Basically what I was getting at, is that we don't necessarily know if there's huge benefits to the proposed interventions/treatments because while it's true that the suicide rates were lower among LGBT youth in the places that are, it was already lower in those places prior to those treatments being thrust into the forefront of the conversation.
I don't think that it's any sort of shocker than an LGBT kid living with more "progressive leaning" parents in SoCal or NYC probably experiences less of the bullying and social maltreatment as one living in rural Alabama or Oklahoma, so it makes sense that their suicide attempt rates were already lower. It just so happens that the places that are staunchly "for/against" the treatments line up, regionally with those scenarios.
It'd be like if there were two regions, one that had a preexisting high rate of drunk driving, and the other that did not, and then promoting even more drunk driving mitigation in the area that already had a low rate of it, and then trying to solely credit the outcomes with the mitigation measure.
Oh the degree of manipulating data I'm some of these "research papers" the medical community is making guidelines off...it's scary. They aren't that dumb. The point I was making above was regarding a paper I saw that based the effectiveness of HRT on a 2 year study. That's a little short.
I've seen studies done with patients at the clinic doing the study...and I don't care if you tell them it's anonymous....those are invalid. You're giving them medication and asking them to rate the treatment. I've seen studies done that quite simply had sample sizes that were ridiculously small. We shouldn't be basing policy decisions on your 18 person study.
If I went on.... it's largely a mess. Even the study that I said was honest had problems. Why group transgender children in a survey with LGB children? Why include 18-24yo in a youth study? A standardized format for referencing starting gender and transitional gender is clearly needed....can't just say it a different way in every study.
The worst part is that these same activists do ignore the science as the OP says. The strongest data I've seen for this being a real condition is a twin study....and they hate it. It obviously points to a biological condition.
There's plenty of data to question the condition as well....but it's not as strong. It seems like a real thing....implausible or not. They may even have found the genetic sequence responsible.
They don't want these innate feelings to be biologically manipulated.....they'd rather blame society, call them the result of constructs, and then push some agenda for who knows what end.
I can extend all the sympathy I have to someone dealing with genuine mental health issues....but if they are going to insist on something else....we need to discuss what that is.
It seems like they hold two completely contradictory positions.
1. Society is wrong in it's recognition of biological differences as these things matter far less than some emotional response called gender. As such, we should disregard these biological differences in a wide variety of contexts.
2. The trans person themselves however is allowed to hold such biological differences as so important they are absolutely necessary to control as soon as possible....or suicide is the likely result.
So do these biological differences matter? Of course they do....they are of paramount importance to the trans person. A life and death issue. Yet at the very same time....we're being told to discard these fabricated ideas of sexual dimorphism. It's fundamentally absurd to claim both things.
It's this repetition of learning that this particular activist group seems both willing to deploy deception to achieve their goals and regularly does that's troubling.....because in the past I doubt the medical community would have gone along. They either sold their ethics and figure they can afford to settle for wrongdoing/malpractice cheaply for the children they damage.....or they are confident they can pass the buck onto the researchers who have been taking advantage of a completely broken peer review and grant process. I think they'll try to settle....but honestly, this gets fixed quickly when someone decides to take every last dime they can grab from the medical community.