Yes it is a good speech! However, typical of Cory Bernardi, he leaves out that many of these children, particularly girls, will turn out to be same-sex attracted, i.e. lesbians. That really has to be said. It was a researcher from the GIDS in London who said that ‘gender affirming care’ will wipe out lesbians and gay men!
Is the AMA qualified to Promote & Support the Affirmative Model of Genser Care?
While the AMA strongly endorses gender-affirming care it is appropriate to test the Association’s record in ensuring safety and efficacy of medical interventions in which it has been involved
Does the AMA have a flawless record in this context?
The answer is a resounding ‘NO’:
The AMA’s endorsement and marketing of Intravaginal Sling Device (IVS) to treat pelvic dysfunction in women has been referred to as ‘the Worst medical scandal since Thalidomid'.
I reference a couple of news articles that outline the disaster that followed the treatment endorsed and marketed by the AMA.
More than 100,000 women globally have pursued lawsuits for severe life-altering complications resulting in global settlements in the $billions.
….Given the magnitude of the damage done by the IVS device it would be reasonable to expect that the AMA would, in future, adopt a most cautious approach to endorsing another invasive irreversible and sterilising therapy, particularly one involving children, given the multiple long term post-transition studies that confirm those who ‘transition’ have a greatly elevated suicide rate, lifelong mental health comorbidities and early death.
Yes it is a good speech! However, typical of Cory Bernardi, he leaves out that many of these children, particularly girls, will turn out to be same-sex attracted, i.e. lesbians. That really has to be said. It was a researcher from the GIDS in London who said that ‘gender affirming care’ will wipe out lesbians and gay men!
Is the AMA qualified to Promote & Support the Affirmative Model of Genser Care?
While the AMA strongly endorses gender-affirming care it is appropriate to test the Association’s record in ensuring safety and efficacy of medical interventions in which it has been involved
Does the AMA have a flawless record in this context?
The answer is a resounding ‘NO’:
The AMA’s endorsement and marketing of Intravaginal Sling Device (IVS) to treat pelvic dysfunction in women has been referred to as ‘the Worst medical scandal since Thalidomid'.
I reference a couple of news articles that outline the disaster that followed the treatment endorsed and marketed by the AMA.
• https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/australian-medical-association-president-confirms-ama-was-role-in-pelvic-mesh-scandal-20170822-gy1hzj.html
• https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/life-after-mesh-one-patient-s-harrowing-experience
More than 100,000 women globally have pursued lawsuits for severe life-altering complications resulting in global settlements in the $billions.
….Given the magnitude of the damage done by the IVS device it would be reasonable to expect that the AMA would, in future, adopt a most cautious approach to endorsing another invasive irreversible and sterilising therapy, particularly one involving children, given the multiple long term post-transition studies that confirm those who ‘transition’ have a greatly elevated suicide rate, lifelong mental health comorbidities and early death.
Great post, thankyou for this information!