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

New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#61

Post by hutzlibu »

collyw wrote: post #54
rygxqpbsngav wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how it works. Ayurveda is not a medical pharmacy. It's a way of treating individuals. Like I said earlier, each case is different. There are no common medicines other than a few (6 or 7), which are known to work for any body type. For anything that doesn't get cured through them needs customized medicine. I am no expert either. But there are no lobbyist pharmas backing studies on Ayurveda medicine as they…

Of course you could study it. Give 50% of the participants individualized Arurdvedic medicine and 50% the standard medicine. Give both groups the consultation Adudveric style as a control measure. See if there is a statistically significant difference in results, then you have an answer. (Your starting point will be people with the same problems/symptoms). Or am I missing something? (Your answer comes across as imply…

"(Your starting point will be people with the same problems/symptoms).

Or am I missing something?"

I don't know much about Ayurveda, but the general idea is, that there are no people with the exact same problems/symptoms.

Which is not, how far I would take it, so you have to do generalisations, but maybe much finer grained.

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#63

Post by apta »

tomlock wrote: post #53
apta wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biology (i.e. XX or XY or other less common variants) doesn't care about what someone thinks they are.

Ah, so you agree that gender isn't binary.

I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender, there isn't anything 'gender' in biology).

The vast majority of cases you see today with people claiming to be the sex they're not are psychological, not physical. They're men with XY chromosomes wanting to be women, or the opposite, women with XX chromosomes wanting to be men. The other cases (e.g. XXY and XYY) are very small in comparison.

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#64

Post by dragonwriter »

apta wrote: post #49
tomlock wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a reasonable comment to me, and not an objection to the finding.

Biology (i.e. XX or XY or other less common variants) doesn't care about what someone thinks they are.

There's a considerable evidence that trans identity is correlsted with variations in physical sex-related traits at a more specific level than counting the number of X and/or Y chromosomes (which themselves aren't sex related traits, just things which contribute to the development of such traits in ways mediated by physical environmental factors.)

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#65

Post by dragonwriter »

apta wrote: post #63
tomlock wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, so you agree that gender isn't binary.

I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender, there isn't anything 'gender' in biology). The vast majority of cases you see today with people claiming to be the sex they're not are psychological, not physical. They're men with XY chromosomes wanting to be women, or the opposite, women with XX chromosomes wanting to be men. The other cases (e.g. XXY and XYY) are very small in comparison.

> I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender,

No, it doesn't. Gender (which is distinct from both sex and gender identity, though there is an increasingly popular modern view that gender should be ascribed based on gender identity) is a socially ascribed trait, and different societies have recognized different numbers of genders and used different methods of ascribing them.

> The vast majority of cases you see today with people claiming to be the sex they're not are psychological, not physical.

The idea that there is such a thing as “psychological, not physical” is mystical woo that has no place in fact-based discussion, and divergences between gender identity and gender ascribed based on sex determined by chromosome counting has an observed correlation with other physical divergences from typical traits for the assigned sex.

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#66

Post by apta »

dragonwriter wrote: post #65
apta wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender, there isn't anything 'gender' in biology). The vast majority of cases you see today with people claiming to be the sex they're not are psychological, not physical. They're men with XY chromosomes wanting to be women, or the opposite, women with XX chromosomes wanting to be men. The other cases (e.g. XXY and XYY) are very small in comparison.

> I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender, No, it doesn't. Gender (which is distinct from both sex and gender identity, though there is an increasingly popular modern view that gender should be ascribed based on gender identity) is a socially ascribed trait, and different societies have recognized different numbers of genders and used different methods of ascribing them. > The vast majority of cases yo…

The facts are that if your chromosomes are XX you're female, and XY you're male. This directly affects things like strength, size of organs, behavior, and more. Anything else is just mental issues. There are inherent differences between men and women whether people want to admit it or not, biology doesn't care about someones feelings

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#67

Post by tomlock »

apta wrote: post #66
dragonwriter wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender, No, it doesn't. Gender (which is distinct from both sex and gender identity, though there is an increasingly popular modern view that gender should be ascribed based on gender identity) is a socially ascribed trait, and different societies have recognized different numbers of genders and used different methods of ascribing them. > The vast majority of cases yo…

The facts are that if your chromosomes are XX you're female, and XY you're male. This directly affects things like strength, size of organs, behavior, and more. Anything else is just mental issues. There are inherent differences between men and women whether people want to admit it or not, biology doesn't care about someones feelings

That simplistic view is not the consensus of modern biologists.

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#68

Post by dragonwriter »

apta wrote: post #66
dragonwriter wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm talking about biological sex (which implies gender, No, it doesn't. Gender (which is distinct from both sex and gender identity, though there is an increasingly popular modern view that gender should be ascribed based on gender identity) is a socially ascribed trait, and different societies have recognized different numbers of genders and used different methods of ascribing them. > The vast majority of cases yo…

The facts are that if your chromosomes are XX you're female, and XY you're male. This directly affects things like strength, size of organs, behavior, and more. Anything else is just mental issues. There are inherent differences between men and women whether people want to admit it or not, biology doesn't care about someones feelings

> The facts are that if you're chromosomes are XX you're female, and XY you're male.

The facts are that if you have the sex-determining-region Y (SRY) gene (which usually comes on the Y chromosome, but may be missing or defective, or may be on the X chromosome because genes do funny things), you are most likely biologically more-male-than-not and if you don't you probably are more-female-than-not.

But even SRY-or-not isn't enough: XX male syndrome, which normally occurs because of an unusual recombination event where a copy of SRY ends up on an X chromosome, can also happen without a copy of SRY, and XY females can exist with SRY in complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (largely, because of variations in genes responsible for androgen receptors, which are located on the X chromosome.)

The idea that biological sex is binary and corresponds to XY vs. XX is simply false; there's a lot more than “what shape are your sex chromosomes” involved.

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#69

Post by m463 »

djsumdog wrote: post #7
sagartewari01 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess they had 100% success rate.

I'd assume it was mostly just to test their ability to harm/toxicity?

I believe the fundamental reason was that testing on women of childbearing age was not recommended, so they tested on men.

Re: New study provides evidence that we need different drugs for men and women

#70

Post by dang »

shard972 wrote: post #13

The article says nothing about how many trans people they had enrolled in the study. I thought we were already past this but no, in 2019 trans individuals are still second class citizens.

If you troll HN again we will ban you. And no more flamebait, please. We've had to warn you about this already.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN