Trans in Sports

[SeattleGriz]

Dumb shit decides to wade out into a subject he only cares for due to virtual signaling.

Show me the studies proving causation? You and UNI, throwing the autistic under the bus. That is what is disgusting.

There is NO data showing any of what you advocate is beneficial. What you quoted as a "study" was actually a bitch session. No data. Idiot.

You angry, bro? Your shitty study was invalidated by experts.

I haven’t produced any studies.

I have a transitioning and autistic niece with an IQ off the charts. She and her mom studied it extensively. Far more than your fear of institutional knowledge.

I have an interest outside of just basic freedoms.

Have any better studies? I’m sure the conservative treehouse and Naturopath Monthly got the goods.

Do better, troll boy.

Not angry, just pointing out you still lack basic science skills to even begin this conversation. What you quoted was an opinion. It was not a study. It was not a beat down of the Cass Review.

The Cass Review showed that almost every single trial/study out there lacked basic trial standards. This is the same scrutiny that was applied to ivermectin and rightly so. Do you understand how trials and studies actually work

I'll say it simply. There is no quality data showing that gender affirming care is beneficial to those who receive it. I'm sure there are instances, but at this point, there aren't any quality studies to rely upon.

As for your niece, that's great that she and her mom have discussed it.

The point I keep making is this needs to be discussed far more than a one hour meeting with some medical hack and then the course is set, especially when relying upon the flawed studies they have been using as proof. People normally get paid to help those like you deficient in scientific skills, but I do it for free.

[kalm]

You angry, bro? Your shitty study was invalidated by experts.

I haven’t produced any studies.

I have a transitioning and autistic niece with an IQ off the charts. She and her mom studied it extensively. Far more than your fear of institutional knowledge.

I have an interest outside of just basic freedoms.

Have any better studies? I’m sure the conservative treehouse and Naturopath Monthly got the goods.

Do better, troll boy.

Not angry, just pointing out you still lack basic science skills to even begin this conversation. What you quoted was an opinion. It was not a study. It was not a beat down of the Cass Review.

The Cass Review showed that almost every single trial/study out there lacked basic trial standards. This is the same scrutiny that was applied to ivermectin and rightly so. Do you understand how trials and studies actually work

I'll say it simply. There is no quality data showing that gender affirming care is beneficial to those who receive it. I'm sure there are instances, but at this point, there aren't any quality studies to rely upon.

As for your niece, that's great that she and her mom have discussed it.

The point I keep making is this needs to be discussed far more than a one hour meeting with some medical hack and then the course is set, especially when relying upon the flawed studies they have been using as proof. People normally get paid to help those like you deficient in scientific skills, but I do it for free.

“Quality data” is an opinion.

The idea it’s a “One hour meeting” I suppose is also backed by study?

You’re not a scientist. You don’t have to be one to grasp some of these arguments you try to make.

Hey! I took a course on legal issues with aquatic facilities as well as some therapeutic rec classes. That makes me a lawyer and physical rehabilitation doctor compared to you. Do you know about myelinated sheaths? Didn’t think so!

[SeattleGriz]

Not angry, just pointing out you still lack basic science skills to even begin this conversation. What you quoted was an opinion. It was not a study. It was not a beat down of the Cass Review.

The Cass Review showed that almost every single trial/study out there lacked basic trial standards. This is the same scrutiny that was applied to ivermectin and rightly so. Do you understand how trials and studies actually work

I'll say it simply. There is no quality data showing that gender affirming care is beneficial to those who receive it. I'm sure there are instances, but at this point, there aren't any quality studies to rely upon.

As for your niece, that's great that she and her mom have discussed it.

The point I keep making is this needs to be discussed far more than a one hour meeting with some medical hack and then the course is set, especially when relying upon the flawed studies they have been using as proof. People normally get paid to help those like you deficient in scientific skills, but I do it for free.

“Quality data” is an opinion.

The idea it’s a “One hour meeting” I suppose is also backed by study?

You’re not a scientist. You don’t have to be one to grasp some of these arguments you try to make.

Hey! I took a course on legal issues with aquatic facilities as well as some therapeutic rec classes. That makes me a lawyer and physical rehabilitation doctor compared to you. Do you know about myelinated sheaths? Didn’t think so!

Quality data is an opinion? Case closed. Klam going into feelz now in regards to scientific rigor. You have no idea what you are talking about here.

[kalm]

“Quality data” is an opinion.

The idea it’s a “One hour meeting” I suppose is also backed by study?

You’re not a scientist. You don’t have to be one to grasp some of these arguments you try to make.

Hey! I took a course on legal issues with aquatic facilities as well as some therapeutic rec classes. That makes me a lawyer and physical rehabilitation doctor compared to you. Do you know about myelinated sheaths? Didn’t think so!

Quality data is an opinion? Case closed. Klam going into feelz now in regards to scientific rigor. You have no idea what you are talking about here.

What constitutes quality data in this instance is YOUR opinion.

Worst…fake…scientist…ever…

[SeattleGriz]

Quality data is an opinion? Case closed. Klam going into feelz now in regards to scientific rigor. You have no idea what you are talking about here.

What constitutes quality data in this instance is YOUR opinion.

Worst…fake…scientist…ever…

The Cass Review was a systematic review. Those are at the very top of the scientific proof hierarchy with RCTs. The studies the Cass Review looked at, were of so low quality, they were essentially considering as case studies, which is the lowest. No control group, no significant follow up, not accounting for psychological issues as confounders, etc.

Never mind Britains HHS changed course after the review, in addition to the AMA and the AAPS. They must not believe in quality either.

As I've said before, you just stick to adding a 1 up to an 8 per hole on your golf score card. That's the limit of your abilities.

[kalm]

What constitutes quality data in this instance is YOUR opinion.

Worst…fake…scientist…ever…

The Cass Review was a systematic review. Those are at the very top of the scientific proof hierarchy with RCTs. The studies the Cass Review looked at, were of so low quality, they were essentially considering as case studies, which is the lowest. No control group, no significant follow up, not accounting for psychological issues as confounders, etc.

Never mind Britains HHS changed course after the review, in addition to the AMA and the AAPS. They must not believe in quality either.

As I've said before, you just stick to adding a 1 up to an 8 per hole on your golf score card. That's the limit of your abilities.

What’s great about you is debunking your sources and information is always just a few clicks away.

Results

Using the ROBIS tool, we identified a high risk of bias in each of the systematic reviews driven by unexplained protocol deviations, ambiguous eligibility criteria, inadequate study identification, and the failure to integrate consideration of these limitations into the conclusions derived from the evidence syntheses. We also identified methodological flaws and unsubstantiated claims in the primary research that suggest a double standard in the quality of evidence produced for the Cass report compared to quality appraisal in the systematic reviews.

Conclusions

We discuss these issues in relation to how evidence regarding gender affirming care is framed, the wider political context, and the future for gender affirming care. The Cass report’s recommendations, given its methodological flaws and misrepresentation of evidence, warrant critical scrutiny to ensure ethical and effective support for gender-diverse youth.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12065279/

[SeattleGriz]

The Cass Review was a systematic review. Those are at the very top of the scientific proof hierarchy with RCTs. The studies the Cass Review looked at, were of so low quality, they were essentially considering as case studies, which is the lowest. No control group, no significant follow up, not accounting for psychological issues as confounders, etc.

Never mind Britains HHS changed course after the review, in addition to the AMA and the AAPS. They must not believe in quality either.

As I've said before, you just stick to adding a 1 up to an 8 per hole on your golf score card. That's the limit of your abilities.

What’s great about you is debunking your sources and information is always just a few clicks away.

Results

Using the ROBIS tool, we identified a high risk of bias in each of the systematic reviews driven by unexplained protocol deviations, ambiguous eligibility criteria, inadequate study identification, and the failure to integrate consideration of these limitations into the conclusions derived from the evidence syntheses. We also identified methodological flaws and unsubstantiated claims in the primary research that suggest a double standard in the quality of evidence produced for the Cass report compared to quality appraisal in the systematic reviews.

Conclusions

We discuss these issues in relation to how evidence regarding gender affirming care is framed, the wider political context, and the future for gender affirming care. The Cass report’s recommendations, given its methodological flaws and misrepresentation of evidence, warrant critical scrutiny to ensure ethical and effective support for gender-diverse youth.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12065279/

In this paper, we report our critique of the methodologies used to synthesise and generate evidence to inform the Cass report.

Another complaint session someone didn't like the outcome. Good job StOnge. No facts, no data, just feelz.

[kalm]

What’s great about you is debunking your sources and information is always just a few clicks away.



https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12065279/

In this paper, we report our critique of the methodologies used to synthesise and generate evidence to inform the Cass report.

Another complaint session someone didn't like the outcome. Good job StOnge. No facts, no data, just feelz.

Any time, Alex Jones. I’m sure there’s another politically driven study to support your next Internet conspiracy theory degree, right around the corner.

[UNI88]

What’s great about you is debunking your sources and information is always just a few clicks away.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12065279/

In this paper, we report our critique of the methodologies used to synthesise and generate evidence to inform the Cass report.

Another complaint session someone didn't like the outcome. Good job StOnge. No facts, no data, just feelz.

You’ve consistently stayed in “study quality” mode, but you’ve avoided the underlying principle question.

So let’s make it simple: Do parents generally have the authority to make medical decisions for their minor children in consultation with licensed physicians — yes or no?

• If yes, then define the objective standard that justifies state override in this case.
• If no, then your position isn’t really about the Cass Review or study design — it’s about expanding state authority over parental medical decisions.

I’m not asking for insults or credentials. I’m asking what consistent standard you’re applying.

[SeattleGriz]

Another complaint session someone didn't like the outcome. Good job StOnge. No facts, no data, just feelz.

You’ve consistently stayed in “study quality” mode, but you’ve avoided the underlying principle question.

So let’s make it simple: Do parents generally have the authority to make medical decisions for their minor children in consultation with licensed physicians — yes or no?

• If yes, then define the objective standard that justifies state override in this case.
• If no, then your position isn’t really about the Cass Review or study design — it’s about expanding state authority over parental medical decisions.

I’m not asking for insults or credentials. I’m asking what consistent standard you’re applying.

The standard I am applying is nobody gets to make wholesale changes until the person themselves can make that decision. In addition, a shit ton of therapy and help in the meantime.

The problem isn't gender affirming care, the problem is it being crammed down people's throats with no data to show it's beneficial. It obviously is for some, but that doesn't mean you get to peanut butter spread it to everyone. That's the issue.

[SeattleGriz]

Another complaint session someone didn't like the outcome. Good job StOnge. No facts, no data, just feelz.

Any time, Alex Jones. I’m sure there’s another politically driven study to support your next Internet conspiracy theory degree, right around the corner.

How was the Cass report politically driven?

[UNI88]

You’ve consistently stayed in “study quality” mode, but you’ve avoided the underlying principle question.

So let’s make it simple: Do parents generally have the authority to make medical decisions for their minor children in consultation with licensed physicians — yes or no?

• If yes, then define the objective standard that justifies state override in this case.
• If no, then your position isn’t really about the Cass Review or study design — it’s about expanding state authority over parental medical decisions.

I’m not asking for insults or credentials. I’m asking what consistent standard you’re applying.

The standard I am applying is nobody gets to make wholesale changes until the person themselves can make that decision. In addition, a shit ton of therapy and help in the meantime.

The problem isn't gender affirming care, the problem is it being crammed down people's throats with no data to show it's beneficial. It obviously is for some, but that doesn't mean you get to peanut butter spread it to everyone. That's the issue.

That’s no longer about study quality — it’s about whether minors, with parental consent and medical supervision, can receive significant treatment.

We already permit serious and sometimes irreversible interventions for minors in other areas of medicine.

What clear standard makes this case categorically different?

[SeattleGriz]

The standard I am applying is nobody gets to make wholesale changes until the person themselves can make that decision. In addition, a shit ton of therapy and help in the meantime.

The problem isn't gender affirming care, the problem is it being crammed down people's throats with no data to show it's beneficial. It obviously is for some, but that doesn't mean you get to peanut butter spread it to everyone. That's the issue.

That’s no longer about study quality — it’s about whether minors, with parental consent and medical supervision, can receive significant treatment.

We already permit serious and sometimes irreversible interventions for minors in other areas of medicine.

What clear standard makes this case categorically different?

What fuck are you talking about? It has every fucking thing to do with study quality. Requiring the medical community to pump the brakes and collect real data is quality.

Stop fucking asking AI for answers. Your responses are fucking idiotic

[BDKJMU]

[kalm]

[BDKJMU]

[UNI88]

Fake news Libs of Chinese Spying App doing what they do best: LYING

Being transgender is NOT a mental illness.

[BDKJMU]

Fake news Libs of Chinese Spying App doing what they do best: LYING

Being transgender is NOT a mental illness.

Being transgender IS a mental illness.

And my opinion is just as valid as yours.

[UNI88]

Fake news Libs of Chinese Spying App doing what they do best: LYING

Being transgender is NOT a mental illness.

Being transgender IS a mental illness.

And my opinion is just as valid as yours.

This isn’t a matter of personal opinion—it’s what medical science and psychiatric consensus say.

[BDKJMU]

Being transgender IS a mental illness.

And my opinion is just as valid as yours.

This isn’t a matter of personal opinion—it’s what medical science and psychiatric consensus say.

No it’s a subjective opinion, not an objective fact.. Within the last couple of decades it was classified as a mental illness in the DSM, which was an opinion. Now it isn’t, but rather a mental diagnosis. Again, opinion.

The classification of gender dysphoria has evolved over time. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), gender dysphoria is listed as a mental health diagnosis, but it is not considered a “mental illness” in the traditional sense.

https://pmhccares.org/is-gender-dysphor ... l-illness/
Much Psychiatry/psyscology is subjective. It’s not a cut and dry objective medical field. Like if you broke your leg, that’s not an opinion, that’s a cut and dry fact.

And Psychiatry/psyscology is the most liberal field in medicine. An opinion, but I would challenge anyone disputing it to name one more to the left.

[UNI88]

This isn’t a matter of personal opinion—it’s what medical science and psychiatric consensus say.

No it’s a subjective opinion, not an objective fact.. Within the last couple of decades it was classified as a mental illness in the DSM, which was an opinion. Now it isn’t, but rather a mental diagnosis. Again, opinion.

The classification of gender dysphoria has evolved over time. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), gender dysphoria is listed as a mental health diagnosis, but it is not considered a “mental illness” in the traditional sense.

https://pmhccares.org/is-gender-dysphor ... l-illness/
Much Psychiatry/psyscology is subjective. It’s not a cut and dry objective medical field. Like if you broke your leg, that’s not an opinion, that’s a cut and dry fact.

And Psychiatry/psyscology is the most liberal field in medicine. An opinion, but I would challenge anyone disputing it to name one more to the left.

Still gives my opinion more weight than your opinion.

[BDKJMU]

No it’s a subjective opinion, not an objective fact.. Within the last couple of decades it was classified as a mental illness in the DSM, which was an opinion. Now it isn’t, but rather a mental diagnosis. Again, opinion.

https://pmhccares.org/is-gender-dysphor ... l-illness/
Much Psychiatry/psyscology is subjective. It’s not a cut and dry objective medical field. Like if you broke your leg, that’s not an opinion, that’s a cut and dry fact.

And Psychiatry/psyscology is the most liberal field in medicine. An opinion, but I would challenge anyone disputing it to name one more to the left.

Still gives my opinion more weight than your opinion.

In your opinion. You don’t think these people are mentally ill.

[UNI88]

Still gives my opinion more weight than your opinion.

In your opinion. You don’t think these people are mentally ill.

I don't and even if I didn't, them being who they are doesn't really impact me so I wouldn't let it get my panties all in a wad like MAQA yahoos do.

[BDKJMU]

In your opinion. You don’t think these people are mentally ill.

I don't and even if I didn't, them being who they are doesn't really impact me so I wouldn't let it get my panties all in a wad like MAQA yahoos do.

Lol them being mentally ill men doesn’t affect my life (well it did when Levine was the PA Sec of Public Health during Covid). It’s your side who gets their panties in a wad when people simply don’t affirm their delusion.

[UNI88]

I don't and even if I didn't, them being who they are doesn't really impact me so I wouldn't let it get my panties all in a wad like MAQA yahoos do.

Lol them being mentally ill men doesn’t affect my life (well it did when Levine was the PA Sec of Public Health during Covid). It’s your side who gets their panties in a wad when people simply don’t affirm their delusion.

Sure you're panties aren't in a wad - should we try and count the number of times you've posted photos of transgender people with disparaging remarks about their mental illness or other derogatory crap?