IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags transgender incidents , transgender issues , transgender rights

Reply
Old 7th June 2022, 02:30 PM   #81
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Seems like the null hypothesis and the Hippocratic Oath prevail, then: No puberty blockers for prepubescent children suspected of having gender dysphoria.
I'm not sure what you think the null hypothesis is, and the Hippocratic oath isn't a thing.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 02:41 PM   #82
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Louden Wilde View Post
Indeed (re: the highlighted). The pdf that mumblethrax linked to also noted that the drugs have been used as puberty blockers for ~30 years. This sounds like a long time, but that means the kids it was used on are only in their mid 40s. You'd like a broad health assessment of those initial cohorts, at the very least.
When it comes to the question of whether or not puberty blockers stunt growth, can we safely assume that people in their 40s have stopped growing?

Last edited by mumblethrax; 7th June 2022 at 04:24 PM.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 02:47 PM   #83
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
I'm not sure what you think the null hypothesis is
In this instance, the null hypothesis would be that puberty blockers don't help children with gender dysphoria.

Quote:
and the Hippocratic oath isn't a thing.
The concept of doing no harm very much is, which was the obvious point.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 03:04 PM   #84
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 9,193
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
In this instance, the null hypothesis would be that puberty blockers don't help children with gender dysphoria.
I don't think "help children with gender dysphoria" can be reduced to a single hypothesis test, since there are several questions which need to be answered.

Do puberty blockers help alleviate dysphoria in the short term, compared to similarly situated control subjects without the treatment?

Do puberty blockers help alleviate dysphoria in the long term, when compared against CSH undertaken after puberty instead of before?

What are the long-term health effects of blockers for patients who skip the process of endogenous puberty?

If I've learned anything from the Cass Review so far, it's that the evidence base isn't remotely in place to answer these questions yet.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 03:45 PM   #85
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 18,265
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
Incredibly dishonest. Here's the chain of that conversation for you again:



As you can see, you claimed that their use as puberty blockers was off-label, and that they were approved only for use in treating cancer. I claimed that they were approved as puberty blockers (and not for "their use for gender dysphoria").


I haven't done that at all. You don't seem to be able to keep the conversation straight.
The approved primary indication is for cancer - that's what it "says on the tin". There is an approved secondary indication for precocious puberty.

They are NOT approved for use as puberty blockers in normal adolescents who do not have precocious puberty!

Seriously, if you have to get down into teensy semantic quibbles and bait-and-switching of terms, you should reconsider your argument.
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 03:49 PM   #86
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 18,265
Originally Posted by Louden Wilde View Post
Indeed (re: the highlighted). The pdf that mumblethrax linked to also noted that the drugs have been used as puberty blockers for ~30 years. This sounds like a long time, but that means the kids it was used on are only in their mid 40s. You'd like a broad health assessment of those initial cohorts, at the very least.

As an analogy, I used to point that (when teaching advanced classes) that we still don't whether people conceived IVF will have normal lifespans (the first being born in 1978), but we know they often exhibit epigenetic alterations
It's also conflating use to halt an inappropriate precocious puberty and use to interrupt a perfectly normal puberty.

FFS, it's nearly as bad as claiming that sumatriptan has been used to treat 'headaches' for 20 years and using that to support it being used for tension headaches. It's blatant motte and bailey, reliant on conflating the medical condition of precocious puberty with transgender.
__________________
The distance between the linguistic dehumanization of a people and their actual suppression and extermination is not great; it is but a small step. - Haig Bosmajian
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 03:54 PM   #87
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 60,243
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
I'm not sure what you think the null hypothesis is, and the Hippocratic oath isn't a thing.
I'm confident you understand both my meaning and my point.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 04:37 PM   #88
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,951
Since we are on this issue, I remember there was some interesting information in Benjamin Boyce's interview with endocrinologist Dr Will Malone in 2019. Like all of Boyce's interviews it's very long. The part I found most interesting was the description of how the affirmation-only approach with promotion of medical transition was simply declared by fiat to be the only acceptable approach by organisations like the endocrine society, AAP and APA, despite lack of data and with suppression of debate. This bit starts around 28.40.

Another interesting issue explained in the interview is that the affirmation-only psychotheraputic approach used in the US is not consistent with the Dutch protocol (where the medical approach with puberty blockers originated). Although the Dutch protocol did use medical transition, it was accompanied by a neutral rather than affirmative theraputic approach to avoid consolidating cross-sex identity where it would otherwise have resolved. This is explained around 20.00.

The interview also covered what we have been discussing surrounding puberty blockers in the earlier part. Everything Malone said about this is consistent with the Cass review.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." - Salman Rushdie.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 07:43 PM   #89
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
In this instance, the null hypothesis would be that puberty blockers don't help children with gender dysphoria.
That strikes me as too vague to be useful. You'll probably want to look for a specific effect.

Quote:
The concept of doing no harm very much is, which was the obvious point.
I mean, it's a concept, sure. It's unclear how it has any practical value here.

Originally Posted by d4m10n
If I've learned anything from the Cass Review so far, it's that the evidence base isn't remotely in place to answer these questions yet.
That seems to be pretty close to the state of things. Weak evidence for a benefit, weak evidence for adverse effects.

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat
The approved primary indication is for cancer - that's what it "says on the tin". There is an approved secondary indication for precocious puberty.
If there's an approved secondary indication, then it also says that on the tin. That's what approval is. It means (among other things) that they can advertise it for that purpose. Which they do.

Quote:
They are NOT approved for use as puberty blockers in normal adolescents who do not have precocious puberty!
I didn't claim they were.

Quote:
Seriously, if you have to get down into teensy semantic quibbles and bait-and-switching of terms, you should reconsider your argument.
Again, this is incredibly dishonest. You denied that they were approved for use as puberty blockers at all. Now you want to weasel your way out of that and somehow that's my fault. You might be fooling somebody, but it isn't me.

Quote:
It's also conflating use to halt an inappropriate precocious puberty and use to interrupt a perfectly normal puberty.
At no point did this occur.

Quote:
FFS, it's nearly as bad as claiming that sumatriptan has been used to treat 'headaches' for 20 years and using that to support it being used for tension headaches. It's blatant motte and bailey, reliant on conflating the medical condition of precocious puberty with transgender.
This is just foolish. The claim is about safety, rather than efficacy, so it would be more like saying that aspirin has been used safely for years and so it's probably safe for prevention of pre-eclampsia, too. And "blatant motte-and-bailey"? It's not even a motte.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 08:19 PM   #90
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
I mean, it's a concept, sure. It's unclear how it has any practical value here.
If you donít understand how the concept of not making things worse applies here, I really donít know what to say to you.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 08:29 PM   #91
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
If you don’t understand how the concept of not making things worse applies here, I really don’t know what to say to you.
I don't see how not making things worse is preferable to not letting things get worse, which is why I don't particularly think "do no harm" is a useful principle in modern medical ethics. Or any kind of ethics, really.

Last edited by mumblethrax; 7th June 2022 at 09:22 PM.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 03:35 AM   #92
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
I don't see how not making things worse is preferable to not letting things get worse, which is why I don't particularly think "do no harm" is a useful principle in modern medical ethics. Or any kind of ethics, really.
First, because if you make things worse, that doesnít preclude them continuing to get worse on their own as well. Second, because you might be wrong about them getting worse on their own. Third, if you canít make things better, then maybe you donít even understand the problem.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 04:09 AM   #93
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
First, because if you make things worse, that doesnít preclude them continuing to get worse on their own as well.
It also does not preclude them getting better due to "making things worse", so this is not a reason to prefer "do no harm" to "allow no harm".

Quote:
Second, because you might be wrong about them getting worse on their own.
You also might be right about them getting worse on their own, so this is not a reason to prefer "do no harm" to "allow no harm".

Quote:
Third, if you canít make things better, then maybe you donít even understand the problem.
And this does not even address the question. If you can't make things better, there's no reason for intervention at all.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 04:20 AM   #94
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
If you can't make things better, there's no reason for intervention at all.
No ****. That's exactly the point of "first, do no harm".
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 04:40 AM   #95
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No ****. That's exactly the point of "first, do no harm".
If the only situation where "first, do no harm" gives you any ethical guidance is the one where no physician who doesn't have to wear a football helmet indoors needs ethical guidance, then it's entirely useless.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 05:06 AM   #96
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 103,182
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No ****. That's exactly the point of "first, do no harm".
It's a bit of a sidebar but the "do no harm" is not really used in modern medical ethics - you are looking at "non-maleficence". A quick think explains why the "do no harm" is not used in considering medical ethics, for example even a blood test causes undeniable harm to a patient (an injury) using "do no harm" as a rule would bring modern medicine to a standstill.

Your wider point is of course still correct, "puberty blockers" have been used unethically by some medical practitioners when treating pre-pubescent children given the lack of research.

This is one of those tricky areas in medical ethics when the only valid research possible is going to involve real people undergoing treatment with these drugs. Personally I don't think we know enough yet about how to treat trans children outside of physical medicine to start research on delaying or supressing puberty via chemical or physical means.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 05:47 AM   #97
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 48,676
One huge problem identified at the Tavistock was the lack of record-keeping and follow-up. At an earlier stage these treatments were justified on the grounds of research, but there was no control group and no proper protocol. No systematic data-gathering operation was mounted, and no systematic protocol of follow-up examinations. Instead, at some point the treatments were simply held to be a success and they carried right on.

So research opportunities that might have answered a lot of questions were lost. Nobody was looking at desistance or detransition rates or even regret. There was a huge attrition rate among the original participants, and nobody tried to follow these patients up to find out why. It was simply assumed that the patients who continued to attend were typical of the entire cohort. However, many detransitioners who have come forward have said that they didn't go near their original provider once they realised the whole thing was a horrific mistake, for various reasons.

The attitude even among medical professionals seems to have been, we know this is the best way to treat paediatric gender dysphoria and that's what we're going to do. Anyone who treats a child in a different way (as would be necessary for a control group on the watchful waiting pathway) is a child abuser, and anyone who questions our actions is a bigoted transphobe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 05:49 AM   #98
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
It's a bit of a sidebar but the "do no harm" is not really used in modern medical ethics - you are looking at "non-maleficence". A quick think explains why the "do no harm" is not used in considering medical ethics, for example even a blood test causes undeniable harm to a patient (an injury) using "do no harm" as a rule would bring modern medicine to a standstill.
And in particular, there is no compelling reason to prioritize non-maleficence over its counterpart, beneficence. A much better general gloss would be something like "provide treatment that you have reason to believe is likely to produce benefits that outweigh its risks, while respecting the autonomy of your patient. And if you live in a civilized country, something about distributive justice".

Last edited by mumblethrax; 8th June 2022 at 06:48 AM.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 07:18 AM   #99
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,483
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
One huge problem identified at the Tavistock was the lack of record-keeping and follow-up. At an earlier stage these treatments were justified on the grounds of research, but there was no control group and no proper protocol. No systematic data-gathering operation was mounted, and no systematic protocol of follow-up examinations. Instead, at some point the treatments were simply held to be a success and they carried right on.

So research opportunities that might have answered a lot of questions were lost. Nobody was looking at desistance or detransition rates or even regret. There was a huge attrition rate among the original participants, and nobody tried to follow these patients up to find out why. It was simply assumed that the patients who continued to attend were typical of the entire cohort. However, many detransitioners who have come forward have said that they didn't go near their original provider once they realised the whole thing was a horrific mistake, for various reasons.

The attitude even among medical professionals seems to have been, we know this is the best way to treat paediatric gender dysphoria and that's what we're going to do. Anyone who treats a child in a different way (as would be necessary for a control group on the watchful waiting pathway) is a child abuser, and anyone who questions our actions is a bigoted transphobe.
I used to have some connection to psychotherapists at the Tavistock who came into psychotherapy in the 70s. They were heavily connected to the Oxford New Left and Cultural Studies. I remember in the 90s having conversations with a couple of them about the challenge of testing psychoanalytic theories. Effectively the majority view was remarkably similar to the kind of opinions expressed by homeopaths and chiropractors on this forum... the treatments were so personalised and dependent on the relationship between therapist and patient, that they couldn't be tested. My impression is that much of what the Tavistock is built on is actively opposed to the idea of evidence based medicine. Many of the same people were connected to similar debates on the New Left about the privileging of theory.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 07:54 AM   #100
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 60,243
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
It also does not preclude them getting better due to "making things worse", so this is not a reason to prefer "do no harm" to "allow no harm".
You don't have an argument that it makes things better, though.

Quote:
And this does not even address the question. If you can't make things better, there's no reason for intervention at all.
I knew my confidence was not misplaced.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 08:05 AM   #101
Rolfe
Adult human female
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 48,676
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
I used to have some connection to psychotherapists at the Tavistock who came into psychotherapy in the 70s. They were heavily connected to the Oxford New Left and Cultural Studies. I remember in the 90s having conversations with a couple of them about the challenge of testing psychoanalytic theories. Effectively the majority view was remarkably similar to the kind of opinions expressed by homeopaths and chiropractors on this forum... the treatments were so personalised and dependent on the relationship between therapist and patient, that they couldn't be tested. My impression is that much of what the Tavistock is built on is actively opposed to the idea of evidence based medicine. Many of the same people were connected to similar debates on the New Left about the privileging of theory.

That is interesting. Before all this my only reference point for the Tavistock was a short scene in my favourite TV show of all time, "A Very Peculiar Practice" (1986-88). In this scene the senior GP partner Jock, who was drunk, was accusing the young and idealistic Stephen of being "one of these Tavi chaps", obviously having no good opinion at all of the pie-in-the-sky trendy leftie mindset of the Tavistock practitioners.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 08:07 AM   #102
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 9,193
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
That is interesting. Before all this my only reference point for the Tavistock was a short scene in my favourite TV show of all time, "A Very Peculiar Practice" (1986-88). In this scene the senior GP partner Jock, who was drunk, was accusing the young and idealistic Stephen of being "one of these Tavi chaps", obviously having no good opinion at all of the pie-in-the-sky trendy leftie mindset of the Tavistock practitioners.
Well it only took three decades for the NHS to start turning the ship around by clarifying the need for an adequate evidence base.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 8th June 2022 at 08:12 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 08:08 AM   #103
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
You don't have an argument that it makes things better, though.
I mean, I do.

But what I'm objecting to is idea that this should be an adversarial affair, where we do not impartially look over the evidence but accept every account of an adverse effect, no matter how implausible or unevidenced, and then wait for someone else to come along to catalog any potential benefits, no matter how implausible or unevidenced. This is obviously not the way to proceed.

Last edited by mumblethrax; 8th June 2022 at 08:10 AM.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 08:50 AM   #104
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 9,483
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
That is interesting. Before all this my only reference point for the Tavistock was a short scene in my favourite TV show of all time, "A Very Peculiar Practice" (1986-88). In this scene the senior GP partner Jock, who was drunk, was accusing the young and idealistic Stephen of being "one of these Tavi chaps", obviously having no good opinion at all of the pie-in-the-sky trendy leftie mindset of the Tavistock practitioners.
It started out in the interwar period. You've got different periods of intellectual development that mirrors the Left in the UK. You've got an early period where it is quite aristocratic. People connected to Freud, the treatment of survivors of WW1. You might want to check into Bion an his daughter Parthenope, just to get an idea of the kind of people in the early Tavistock.

You then have Freud coming over and dying in Hampstead. All that got absorbed by the NHS. In the 60s/70s things shift over to the New Left. In the 2000s things then shifted to a new generation. I think it maybe became more managerial. Gender dysphoria became the big growth area for them.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 09:17 AM   #105
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 60,243
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
I mean, I do.

But what I'm objecting to is idea that this should be an adversarial affair, where we do not impartially look over the evidence but accept every account of an adverse effect, no matter how implausible or unevidenced, and then wait for someone else to come along to catalog any potential benefits, no matter how implausible or unevidenced. This is obviously not the way to proceed.
The thread runs along libertarian lines. Nothing stops you from doing exactly what you propose, if you believe the thread needs more of that and less of the other thing.

Honestly I was a lot less polarized at the beginning of this discussion. I kinda figured that transwomen were women pretty much across the board. I had some misgivings about certain areas of sex segregation, and I looked forward to seeing the more informed and invested trans-inclusionists address those concerns with the best reasoning and science they could muster.

Instead, though, their response has only deepened my concerns, and led me to the conclusion that there is very little science and reasoning at all, behind the trans-inclusionist view of those concerns.

If you don't like the adversarial mode, stop being adversarial. If you think we should take a more balanced approach, and you have a more balanced approach in mind, lead the way. If you have science that says prescribing puberty blockers to prepubescent children diagnosed with gender dysphoria does more good than harm, cite it.

As far as I know, there is no good science that says that it's helpful to diagnose prepubescent children with gender dysphoria, that it's better to intervene than to let normal puberty progress, and that the long-term benefits of such treatment outweigh the long-term detriments. So for me it's less a matter of being "adversarial" and more a matter of thinking there's only one really rational way to look at it. If you have another rational way to look at it, that would greatly lessen my "adversarial" position on the subject.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 11:29 AM   #106
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 9,193
Question Owen Jones joins team TERF

UKites please tell me why #OwenJonesIsATerf is trending on my favorite microblogging platform.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 8th June 2022 at 11:31 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 11:35 AM   #107
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
UKites please tell me why #OwenJonesIsATerf is trending on my favorite microblogging platform.
Do you know who Owen Jones is?
__________________
"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." - Salman Rushdie.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 11:36 AM   #108
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 9,193
Originally Posted by Elaedith View Post
Do you know who Owen Jones is?
I thought he was just another across-the-pond journo until just now.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 11:57 AM   #109
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I thought he was just another across-the-pond journo until just now.
He is the Wokiest of the Woke with a capital W, morally grandstanding 'speech has consequences' bully, questioning the narrative is literal violence, JK Rowling is evil etc. I would probably agree with his opinions on many social issues, but he has gone way down the authoritarian Critical Social Justice cult path.

Then he said something that wasn't quite ideologically pure. I think it started when Helen Joyce said that we should try to reduce the number of people medically transitioning, and was immediately accused of advocating eugenics (which a lot of people seem to be conflating with genocide - somebody who was advocating eugenics would surely encourage medical transition because it sterilizes people).

OJ said something about not over-reacting and mentioned detransitioners, and then got a massive pile-on accusing him of being a Nazi and literally condoning eugenics/genocide etc. Then he complained about being frustrated at false claims being accepted as truth on social media, with a total lack of irony or self-reflection.

Some of us find it amusing. These people will always end up turning on each other.

ETA. I think he did actually condemn Helen Joyce, just not strongly enough. He said it was 'chilling' but denied that it was advocating genocide or something. Big mistake. Always use words like 'genocide' 'fascist' etc to be safe.

That's just my rough understanding. I haven't bothered looking up exactly what he said. Everyone will eventually fail to be ideologically pure enough no matter how safe they think they are.
__________________
"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." - Salman Rushdie.

Last edited by Elaedith; 8th June 2022 at 12:04 PM.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:18 PM   #110
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by Elaedith View Post
OJ said something
I can't avoid associating this abbreviation with someone else.

Quote:
Some of us find it amusing. These people will always end up turning on each other.
"Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children" - Jacques Mallet du Pan
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:20 PM   #111
SuburbanTurkey
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Null
Posts: 15,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I can't avoid associating this abbreviation with someone else.



"Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its children" - Jacques Mallet du Pan
I think comparing twitter squabbling to a revolution would be sin serious enough for the French to feed you into a guillotine.

Getting into tedious debates and working yourself into a furor is why Twitter exists. Gonna have to play the "touch grass" card on this one. Twitter slapfights aren't real life*

*Unless you're Graham Linehan and decide to piss away your whole personal life over it. I guess if you try hard enough, you can make it real.

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 8th June 2022 at 12:23 PM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:26 PM   #112
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,938
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Getting into tedious debates and working yourself into a furor is why Twitter exists. Gonna have to play the "touch grass" card on this one. Twitter slapfights aren't real life*
You say that like this dynamic is confined to Twitter. It isn't. And for some reason (well, probably because they're largely immature narcissists), journalists in particular seem to treat Twitter as if it was real, so there can in fact be significant real-world consequences for journalists to what happens on Twitter. Maybe there shouldn't be, but there often are.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:29 PM   #113
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 60,243
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I think comparing twitter squabbling to a revolution would be sin serious enough for the French to feed you into a guillotine.

Getting into tedious debates and working yourself into a furor is why Twitter exists. Gonna have to play the "touch grass" card on this one. Twitter slapfights aren't real life*

*Unless you're Graham Linehan and decide to piss away your whole personal life over it. I guess if you try hard enough, you can make it real.
The revolution and its failure modes are fractal.
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:45 PM   #114
SuburbanTurkey
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Null
Posts: 15,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You say that like this dynamic is confined to Twitter. It isn't. And for some reason (well, probably because they're largely immature narcissists), journalists in particular seem to treat Twitter as if it was real, so there can in fact be significant real-world consequences for journalists to what happens on Twitter. Maybe there shouldn't be, but there often are.
Well, is this one such time?

We can all cite twitter weirdos aggravated about this or that topic until the cows come home. My point is that pointing to a bunch of weirdos slapfighting on twitter is not very instructive.

Perhaps this twitter spat is a reflection of something happening in the broader world, perhaps not. Seems like something that ought to be demonstrated before going any further.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:45 PM   #115
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I thought he was just another across-the-pond journo until just now.
Here's a sample thread about it. Apparently he was 'tone policing trans people for saying Joyce was calling for genocide'.
__________________
"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." - Salman Rushdie.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 12:52 PM   #116
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The revolution and its failure modes are fractal.


(Ignore my sig for this one. I just thought the saying was great.)
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 01:03 PM   #117
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If you don't like the adversarial mode, stop being adversarial.
I haven't been, at least not in the sense I mean. I have not played the part of the "trans activist", and I don't intend to.

Quote:
As far as I know, there is no good science that says that it's helpful to diagnose prepubescent children with gender dysphoria
Why would you expect a diagnosis to be helpful?

Quote:
that it's better to intervene than to let normal puberty progress, and that the long-term benefits of such treatment outweigh the long-term detriments. So for me it's less a matter of being "adversarial" and more a matter of thinking there's only one really rational way to look at it. If you have another rational way to look at it, that would greatly lessen my "adversarial" position on the subject.
Here's a recent overview of the evidence commissioned by Florida's AHCA:

https://ahca.myflorida.com/letkidsbe...tachment_C.pdf

Here's a relatively recent longitudinal study that looks at the mental health consequences of puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2789423
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 01:29 PM   #118
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post


Here's a relatively recent longitudinal study that looks at the mental health consequences of puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2789423
Funnily enough, that is one I was meaning to use as an example of a study in this area that misrepresents findings - only I am still working though it and the critiques.

Anyway, here is Jesse Singal's take:
Researchers Found Puberty Blockers And Hormones Didnít Improve Trans Kidsí Mental Health At Their Clinic. Then They Published A Study Claiming The Opposite.
__________________
"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." - Salman Rushdie.
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 02:14 PM   #119
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 9,193
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
...journalists in particular seem to treat Twitter as if it was real, so there can in fact be significant real-world consequences for journalists to what happens on Twitter. Maybe there shouldn't be, but there often are.
Dave Weigel has joined the chat.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 02:17 PM   #120
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by Elaedith View Post
Funnily enough, that is one I was meaning to use as an example of a study in this area that misrepresents findings - only I am still working though it and the critiques.
Haven't finished Singal's take, but yeah, I agree they're misrepresenting their findings.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.