Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

British Medical Journal Backs Cass Report fully - Refutes daft accusations it is unevidenced

7 replies

fromorbit · 12/04/2024 00:44

Damning and important editorial from one of the world's top medical journals. Key quotes, but read the lot. Use this if you get this in arguments because it is fighting back against the unscientific nonsense going around:

For example, of more than 100 studies examining the role of puberty blockers and hormone treatment for gender transition only two were of passable quality. To be clear, intervention studies—particularly of drug and surgical interventions—should include an appropriate control group, ideally be randomised, ensure concealment of treatment allocation (although open label studies are sometimes acceptable), and be designed to evaluate relevant outcomes with adequate follow-up.

One emerging criticism of the Cass review is that it set the methodological bar too high for research to be included in its analysis and discarded too many studies on the basis of quality. In fact, the reality is different: studies in gender medicine fall woefully short in terms of methodological rigour; the methodological bar for gender medicine studies was set too low, generating research findings that are therefore hard to interpret. The methodological quality of research matters because a drug efficacy study in humans with an inappropriate or no control group is a potential breach of research ethics. Offering treatments without an adequate understanding of benefits and harms is unethical. All of this matters even more when the treatments are not trivial; puberty blockers and hormone therapies are major, life altering interventions. Yet this inconclusive and unacceptable evidence base was used to inform influential clinical guidelines, such as those of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which themselves were cascaded into the development of subsequent guidelines internationally.

https://www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj.q837?

The science behind transitioning kids was BAD. The scam is over in the UK. It will run longer in the US and other places till everyone gets sued enough the clinics are shut down.

This is why Wes Streeting and others are swapping sides. The house of cards is coming down. The Ferrets are reversing.

The Cass review: an opportunity to unite behind evidence informed care in gender medicine

At the heart of Hilary Cass’s review of gender identity services in the NHS is a concern for the welfare of “children and young people” (doi:10.1136/bmj.q820).1 Her stated ambition is to ensure that those experiencing gender dysphoria receive a high st...

https://www.bmj.com/content/385/bmj.q837

OP posts:
Hoardasurass · 12/04/2024 01:19

Thanks @fromorbit will read it in the morning

MrsTerryPratchett · 12/04/2024 01:33

studies in gender medicine fall woefully short in terms of methodological rigour

That's damning.

LargeSquareRock · 12/04/2024 01:36

About bloody time. The Lancet and BMJ have been beyond cowardly throughout this medical scandal. I guess it’s safe for them to pop their heads over the parapet now.

FictionalCharacter · 12/04/2024 01:53

All absolutely valid points, but it’s worrying that he confuses people with gender dysphoria with “gender non-conforming people”.

FrothyCothy · 12/04/2024 01:55

Why has it taken until now for BMJ to speak up?

IwantToRetire · 12/04/2024 02:11

I posted the link in OP above along with others from various health groupings (as well as other groups making statements)

Here https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5046923-final-report-cass-review-now-published?page=11&reply=134450791

And here https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5046923-final-report-cass-review-now-published?page=11&reply=134465716

LargeSquareRock · 12/04/2024 02:22

Let’s not forget the weasels at Royal College of General Practitioners who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to allow Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender (CAN-SG) conference to go ahead in ONLY FEBRUARY just gone. Here’s their statement at the time- https://www.rcgp.org.uk/News/can-sg-conference-statement

Where’s their statement about the Cass Review?

Statement from Professor Kamila Hawthorne, Chair of Council, Professor Mike Holmes, Chair of Trustees, and Mark Thomas, Acting Chief Executive Officer re: CAN-SG conference

We have today reached the decision that the Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender (CAN-SG) conference can go ahead as booked at 30 Euston Square.

https://www.rcgp.org.uk/News/can-sg-conference-statement

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread