Is there ANY concern among Trans Rights Activists for the health wellbeing of adolescents receiving gender affirming drugs that the findings of the Finnish study might be true

[mardirousse]

You would expect Trans Rights Activists to be concerned about the physical mental health of gender questioning children, yet I haven't seen a single TRA express the slightest concern that gender affirming care might be causing harm to young kids, who they see as transgender. Not here, not on r/transgenderuk, not on x.
They are attacking the credibility of the study, but given its size and the very shocking findings, why aren't at least some of them expressing a little concern that there might be something in it? I mean, these are vulnerable kids, and they're taking really powerful drugs with major long-term consequences, and now it looks like there's evidence that it may be doing the opposite of what it's supposed to...
How could you not be concerned, whatever your agenda? They're kids!
Aren't trans rights activists interested in the right of trans kids to be safe and healthy?
Am I missing something?

Yeah but I came on to read about why transitioning doesn’t improve mental health outcomes and I read a really interesting response from a person with experience of doing it. I learned a lot about how people view transition, why it might impact mental health, about earlier stories of transition before the internet. I found the way they were argued respectful. And the content illuminating and a ver interesting read.
Did I agree with every point? No. Did I find the contribution very valuable and would I like to hear from this poster again? Yes

It’s also not realistic to do it on a case by case basis. I remember having a similar argument with D Hayton a while ago.

This one has had surgery, this one just wants to fit in, this one is threatening to assault women with a splintery rolling pin…

It has to be a blanket no males in female spaces rule, & the decent males will support that.

Onepost despite their name has been posting here for months. He's not required to come here, he chooses too. He can leave at any time

and all his 'evidence' has been debunked multiple times - yet still he comes back

he clearly enjoys it and his style is for reminiscent of another TW who used to spend hours of their time here

he clearly enjoys it and his style is for reminiscent of another TW who used to spend hours of their time here

That struck me too.

thete are multiple contributions from onepost all over this board if you want read more of what he thinks

Well I learned a LOT. Transitioning is viewed as a finite process for some, and where it ends isn’t universally agreed.

Point to anywhere he engaged with it? How did he show any TRAs have expressed genuine concern for the fact that a major study has suggested harms puberty blockers and cross sex hormones have seriously worsened, rather than improved, the long term mental health of children and young adults?
Remembering that there is no doubt of the serious risks to their physical health.
And how typical of you to dismiss the actual engagement of other posters?!

I gave you a very balanced fair and reasonable perspective on why it wasn’t making them all immediately agree with you - namely that this is the first peice of work that has raised important questions others need to answer, not that these drugs in themselves cause the issues psychiatrically. You called me a tra and then engaged with none of it.
this poster talked about their experiences, offered an alternative (over 21 I think).
you did offend me a bit yeah

@22ztr you dismiss the suggestion that you're a TRA, fair enough, but your contributions have so far dismissed the study's credibility and laud the other poster who compared physical risks of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones to those of paracetamol and contacts sports and suggested that adolescent girls can mitigate their downsides with egg freezing and topical oestrogen!

I reviewed it like a peer. The point of the study being put on line is that you assess its strengths and weaknesses and areas for further research. This is what peer reviewing is. It contributed to the literature - it was a good study. Would I replicate it? No. Would I reference it? Yes

The study has shown that claims that treatment and surgery improve mental health for adolescents is again not a claim that can be made, and yet has been made repeatedly by those in authorative and influential positions.

It also shows that the lack of extensive mental health support is an acute issue, in countries such as the UK, both before and after diagnosis and before and after treatments. If Finland, with its high standard of care is showing these issues are not improving then where less mental health support is given it is a very concerning issue.

There is another thread discussing the study. This study was specifically about whether or not a group of people have concerns about adolescents currently receiving treatment.

The question was not about anyone's personal experience, or whether the study should be replicated
It is about whether TRAs have any concern about the wellbeing of kid's

So you are specifically a specialist researcher in medical treatments for gender dysphoria ?

Yes and I think they do - on paper. You’re both arguing that these kids need treatment. You jus disagree on what type and why.

You don’t need to be. Any undergrad referencing that would need to do the same

You said you reviewed it like a ‘peer’.

A specialist researcher in medical treatments for gender dysphoria would be the ‘peer’ level of reviewer for this study, wouldn’t it? So, thanks for clarifying that you are not a peer reviewer for this study.

To clarify - I am not, never pretended to be, and never will pretend to be - using Mumsnet to peer-review scientific articles.
i was using the same skills to evaluate the study. Which anyone referencing it seriously would have to do to be scientific

All the people in the study are actual human beings. Very young people. Thousands of them. And the vast majority of them had worse mental health, after receiving medical treatment that we know has serious , long term and irreversible risks.
Regardless of confounding factors in the study, other possible reasons, I here is zero doubt that their mental health is much worse now.
How can you not fell concern for them?
What's wrong with you?

Im seriously very concerned. That’s why im saying this study is fantastic because it’s highlighted the need for more robust studies to show why transitioning is having this impact and convince the people that matter - parents and doctors.

Respectful!!!??!

That's a matter of opinion.

I find one deeply disrespectful. Especially carrying on when women have said just how upsetting they find him.

You know in academia someone seriously engaging with your work like this, taking the time to read it and share their opinions is a huge compliment even if they don’t agree with you? Or find it all perfect?

Having been on the receiving end of you lot before and losing my shit, the lack of insults back was commendable

You identify as a peer.
If that like a man identifying as a woman who is in complete denial of reality and chooses to ignore anything and everything that says they can't be a woman cos 'reality'?

To the authors of the journals lol not the trans community lol

He also behaves dismissively about the long term impacts on female people getting these treatments as children or young adults.

There is very little ‘respectful’ about those actions.

Respectfulness is not about passively saying ‘the clincians know what they are doing’, when the clinicians have been heavily influenced by political groups such as WPATH, if they are not activist clinicians themselves and there are now documented declarations that WPATH has advocated for harmful treatment.

Respectfulness is also not dismissing and denigrating those people who raise the issue as onepostwonder has done.