The Myth of Saving Lives: A Critical Look at Gender Transition Claims
I reference a brief summary of four studies that indicate that the outcomes following gender transition is not what we always hear
1. Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972–2017)
o Key Finding: While suicide risk in transgender individuals is higher than in the general population, this risk remains consistent across all stages of transition. The study noted no significant increase in suicide risk over time, and in some cases, a decrease in trans women.
2. Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons in Sweden (1973–2023)
o Key Finding: Individuals who underwent sex reassignment surgery exhibited substantially higher risks of mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric conditions compared to the general population.
3. Suicide Mortality Among Adolescents in Finland (1996–2019)
o Key Finding: Gender dysphoria alone did not predict mortality or suicide among adolescents referred to gender identity clinics. Psychiatric comorbidities were the primary predictors of mortality, and medical gender reassignment did not mitigate suicide risk.
4. Somatic Morbidity and Cause of Death in Denmark (1978–2010)
o Key Finding: Among individuals who underwent SRS, somatic morbidity increased from 19.1% pre-surgery to 23.2% post-surgery, with a mortality rate of 9.6%. The average age at death was 53.5 years.
Yet the Royal Children’s Hospital claims excellent outcomes following Transition!
. . . It is important to remember that RCH didn’t commence significant numbers of ‘transitions’ until 2010 (in that year six children were thus treated’)
Clearly the outcome of the RCH transition cohort cannot be compared with the European studies referenced above (30-50 years post transition) – IT TAKES TIME for the misery to manifest.
I suspect that the current cohort of gender physicians plying their trade will be well and truly retired when the realities begin to emerge.
Thanks for these relevant summaries Vincent. I often read your comments on “Australian Doctor” and I am nodding along in agreement. Why do you think so many of our medical colleagues are completely beholden to this ideology? Not just those who are directly involved in treating transgender patients?
I think it is because the proponents of this affirmative model have painted it as a left/right argument and have further labelled those against as extreme, whereas it is the exact opposite. Many of our colleagues are terrified of being labelled as extreme so remain quiet.
I even noticed in my iPhone address book now it offers the option of adding pronouns to addresses!!! Despite our pushback they keep the pressure on continuously. It is a war that needs to be won.
I agree, it seems incomprehensible that this nonsense is embraced by so many and that the perputrators are the 'specialists' within our own profession.
Basic principles are trashed in an ever more sanctimonious commitment to violate such simple realities as 'gender assigned at birth'.
History will not look kindly on those spearheading this violation of ethics and reality.
The dominance of “Gender affirming care” , in facilitating medical intervention represents the triumph of empathy over an ethical , science based response, and the intolerance of challenge , as illustrated by the predictable risk of infliction of career retribution, is a form of empathy which can only be be one born of inappropriate narcissistic compassion, expressed by a minority who have been prepared to fight harder, to obtain positions of power.
The Myth of Saving Lives: A Critical Look at Gender Transition Claims
I reference a brief summary of four studies that indicate that the outcomes following gender transition is not what we always hear
1. Amsterdam Cohort of Gender Dysphoria Study (1972–2017)
o Key Finding: While suicide risk in transgender individuals is higher than in the general population, this risk remains consistent across all stages of transition. The study noted no significant increase in suicide risk over time, and in some cases, a decrease in trans women.
2. Long-Term Follow-Up of Transsexual Persons in Sweden (1973–2023)
o Key Finding: Individuals who underwent sex reassignment surgery exhibited substantially higher risks of mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric conditions compared to the general population.
3. Suicide Mortality Among Adolescents in Finland (1996–2019)
o Key Finding: Gender dysphoria alone did not predict mortality or suicide among adolescents referred to gender identity clinics. Psychiatric comorbidities were the primary predictors of mortality, and medical gender reassignment did not mitigate suicide risk.
4. Somatic Morbidity and Cause of Death in Denmark (1978–2010)
o Key Finding: Among individuals who underwent SRS, somatic morbidity increased from 19.1% pre-surgery to 23.2% post-surgery, with a mortality rate of 9.6%. The average age at death was 53.5 years.
Yet the Royal Children’s Hospital claims excellent outcomes following Transition!
. . . It is important to remember that RCH didn’t commence significant numbers of ‘transitions’ until 2010 (in that year six children were thus treated’)
Clearly the outcome of the RCH transition cohort cannot be compared with the European studies referenced above (30-50 years post transition) – IT TAKES TIME for the misery to manifest.
I suspect that the current cohort of gender physicians plying their trade will be well and truly retired when the realities begin to emerge.
Thanks for these relevant summaries Vincent. I often read your comments on “Australian Doctor” and I am nodding along in agreement. Why do you think so many of our medical colleagues are completely beholden to this ideology? Not just those who are directly involved in treating transgender patients?
I think it is because the proponents of this affirmative model have painted it as a left/right argument and have further labelled those against as extreme, whereas it is the exact opposite. Many of our colleagues are terrified of being labelled as extreme so remain quiet.
I even noticed in my iPhone address book now it offers the option of adding pronouns to addresses!!! Despite our pushback they keep the pressure on continuously. It is a war that needs to be won.
The power of the progressive idea, always moving forward, is strong in our culture & nobody likes to be assailed as a throwback.
Thanks Bea R,
I agree, it seems incomprehensible that this nonsense is embraced by so many and that the perputrators are the 'specialists' within our own profession.
Basic principles are trashed in an ever more sanctimonious commitment to violate such simple realities as 'gender assigned at birth'.
History will not look kindly on those spearheading this violation of ethics and reality.
Or even the simple reality of birth sex rather than “gender assigned”
The dominance of “Gender affirming care” , in facilitating medical intervention represents the triumph of empathy over an ethical , science based response, and the intolerance of challenge , as illustrated by the predictable risk of infliction of career retribution, is a form of empathy which can only be be one born of inappropriate narcissistic compassion, expressed by a minority who have been prepared to fight harder, to obtain positions of power.