on them like 'World's Best Dad'. Ordinary people who go home, kiss their children, walk their dog, wash their car, sleep peacefully, can do things that, by any sane measure, are monstrous.

So why is the incredibly poorly evidenced Dutch protocol pushed by the TRA's? Why do they not push for EBM? Do they think that these children deserve lower quality healthcare? I don't understand it.

Because children are a tool to give validity to adults at Malaga airport.

Because children are a tool to give validity to adults at Malaga airport.

Quite. And we're hateful bigots for caring about what is being done to those children.

Oops sorry I posted a video upthread of a Dutch documentary recently aired on a mainstream television channel there featuring interviews with Dr Kaltiala and Hannah Barnes - unfortunately it was being shared by B*tChute which is a banned channel on MN, I think I had no idea

Well Mish, you know quite well that (a) puberty blockers for kids are normally used for very short times, eg. between 7 and 8 years old, to delay precocious puberty, and not meant to be taken for long periods; and (b) are controversial anyway, with significant side effects, and even class actions pending in the US for serious harms done to bone and liver function. Taking a puberty blocker for a year to delay precocious puberty slightly under the age of 8 is not at all the same as taking them for years and years in one’s teenage years to stop having any puberty at all.

Tell me, if trans people aren’t mentally ill, why are they calling for “treatment” on the grounds that it is psychologically required or they will be depressed/commit suicide/any number of other things? Why is there a constant refrain about suicidality and being mentally “vulnerable”? And if trans people aren’t mentally ill, suicidal or mentally vulnerable why have any treatment at all? If middle-aged men can re-name their genitals female penises and so forth, why do kids need puberty blockers or surgery?

JKR nails it again:

"Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It."

A massive medical scandal has been unfolding in plain sight. All who've tried to shout down whistleblowers like Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala deserve the reckoning that's coming.

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1719073478421184796?s=12&t=LdI-vLJjjnwK1fERviEpBg

Mishy

Given the FP.comis a very right wing organisation that many have said is very anti-woke, then no surprise this article would appear. An organisation of Bari Weiss.

Well, seeing as papers like the Guardian won't publish truthful articles, by experienced, highly qualified people, who know their subject very well, are you surprised that they go to more niche publications?

I've not come across FP.com before, so have no opinion on whether they're right wing, or not.

Have you read her article? Followed any of the links, or looked into her co-signatories? I note that you haven't written anything in the way of a counter argument, you've simply criticised the publisher.

Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement

Urg, that’s a bit blury. Trying again

You can’t see the last level without opening the picture but it is namecalling (eg terf, bigot)

And if you cannot present a coherent argument without an ad hom attack on the media, you know your argument is fucked.

“Puberty blockers for kids have been used way before 2011.”

So, Mishy, can YOU post the studies that show that the treatments that this Dr is talking about improves the lives of children and adolescents? Since you supposedly know so much about them. And according to you the medical community should have decades of data to show that improvement.

And Because you have posted unevidenced misinformation for years on this board. And not one study or review of evidence that shows improvement.

This article, that you are telling readers to dismiss because you ignorantly think the media outlet is far more important than the content, has several peer reviewed studies linked. Would you like to tell everyone why this clinical specialist, should dismiss those? No?

No? Nothing but superficial assurances with this laughable and in your instance, ridiculous statement. “For those more balanced among us, I would treat this with a high degree of scepticism.”

Not once have you posted anything at all that has any scientific merit, or anything that is truly supportive of children and adolescent care. In your years on this board. Instead you support these patients receiving a poor standard of care.

Instead, you post this:

“But if your life view is that treatment for trans people is wrong, and they are mentally ill, then I am sure it will reinforce for you that belief.”

I can see from this statement that you don’t seem to know any children or adolescents with trans identities at all. Because any one who does know children or adolescents with trans identities knows there is a very high likelihood of poor, even fragile, mental health. Shall I start to post the proportion of children and adolescents who are being treated or have been treated with their comorbidities? The Cass report has these, which you would know if you even bothered reading it.

I have other evidence as well. Have you missed all those links over the years, or just ignored them because of your ignorant attitude of dismissing content because of the media the content is published on?

Maybe it is time you posted some evidence to support your own posts, don’t you think? Or do you actually expect any reader who can search your name to give your posts any credibility?

Please stop spreading misinformation. It is you who is supporting a poor level of care for children and adolescents in your efforts to shame readers and posters on this board.

I was listening to an interesting podcast the other day (sorry lost link) which made the point that anyone who is suicidal is by definition unable to consent. To be suicidal means your world view is distorted, you are mentally ill and unable to weigh up things in a logical manner. So if these children are as suicidal as all these genderists claim then none of them should be receiving any treatment apart from therapy for their suicidal thoughts.

Yes saffron leveraging suicide is a massive red flag on both an individual level and a organisational level. Any child or adolescent expressing suicidal thoughts needs very thorough mental health support before progressing to chemical or surgical treatment. Which, incidentally as if we need reminding on this board (ie we most likely don’t ), is what the original Dutch Protocol for treatment stipulated as the first stage of treatment.

That was before it was corrupted to be the current version of affirming only treatment.

Honestly, children would be in a better position in this country if the regular posters on here were in charge in Education rather than Keegan and also when it comes to Health too. There is just so much knowledge that most of the politicians or indeed clinicians involved seemingly completely lack. I'll never understand why doctors, who are usually quite aware of the need for evidence based medicine, have abandoned it in this area, particularly when it comes to children who cannot consent.

We all know that the tiniest bit of scrutiny of the TRA argument has it fall apart, but the point about someone who is suicidal - so often leveraged as a reason for abandoning evidence based medicine - being by definition unable to consent is really important. It's a shame so few journalists hold their interviewees to account on this point.

And yes, Malaga airport. We must always remember that whilst most women on here can't conceive of anyone not caring about the health of children, there are many adults who very much don't give a tiny shit and don't really care how many children are harmed as long as they get what they want.

yep pronouns

And I still live in anticipation that Mishy will actually contribute some evidence based paper or study to their constant stream of weak attempts at shaming posters and readers who seem to have a much better grasp of the realities these children and adolescents face than Mishy has ever once displayed. Over the years it has become laughable that such a poster could post something like they posted yesterday.

But then I remember, the motivation isn’t to make sure children and adolescents receive the highest degree of care. It is purely driven by the need to shame FWR regulars and anyone who doesn’t fully agree with Mishy. They even seem to try to appropriate cultural elements that are not their own in their attempt to do so, resulting in misusing those cultural elements in the process. But, hey. Mishy is on the right of history apparently. So they like to think anyway.

That's a good point RE the three letter acronym. Another supporting cohort is parents of transitioned children and I understand Helen Joyce's point that they cannot admit to themselves that this is wrong.

It still doesn't explain why 'allies' support it so vigorously, especially female allies with no children. This group are neither the three letter acronym or parents of puberty blocked children themselves.

It surely can't be simply to see themselves as 'good people on the RSoH' when it is so obviously wrong to medically experiment on children?

Forgive my ignorance but what are the references to Malaga Airport about? I've clearly missed something.

The code for that airport is the 1st letter, 7th letter and the 16th letter of the alphabet.

It still doesn't explain why 'allies' support it so vigorously, especially female allies with no children. This group are neither the three letter acronym or parents of puberty blocked children themselves.

I see this group as Dolores Umbridges. Love feeling superior and smug and enjoy the power they get from blindly following a trendy cause with social capital, regardless of how obviously nonsensical or harmful it is. They would have been the people reporting their neighbours to the Stasi also. Too thick to realise it could quite easily backfire on them or those they love...

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/let-kids-be-kids-whats-wrong-with-govt-sex-and-gender-education-tickets-737844642187?aff=oddtdtcreator

By the way, for those who have got the evidenced knowledge to hand, there is still some time left to submit to the consultation.

https://www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/puberty-suppressing-hormones/

Remember for question 5 (I think) that age, sexual orientation and disability are protected characteristics under the EA. And the % of same sex and autistic, ADHD and other conditions that are hugely over represented in this current cohort (as per the Cass interim report) means these need specific consideration in forming any policy going forward.

The break it down thread has a rich stash of studies and papers to use for your submissions.