The 3 largest and most-cited studies have reported on the adolescent or adult gender identities of cohots who had, in childhood, showed gender "typical" patterns of behavior. Of those who could be followed up, a minority were transgender. 1 of 44, 9 of 45, and 21 of 54. Most of the remaining children later identifies as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (although a small number also was heterosexual).
However, close inspection of these studies suggests that most children in these studies were not transgender to begin with. In 2 studies, a large minority (40% and 25%) of the children did not meet the criteria for GID to start with, suggesting they were not transgender (because transgender children would meet the criteria).
Yes, interesting that another person's opinion on the subject is being boosted who cannot properly read the Swedish study (see point 8). She completely ignores that the study itself says that those who transitioned after 1989 don't have the high suicide rate. It's literally in the language of the study itself. Look under Discussion, paragraph 2. It's in plain black and white. But that's not the only problem with her opinion piece. Here's three more:
Point 5 she refers to a study from 2003 of 30 trans individuals to say that it's unsafe. She wrote this study a few days ago. Why she would pick this study when there is a more recent (2012), much more extensive study of a much larger (over 1,000) population is unclear, unless you look at the results of the study. The study she presented says there is a high risk. The larger, more recent study says it's safe.
In point 4, her conclusion that the medical protocol leads children to identify as transgender is unsupported and ignores the reality of the requirements for medical treatment (mainly that the child already persistently, consistently and insistently identify as transgender). It's rather a bizarre way to look at the cases.
Point 7 demonstrates a lack of awareness of the studies done. Keep in mind she wrote this article in July 2017 and notes here that "there is no evidence" that affirmation helps children. Yet there is. The study is over a year before this article. "no evidence" indeed.
If you actually want to understand the subject matter, I wouldn't turn to folks who are cherry picking their presentation and ignoring the current science on the subject.
Whoops accidentally ended up on transgenderissafeandawesome.com. Going to Christian Forums now.
To be blunt, expecting people to take your word (a biased transgender person, and being no notable authority at all to the best of our knowledge, being that this is mostly an anonymous forum) over the words of an actual pediatric and professional just ain't gonna happen.Challenging bad information is better for everyone. That's all I did here.
To be blunt, expecting people to take your word (a biased transgender person, and being no notable authority at all to the best of our knowledge, being that this is mostly an anonymous forum) over the words of an actual pediatric and professional just ain't gonna happen.
I didn't attack you personally at all. It's a fact that you are transgender, it's a fact that this person is a professional, and it is my opinion that you're biased based on your defense of transgenderism in any thread that is about it. I too am a biased person in many things.That's why I linked to the work of actual professionals. Nobody is expected to take my word over that of anyone. I gave my sources. You want to ignore the facts, be my guest, but it's not going to make her correct on those points.
However, ad hominem attacks against me are meaningless. Do you want to actually address the findings of the studies I posted and how they contradict her on the points or just attack me personally?
For what it's worth, don't pretend that she's not biased. Just because she's a medical professional doesn't mean that she's necessarily correct. Blinding yourself to the facts because of her degree is doing you no favors.
I didn't attack you personally at all. It's a fact that you are transgender, it's a fact that this person is a professional, and it is my opinion that you're biased based on your defense of transgenderism in any thread that is about it. I too am a biased person in many things.
I'm not arguing with you about it.Your entire response to this thread has been about me, rather than about what I post. That's why I stated that your posts are personal attacks, rather than say, attacks on the information. Not that you are insulting me in anyway.
I also didn't "expect people to take my word" on anything.
So here we are.
Your entire response to this thread has been about me, rather than about what I post. That's why I stated that your posts are personal attacks, rather than say, attacks on the information. Not that you are insulting me in anyway.
I also didn't "expect people to take my word" on anything.
So here we are.
This is the reason I don't support transition. It doesn't solve the problem. It doesn't make transgender individuals happier, or bring down the suicide rates. And like the article says, 75-95% of transgender kids grow out of it--it's morally wrong to transition them....child abuse
Very interesting article!
I’m a Pediatrician. How Transgender Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced Large-Scale Child Abuse.
When I was in the 3rd grade, I went through a phase where I acted girlish. And I grew out of it.This is the reason I don't support transition. It doesn't solve the problem. It doesn't make transgender individuals happier, or bring down the suicide rates. And like the article says, 75-95% of transgender kids grow out of it--it's morally wrong to transition them.
When I was in the 3rd grade, I went through a phase where I acted girlish. And I grew out of it.
Thank God it wasn't in a time like today.
Yes, interesting that another person's opinion on the subject is being boosted who cannot properly read the Swedish study (see point 8). She completely ignores that the study itself says that those who transitioned after 1989 don't have the high suicide rate. It's literally in the language of the study itself. Look under Discussion, paragraph 2. It's in plain black and white. But that's not the only problem with her opinion piece.
Point 5 she refers to a study from 2003 of 30 trans individuals to say that it's unsafe. She wrote this study a few days ago. Why she would pick this study when there is a more recent (2012), much more extensive study of a much larger (over 1,000) population is unclear, unless you look at the results of the study. The study she presented says there is a high risk. The larger, more recent study says it's safe.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?