Cancer Research UK promoting 'sex isn't binary' to professionals

[nothingcomestonothing]

I just got sent this via a cancer professional who knows my interests, it's ridiculous. It's from Cancer Research and was shared with cancer professionals. Along with exhortations to be an ally via a poster from 'demand equality ' ( me either) there's this helpful article on including gender diverse people in medical research trials. It literally says sex isn't binary because intersex (DSDs anyone?) people exist, and conflates DSDs with gender ID. Are we seriously still here, in 2024?

https://theconferenceforum.org/editorial/making-clinical-trials-more-inclusive-for-sex-and-gender-diverse-people

Where does it say this is CRUK? It is authored and sponsored by COUCH health.

I can't see that it's from Cancer Research UK. It's from Couch Health on The Conference Forum.

Sorry this article was recommended by Cancer Research UK Cambridge centre in an email newsletter to cancer professionals, hopefully openable here:

https://mailchi.mp/a553efe31c06/cruk-nahp-programme-february-2024-newsletter-12694763?e=4cd2f81ebe

Demand Diversity is a CIC.

https://demanddiversity.net/

There's undoubtedly a substantial issue with under-recruitment of relevant populations to clinical trials across a number of protected characteristics in addition to wider ones such a regional and socio-economic.

Macmillan holds a conference that gives a good overview of relevant trial recruitment issues.

https://www.macmillan.org.uk/healthcare-professionals/news-and-resources/blogs/macmillan-equity-diversity-and-inclusion-conference-2023

I should think a member of CRUK comms staff included this item in its own right as a means of accruing allyship points for a performance review. I don't know about CRUK but I think MacMillan recently had a hammering about their own policies and culture.

https://www.macmillan.org.uk/about-us/organisation/listening-exercise

NB: I'd agree that Stephenson's editorial is embarrassing, not least for the anachronistic and wrongheaded persistence in using "intersex" despite the excellent advocacy of relevant organisations. What a way to demonstrate allyship with excellent advocacy organisations who largely want to be left to their own concerns and not used as proxy human shields for the disputes of others.

But biological sex itself is not a binary concept, because it includes people who are intersex.

So says COUCH. When they can tell me which gametes these "non-binary" people produce maybe I will take them seriously.