Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
The Most Passionate Science Deniers Are Pro-Trans ‘Experts’ Who Profit From Carving Up Kids
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThatRobGuy" data-source="post: 77035028" data-attributes="member: 123415"><p>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.</p><p></p><p>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.</p><p></p><p></p><p>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.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThatRobGuy, post: 77035028, member: 123415"] 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. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
News & Current Events (Articles Required)
The Most Passionate Science Deniers Are Pro-Trans ‘Experts’ Who Profit From Carving Up Kids
Top
Bottom