Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 102 posts

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#51

Post by cubefox »

summermusic wrote: post #19
AlexandrB wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counterpoint: https://segm.org/regret-detransition-rate-unknown > And since gender transition is a lifelong process required to maintain a masculinized or feminized appearance, instances of medical detransition—reported by one study as reaching 30% within just 4 years of initiating treatment—is an alarming warning signal of high numbers of inappropriate transitions.

Your source is fake. "The Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM) is an anti-trans organization that is known for its opposition to gender-affirming care for transgender youth and for engaging in political lobbying. SEGM is known for transgender health care misinformation. It has falsely claimed that the majority of transgender children desist, argued that gender exploratory therapy should be the first line…

Wikipedia is also known to be heavily biased on these matters.

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#52

Post by HedonicEscal8r »

rootusrootus wrote: post #37
HedonicEscal8r wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is also wrong. People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. The small percentage that do seek amputation have usually exhausted all treatment options, and find that amputation improves their quality of life.

We should let them, if they are of sound mind and capable of consenting. Part of that means they are not a minor.

I agree that you should almost never offer amputations for BIID in minors, since delaying until adulthood would only risk a couple of years of distress and would not cause additional permanent harm.

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#53

Post by pseudalopex »

rootusrootus wrote: post #37
HedonicEscal8r wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is also wrong. People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. The small percentage that do seek amputation have usually exhausted all treatment options, and find that amputation improves their quality of life.

We should let them, if they are of sound mind and capable of consenting. Part of that means they are not a minor.

Most developed countries allow minors to make medical decisions from an age or if enough mature.

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#54

Post by ASalazarMX »

HedonicEscal8r wrote: post #50
ASalazarMX wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO the issue is that we're still seeing the world in black and white. A trans person can't transform into the opposite sex, that's biologically impossible. They exist up in a middle ground, and they should be recognized and accepted as they are so they don't feel the need to transition and detransition to fulfill the binary standard. Trying to make-believe that people can convert to the opposite sex, and even go bac…

If you think that a modal person who transitions does so because they don't understand what biological changes can be achieved* and/or because society doesn't accept them "as they are" enough, you are hopelessly confused about this entire topic. *Note that a disagreement about whether currently available medical procedures constitute a "sex change" is almost always a dispute of semantics and not of fact. A trans woma…

You're not getting my point. I've seen that trans people don't want others to think of them as their former sex, they don't want to be reminded that they're still men that look look like women, or viceversa. Mentioning that they can't actually get pregnant, or impregnate someone, is taboo. IMO, this shows a strong psychological, rather than medical, motive. That sets their personal expectations to an impossible ideal, since that needs forcing others to participate in the illusion of a complete sex change.

Disclaimer: I don't know any trans person IRL, so my perception is likely skewed by their loud online interactions.

See this article about muxes, the third gender of the prehispanic Zapotec civilization that still survives today, for an example of accepting gender choice differences healthily, without creating culture wars, and without aggresive treatments on an otherwise healthy individual:

https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20181125-the-third-gender...

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#55

Post by slowmovintarget »

HedonicEscal8r wrote: post #22
AlexandrB wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do it all the time with people who believe they should be amputees. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/body-integrit...

Which is also wrong. People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational. The small percentage that do seek amputation have usually exhausted all treatment options, and find that amputation improves their quality of life.

> People living with BIID are (usually) not irrational.

This statement seems to be incorrect by definition. Do you mean, not otherwise irrational?

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#56

Post by slowmovintarget »

plorkyeran wrote: post #34
tosti wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be an adult to get a tattoo. Because by then, you're expected to be able to make a well-informed descision and be able to think of possible coonsequences. Why on earth would a child be allowed to decide on life-changing or even life-shattering bodily harm?

The entire purpose of puberty blockers is to enable deferring the decision until you are an adult and can make a well-informed decision. The make an irrevocable decision right now options are to go through natural puberty or immediately go on HRT. We also let children decide on inflicting life-shattering bodily harm to themselves all the time. The classic examples are things like contact sports (children playing tack…

No, that is not the purpose of "puberty blockers." Those drugs were developed for four different reasons:

1. To delay extremely early-onset puberty in children as young as seven or eight who had a pituitary disorder.

2. To treat advanced prostate cancer.

3. To treat endometriosis and uterine fibroids in women.

4. As part of a treatment for breast cancers, part of fertility protocols, or treatments for endocrine disorders.

This notion of using these drugs to disrupt healthy and physiologically normal puberty, was not even a little part of their purpose. It's how they're being used now in some cases.

The fact is that administering hormone disruptors or synthetic hormones are the opposite of what should be done, as gender dysphoria often resolves itself as the process of puberty and natural maturation unfolds. Interventionism, in these cases, is extremely harmful.

Adults making these choices are a completely different case.

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#57

Post by HedonicEscal8r »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #54
HedonicEscal8r wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think that a modal person who transitions does so because they don't understand what biological changes can be achieved* and/or because society doesn't accept them "as they are" enough, you are hopelessly confused about this entire topic. *Note that a disagreement about whether currently available medical procedures constitute a "sex change" is almost always a dispute of semantics and not of fact. A trans woma…

You're not getting my point. I've seen that trans people don't want others to think of them as their former sex, they don't want to be reminded that they're still men that look look like women, or viceversa. Mentioning that they can't actually get pregnant, or impregnate someone, is taboo. IMO, this shows a strong psychological, rather than medical, motive. That sets their personal expectations to an impossible ideal…

> Mentioning that they can't actually get pregnant, or impregnate someone, is taboo.

Don't know the context, but I don't think this is a "trans" thing. It is usually considered taboo to bring up someone's fertility or sexual issues, even if said issues are common knowledge.

> Disclaimer: I don't know any trans person IRL, so my perception is likely skewed by their loud online interactions.

As an exercise, pick any other minority group, and try to imagine forming an impression of them based solely on reading about the group in culture war arguments and online controversies. I know many trans people due to working in tech, living in California, and hanging out in (bio)hacking circles, and I can promise they are sane and normal people.

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#58

Post by pseudalopex »

sail2boat3 wrote: post #20
VCFundedGenYer wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really understanding you. Are you softly still saying, as someone who isn't them, that you want to gatekeep this from people who don't feel comfortable in their own bodies?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say by - "isn't them" If I did undergo that path when I wanted to, at which point would you consider me "becoming them"? At the inception of the thought? After some rumination? After making the decision? After first time taking meds? After undergoing surgery? I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from…

> I don't consider it gatekeeping, rather prevention of making an irreversible choice while the frontal lobe is still far from knowing even what path it wants for itself for the rest of its life.

To control access is gate keeping.

Puberty blockers' effects are reversible generally. Puberty's effects are not.

Gender affirming care regret rates are very low.

> I know that might be seen as unfair to a lot of people, but given the persistence with which gender affirmation is being pushed, I feel that cases like me are simply considered collateral damage.

Access to gender affirming care is pushed persistently because denial of gender affirming care was and is pushed persistently. And the benefits are significant. And regret rates are very low.

Do you understand that no regretted treatment would require no treatment? What ratio of regretted treatment and regretted non treatment would you consider fair?

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#59

Post by pseudalopex »

tosti wrote: post #36
HedonicEscal8r wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are 11 and wait 7 years to get a tattoo, your tattoo will look just as good or better. If you are 11 and wait 7 years to transition, you will suffer irreversible physical and psychological damage. You will have missed formative social experiences. You will have to get expensive, painful surgeries to partially correct what was done to you.

At least you'll have a better idea if it's psychosomatic or not.

Gender dysphoria is mental by definition.

Re: Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children

#60

Post by pseudalopex »

DrProtic wrote: post #41

Should children have the right to commit assisted suicide?

Most developed countries allow minors to make medical decisions from an age or if enough mature.

Puberty blockers are reversible generally. Suicide is not.

Many people believe adults should be denied assisted suicide.

Your point was what?

Post reply on HN