Dutch goalposts on the move; common sense of an Aussie gender clinician; tips for Trump; Italian prof calls out research taboos; talking self-harm with Wes Streeting; laying down the law in Chile
I reference a highly relevant Finnish study from 2020 titled:
“All-cause and suicide mortalities among adolescents and young adults who contacted specialised gender identity services in Finland in 1996–2019: a register study”,
The Objective, Conclusions and Implications of that study are summarised verbatim:
Objective: To examine all-cause and suicide mortalities in gender-referred adolescents and the impact of psychiatric morbidity on mortality.
Conclusions: Clinical gender dysphoria does not appear to be predictive of all-cause nor suicide mortality when psychiatric treatment history is accounted for.
Clinical implications: It is of utmost importance to identify and appropriately treat mental disorders in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria to prevent suicide.
The message: Skip the puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and mutilating surgery and treat the psychiatric conditions!
“There are even fewer well-conducted RCTs in paediatric medicine than there are in adult medicine,” Dr O said. “It is, therefore, not valid to discard the whole field of gender-affirming health care because there are no RCTs.”
There are no RCTs in gender medicine. So if Cass only included RCTs she would have been able to conclude her review in one day.
Completely unbelievable that Justice Tree regarded Dr O as a commanding witness after this ludicrous statement.
That the concept of Gender Identity has become a full blown cult theology is underscored by proponents putting it beyond scientific evaluation. At this point what we are essentially witnessing is child sacrifice to a Gender Deity.
The affirmative care in minors proponents keep saying that RCTs(Randomised Controlled Trials) are impossible because the difference in treatments would become obvious as one group went through puberty and the other didn’t. This complete confuses a RCT with a blinded RCT. Blinding is not a compulsory part of a RCT.
There are many examples, eg; Mastectomy vs Lumpectomy plus radiation in breast cancer.
I would say the main argument against a RCT is the ethics of subjecting half of the children to a treatment with zero to very weak evidence of any efficacy.
In my own field of Oncology we rarely progress to a RCT unless there are clear positive outcomes from Phase ll trials. And even then the success rate is only about 50%.
So I can see why gender clinicians are reluctant to agree to a RCT. I would rate the chance of a positive trial at less than 10%.
I see that Clayton et al, 2024, reference rcts in pediatric oncology which were important--and there have been RCT's for adolescent depression (the TADS study)--drugs, therapy, together or separate...
Describing psychotherapy for gender distress as a “covert exercise” in seeking to change a child’s “gender identity" is one way of looking at it. Another way, perhaps, is helping the child learn to love and accept the body they are in, and the reality that no matter how many drugs and surgeries they have, they cannot change their sex.
That these practitioners are experimenting on vulnerable children and they are children till they are 18 is as appalling liberty that these doctors are taking. I would argue 21 is the age we should take notice of children’s preferences.
As for a judge ruling a 16-18 year old is mature enough to overrule parental authority is just plain wrong and puts parents in an invidious position. Parents know their children best and should be heeded.
How did your view, which would have been seen as common sense not long ago, come to be seen as unpersuasive? Weird. I wonder how this will all seem 10 years from now.
It’s the same view from judges and police that said the girls raped by the Muslim gangs are old enough to consent which clearly in law and reality they were not able to. We make children grow up too fast.
I note that the Australian does not allow comments on the article which reported the case of the 16 yo. They appear to be extraordinarily sensitive to critical comments of transgender medicine. I wonder why?
We recall our GCN host , Bernard was once a regular columnist in The Australian which reached the paper’s large readership and stimulated plenty of opportunity for both gaining information and providing public interaction, as openly published in the letters section . Bernard would you be able to share with us readers and GCN subscribers, the circumstances of your exit from the valuable previous regular contributions to discourse on this important public issue?
"“Even when the kids were talking about self-harm and suicide, there was just no reaction on his face at all. He’s a politician and maybe that’s how he’s trained to react.”
Didn't anyone tell these parents that these interventions aren't shown to reduce self-harm and suicide....and that telling kids otherwise can suggest it to them, a "suicide script"?
I reference a highly relevant Finnish study from 2020 titled:
“All-cause and suicide mortalities among adolescents and young adults who contacted specialised gender identity services in Finland in 1996–2019: a register study”,
The Objective, Conclusions and Implications of that study are summarised verbatim:
Objective: To examine all-cause and suicide mortalities in gender-referred adolescents and the impact of psychiatric morbidity on mortality.
Conclusions: Clinical gender dysphoria does not appear to be predictive of all-cause nor suicide mortality when psychiatric treatment history is accounted for.
Clinical implications: It is of utmost importance to identify and appropriately treat mental disorders in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria to prevent suicide.
The message: Skip the puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and mutilating surgery and treat the psychiatric conditions!
“There are even fewer well-conducted RCTs in paediatric medicine than there are in adult medicine,” Dr O said. “It is, therefore, not valid to discard the whole field of gender-affirming health care because there are no RCTs.”
There are no RCTs in gender medicine. So if Cass only included RCTs she would have been able to conclude her review in one day.
Completely unbelievable that Justice Tree regarded Dr O as a commanding witness after this ludicrous statement.
That the concept of Gender Identity has become a full blown cult theology is underscored by proponents putting it beyond scientific evaluation. At this point what we are essentially witnessing is child sacrifice to a Gender Deity.
The affirmative care in minors proponents keep saying that RCTs(Randomised Controlled Trials) are impossible because the difference in treatments would become obvious as one group went through puberty and the other didn’t. This complete confuses a RCT with a blinded RCT. Blinding is not a compulsory part of a RCT.
There are many examples, eg; Mastectomy vs Lumpectomy plus radiation in breast cancer.
I would say the main argument against a RCT is the ethics of subjecting half of the children to a treatment with zero to very weak evidence of any efficacy.
In my own field of Oncology we rarely progress to a RCT unless there are clear positive outcomes from Phase ll trials. And even then the success rate is only about 50%.
So I can see why gender clinicians are reluctant to agree to a RCT. I would rate the chance of a positive trial at less than 10%.
I see that Clayton et al, 2024, reference rcts in pediatric oncology which were important--and there have been RCT's for adolescent depression (the TADS study)--drugs, therapy, together or separate...
Describing psychotherapy for gender distress as a “covert exercise” in seeking to change a child’s “gender identity" is one way of looking at it. Another way, perhaps, is helping the child learn to love and accept the body they are in, and the reality that no matter how many drugs and surgeries they have, they cannot change their sex.
Isn't Andrea Long Chu a trans-identified male, not female?
That is right. A bloke.
She is natal male and is now a trans woman.
I.e. male, since sex doesn't change.
If he/she has chromosomes then he's a MALE
WHOOPS, I meant if he has XY Chromosomes then he's a MALE!
That these practitioners are experimenting on vulnerable children and they are children till they are 18 is as appalling liberty that these doctors are taking. I would argue 21 is the age we should take notice of children’s preferences.
As for a judge ruling a 16-18 year old is mature enough to overrule parental authority is just plain wrong and puts parents in an invidious position. Parents know their children best and should be heeded.
How did your view, which would have been seen as common sense not long ago, come to be seen as unpersuasive? Weird. I wonder how this will all seem 10 years from now.
It’s the same view from judges and police that said the girls raped by the Muslim gangs are old enough to consent which clearly in law and reality they were not able to. We make children grow up too fast.
I note that the Australian does not allow comments on the article which reported the case of the 16 yo. They appear to be extraordinarily sensitive to critical comments of transgender medicine. I wonder why?
We recall our GCN host , Bernard was once a regular columnist in The Australian which reached the paper’s large readership and stimulated plenty of opportunity for both gaining information and providing public interaction, as openly published in the letters section . Bernard would you be able to share with us readers and GCN subscribers, the circumstances of your exit from the valuable previous regular contributions to discourse on this important public issue?
"“Even when the kids were talking about self-harm and suicide, there was just no reaction on his face at all. He’s a politician and maybe that’s how he’s trained to react.”
Didn't anyone tell these parents that these interventions aren't shown to reduce self-harm and suicide....and that telling kids otherwise can suggest it to them, a "suicide script"?
(See the article on the placebo effect by Clayton, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-022-02472-8 )
HOW CAN YOU TAKE MONEY FROM MY ACCOUNT WITHOUT MY DETAILS?
I have tried to contact you and my email was sent back .
This is the second time it has happened on a substack recently. NOT A GOOD LOOK.
I DO NOT WANT TO BE A SUBSCRIBER OF YOUR SITE Gender Clinic News FOR $90. PLEASE PAY THIS MONEY BACK IN FULL NOW.
Sarah, I did nothing. You must have inadvertently subscribed. I will reverse it.
Bernard, see my request of you Feby14. Your previous presence by way of articles in The Australian were contributing to the public interest IMO