WPATH deletes standards of Care v8" from its website!

[WarriorN]

And possibly Marci has gone?

Somehow it feels too amazing to be true though.

x.com/shellenberger/status/1770042611807486187?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

Gosh. Lucky that everyone archived the fuck out of WPATH's website and downloaded v8 in many hundreds of locations.

It's only showing 19 members currently. I wonder why.

https://www.wpath.org/member/search/results?showAll=1

Is somebody in the back office desperately shredding all the documents? Wonder if the tech guys (presumably subcontracted) know they are the updated versions of a Girl Friday in this instance. Interesting times.

I recommend anyone who can archives whatever they can as fast as they can!

Dr Jame Agapoff?🤔
Parody or nominative determinism?

Well, that’s curious.

What’s viewable is circa 2019 (despite the site’s footer stating copyright 2024).

and the ‘find a provider’ section is totally dead.

Business as usual over on EPATH:

https://epath.eu/

Anyone fancy a jolly to Marbella in April?

New message

Boys v women seems to be closely following and understands computer stuff (I'm clueless!)

x.com/boysvswomen/status/1770133680830177594?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

Missing part of second tweet;

Seems consistent with a loss of data - from what those with connections have said, it could be from hacking.

It's all speculation at the moment I suppose.

Following with interest.

Obviously it's all speculation, agreed.

But some interesting facts to ponder:

1. The release of the WPATH files has only just happened
2. Planned updates will/should include a rollback plan in the event of an issue during the maintenance. It would be unusual for a company to have a plan which involves rolling back a website to a version from that long ago. Especially if it was known to be out of date with current practices (2019 is obviously pre the release of SOC 8 in 2022). Test environments generally have more up to date versions, although many companies are a bit crap at this. However, before major maintenance, part of the plan would normally be to copy everything. Also, it would also be unusual to point a production environment (live, public facing) at a test back end.
3. Hackers don't tend to take stuff and then put previous versions back in place of what they have taken. It's far more effective (and less effort) just to lock the host out and demand a ransom. If the host (WPATH IT team) is locked out, they wouldn't be able to upload an old version while they work out what's going on.

Re point 2, it's conceivable that they are crap at IT.

Hm.

Update:

Some tweets deleted BUT more info

Update: WPATH is continuing to promote its pseudoscientific “Standards of Care 8” and is claiming an “internal system error”

At the same time, multiple sources confirm that WPATH held an emergency board meeting last night to deal with the widening scandal.

wpath.org

However, until we see definitive action, it's still all hearsay and speculation.

So perhaps the most likely scenario is that someone went in to panic edit a few pages (perhaps pages with names and contact details for individuals, so the membership list and the ‘find a clinician page’) but whoever it was isn’t actually an IT person, so they accidentally DFE’d the whole thing and then were only able to restore to 2019?

🤷🏻‍♀️

Yes it must give him a sort throat to speak like that.

I've recently watched too many documentaries on fundamentalist Mormons and it reminds me of how the women are taught to speak, all quiet, demure and non threatening. It sounds ridiculous when women speak like that and it sounds even worse when men attempt to do it.

'OUR WEBSITE IS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING AN INTERNAL SYSTEM ISSUE AND WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING TO RESTORE IT.'

The membership section is gone entirely.

SoC v 8 is back up, though.

So the ship is not yet sunk.

It'll be interesting to see what's changed. I have no doubt that someone, somewhere is combing through an archived copy and doing a comparison with what has been removed or rewritten. Microsoft Word has a pretty good document comparison feature. Not sure if I'll get an opportunity to look myself but I'll throw the idea out there in to cyber space!

Again, I encourage everyone who is able to to check and archive as often as possible. We can hope that someone, somewhere is doing it, but the truth is it's a lot of individuals trying to keep on top of a vast amount of information and things are often missed.

Agreed. Am currently knee deep in some CAMHS stuff (in a good way) so I'll leave that one for now. But I have added it to my list of things to do if it hasn't already been done and called out online.

I did it with the NHS page but unfortunately it's not gained any interest on X. Personally I think it's a pretty big deal that the NHS no longer mentions that puberty blockers have an "unknown impact" on the "teenage brain". Its omission suggests that they want to reverse-ferret away from flagging future litigation opportunities to those that have been on them already, remain on them now or will go on them in future as part of a trial. Just like the SOC 8 page, their website is the shop window that either draws people in or makes them think that the risk is too great. I can't remember if it was on this thread that I said it, but it was the NHS wording that made us say no to our daughter's request for puberty blockers when I knew absolutely nothing else about this subject. She accepted our no because of the NHS wording. The current wording sends a completely different takeaway message (pretty much that if you take cross sex hormones - they handle the PBs and cross-sex hormones in the same paragraph - you could end up infertile but don't rely on it for contraception).

I then made her a promise that I would learn everything that I could to help her. That began with reading a therapy book on gender dysphoria, speaking to trans people from the LGBT network... and digging more until I got to here...
But without that shop window giving me the information that I needed to be cautious, I don't really know if I would have had the same impotus to keep digging.
I strongly suspect that WPATH has done some similar reframing on its current content.

Just noting that WPATH's website still seems to have the same message about an internal.error. And I still cant see any members.

Thanks for checking - curious

They put out a statement last week that smacks of defensiveness to me. I keep copy pasting and failing, here is the second half:

'The Standards of Care Version 8 has been translated into 10 languages with a goal for 15 more.

“Our members are on track to publish research this year that will shed more light on the social determinants of health for transgender people and reaffirm gender-affirming hormones as safe and effective. And we have a multitude of educational sessions planned in the months ahead during our online courses as well as part of our 28th scientific symposium to be held in Lisbon, Portugal in September 2024.

“As practitioners with decades of experience caring for transgender patients, WPATH members are leaders in developing and providing evidence-based medically necessary healthcare for our community and we’ll never stop.”'