• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Utah lawmakers’ own study found gender-affirming care benefits trans youth. Will they lift the treatment ban?

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
40,903
43,957
Los Angeles Area
✟982,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Utah‘s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth was meant to be a moratorium, giving lawmakers the chance to reevaluate the policy once experts reviewed research on the impacts of treatment.

This week, nearly 2½ years after the law took effect, lawmakers received the findings of that study.

Utah health care experts concluded, in a more than 1,000-page report, “Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes” as a result of gender-affirming care.

Well, now that the results are in, they will change the law to follow the evidence, right?

But some Republican legislators are already dismissing those findings.

I guess it wasn't all about the evidence after all.

While the review prepared for lawmakers acknowledged “an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors,” it found in studies that included thousands of transgender individuals that “increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult.”
 

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
41,243
19,483
Finger Lakes
✟294,419.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Utah‘s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth was meant to be a moratorium, giving lawmakers the chance to reevaluate the policy once experts reviewed research on the impacts of treatment.

This week, nearly 2½ years after the law took effect, lawmakers received the findings of that study.

Utah health care experts concluded, in a more than 1,000-page report, “Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes” as a result of gender-affirming care.

Well, now that the results are in, they will change the law to follow the evidence, right?

But some Republican legislators are already dismissing those findings.

I guess it wasn't all about the evidence after all.

While the review prepared for lawmakers acknowledged “an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors,” it found in studies that included thousands of transgender individuals that “increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult.”
Sure, we'll get gender affirming care for transgendered kids just after we eliminate the #1 killer of kids.
 
Upvote 0

JSRG

Well-Known Member
Apr 14, 2019
2,193
1,394
Midwest
✟214,978.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Utah‘s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth was meant to be a moratorium, giving lawmakers the chance to reevaluate the policy once experts reviewed research on the impacts of treatment.

This week, nearly 2½ years after the law took effect, lawmakers received the findings of that study.

Utah health care experts concluded, in a more than 1,000-page report, “Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes” as a result of gender-affirming care.

Well, now that the results are in, they will change the law to follow the evidence, right?

But some Republican legislators are already dismissing those findings.

I guess it wasn't all about the evidence after all.

While the review prepared for lawmakers acknowledged “an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors,” it found in studies that included thousands of transgender individuals that “increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult.”
This article seems to be leaving out a key phrase from the overall summary.

Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes. While gender affirming treatment showed a possibly protective effect in prostate cancer in transgender men and breast cancer in transgender women, there was an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors. There were increased mortality risks in both transgender men and women treated with hormonal therapy, but more so in transgender women. Increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult. The studies that addressed mortality included thousands of transgender individuals.

The article you quote says that transgender individuals have "increase risk of mortality that was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS." However, it leaves out the fact that it says that increased risk applies to those that were treated with hormonal therapy. Now, the phrasing is somewhat confusing as to whether this is in comparison to regular people or to other transgender people, but either way the article ignores the fact the preceding sentence says it is referring specifically to those who were treated with hormonal therapy.

It should also be noted that the report says "As noted previously, DHHS takes no position on whether the Legislature should lift the moratorium."
 
Upvote 0

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,564
7,056
✟325,555.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Gender-affirming care is

Gender-affirming care is a BUNCH of different things. It's commonplace globally, particularly the wealthy West.

Breast enhancement is gender-affirming care. Breast reduction is also gender-affirming care.
Hair plugs/transplants? Gender-affirming care. Hair removal? Also gender-affirming care.
Procedures like tummy tucks, nose jobs and ear pinning can all qualify as gender-affirming care.

Hormone therapy is also gender-affirming care, as is psychological counselling. Exercise, particularly for hypertrophy, can also be gender-affirming care.

Something as basic as a padded bra? That's gender-affirming care. Corset? Gender-affirming care. Changing hairstyle? Gender-affirming care.


On a personal note, I have two different family friends who have sons who are now on puberty blockers. Neither boy is trans, but both have been prescribed them to deal with medical issues (one for short stature/delayed growth, one for gynecomastia).

These are also examples of gender-affirming care.

Taking puberty blockers means one of these boys will in all likelihood end up taller, heavier and more muscular as an adult than he otherwise would without medical intervention. For the other, it means he likely won't have to spend his teenage years growing breasts. Meaning he avoids potential lifelong psychological issues AND a potential double mastectomy at age 18 or 19.

These boys are lucky that they exist in such a time and place that these drugs are available, and they don't have lawmakers interfering with the decisions that they, their parents and their doctors have made.


If I was living in the US (or the UK, for that matter), I'd be worried that their access to gender-affirming care is at risk of being taken away. Which for the US at least, would seem to run in violation of the fundamental concept of equal protection - why should cisgendered teens have access to gender-affirming care, but transgender teens be denied access?
 
Upvote 0

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
15,667
7,292
61
Montgomery
✟242,869.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Utah‘s ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth was meant to be a moratorium, giving lawmakers the chance to reevaluate the policy once experts reviewed research on the impacts of treatment.

This week, nearly 2½ years after the law took effect, lawmakers received the findings of that study.

Utah health care experts concluded, in a more than 1,000-page report, “Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes” as a result of gender-affirming care.

Well, now that the results are in, they will change the law to follow the evidence, right?

But some Republican legislators are already dismissing those findings.

I guess it wasn't all about the evidence after all.

While the review prepared for lawmakers acknowledged “an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors,” it found in studies that included thousands of transgender individuals that “increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult.”
By all means let’s get these kids treated so they can die of suicide, non natural causes and AIDS. Sounds like a plan
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
40,903
43,957
Los Angeles Area
✟982,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
By all means let’s get these kids treated so they can die of suicide, non natural causes and AIDS. Sounds like a plan
They will have a lower risk of suicide if treated while they are still kids.
 
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
8,870
9,650
PA
✟421,719.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
This article seems to be leaving out a key phrase from the overall summary.

Overall, there were positive mental health and psychosocial functioning outcomes. While gender affirming treatment showed a possibly protective effect in prostate cancer in transgender men and breast cancer in transgender women, there was an increase in some specific types of benign brain tumors. There were increased mortality risks in both transgender men and women treated with hormonal therapy, but more so in transgender women. Increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS. Patients that were seen at the gender clinic before the age of 18 had a lower risk of suicide compared to those referred as an adult. The studies that addressed mortality included thousands of transgender individuals.
I don't find that paragraph anywhere in the actual report.
The article you quote says that transgender individuals have "increase risk of mortality that was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS." However, it leaves out the fact that it says that increased risk applies to those that were treated with hormonal therapy. Now, the phrasing is somewhat confusing as to whether this is in comparison to regular people or to other transgender people, but either way the article ignores the fact the preceding sentence says it is referring specifically to those who were treated with hormonal therapy.
The increase in mortality among people who received hormonal therapy is relative to the general population, and is still lower than in the transgender/gender dysphoric population as a whole. This has been a consistent finding for pretty much as long as people have been doing studies on the subject.
It should also be noted that the report says "As noted previously, DHHS takes no position on whether the Legislature should lift the moratorium."
DHHS did not write the report. They commissioned it on behalf of the Utah state legislature. The report's actual authors concluded this:
Based on the reviewed evidence included in this report, it is our expert opinion that policies to prevent access to and use of GAHT for treatment of GD in pediatric patients cannot be justified based on the quantity or quality of medical science findings or concerns about potential regret in the future, and that high-quality guidelines are available to guide qualified providers in treating pediatric patients who meet diagnostic criteria.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
40,903
43,957
Los Angeles Area
✟982,835.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
I don't find that paragraph anywhere in the actual report.
It's lifted from the Conclusions:

1748365424689.png
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

One nation indivisible
Mar 11, 2017
20,801
15,734
55
USA
✟396,837.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
By all means let’s get these kids treated so they can die of suicide, non natural causes and AIDS. Sounds like a plan
Why would "gender affirming care" lead to death from AIDS?
 
Upvote 0

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
15,667
7,292
61
Montgomery
✟242,869.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why would "gender affirming care" lead to death from AIDS?
From the OP:
it found in studies that included thousands of transgender individuals that “increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS.
 
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
8,870
9,650
PA
✟421,719.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
From the OP:
it found in studies that included thousands of transgender individuals that “increase risk of mortality was consistently due to increase in suicide, non-natural causes, and HIV/AIDS.
Yes, transgender people have a higher risk of dying from suicide, "non-natural" causes (i.e. murder, drug overdose), and HIV/AIDS, in large part because of the ostracization, discrimination, and bigotry that they face for their identities. While it does not eliminate the elevated risk, because it cannot change other peoples' behaviors, gender-affirming care does help with issues that arise from body image, and thus it does help reduce the risk of dying from at least some of those causes among transgender people.

In other words, transgender people who receive treatment still have an elevated risk of dying, but not as elevated as it would be without treatment. And the earlier they get that treatment - to a point - the better the outcome.
 
Upvote 0

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
15,667
7,292
61
Montgomery
✟242,869.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, transgender people have a higher risk of dying from suicide, "non-natural" causes (i.e. murder, drug overdose), and HIV/AIDS, in large part because of the ostracization, discrimination, and bigotry that they face for their identities. While it does not eliminate the elevated risk, because it cannot change other peoples' behaviors, gender-affirming care does help with issues that arise from body image, and thus it does help reduce the risk of dying from at least some of those causes among transgender people.

In other words, transgender people who receive treatment still have an elevated risk of dying, but not as elevated as it would be without treatment. And the earlier they get that treatment - to a point - the better the outcome.
How early? I don't want to interfere with someone's personal choices or intrude on their rights but when you're talking about children I'm concerned about them making life altering decisions when they are not old enough to buy a beer or have a drivers license
 
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Christian Forums Staff
Moderator Trainee
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Feb 10, 2013
33,052
19,431
29
Nebraska
✟676,299.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Christian Forums Staff
Moderator Trainee
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Feb 10, 2013
33,052
19,431
29
Nebraska
✟676,299.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Why would "gender affirming care" lead to death from AIDS?
Sex work/prostitution and having multiple partners. Promiscuity is often rampant among them.
 
Upvote 0

RileyG

Veteran
Christian Forums Staff
Moderator Trainee
Angels Team
Site Supporter
Feb 10, 2013
33,052
19,431
29
Nebraska
✟676,299.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Sure, we'll get gender affirming care for transgendered kids just after we eliminate the #1 killer of kids.
Gun violence?
 
Upvote 0

RocksInMyHead

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!
May 12, 2011
8,870
9,650
PA
✟421,719.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
How early? I don't want to interfere with someone's personal choices or intrude on their rights but when you're talking about children I'm concerned about them making life altering decisions when they are not old enough to buy a beer or have a drivers license
Per the study, best results are achieved if treatment is started during puberty. There's a significant reduction in suicide and depression for people who started treatment during puberty rather than as adults. Notably, most treatments at that stage are reversible - and people make life-altering decisions about their children's lives every day that have nothing to do with gender.
 
Upvote 0