Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Pediatricians Group Says Research Doesn’t Support ‘Gender Affirming’ Treatments


WVK

Recommended Posts

A review of 60 studies of the mental health of transgender-identifying youth found that “there is no long-term evidence that current ‘gender affirming’ medication and surgical protocols benefit their mental well-being,” according to a group representing pediatricians.

The American College of Pediatricians issued a position statement on Wednesday opposing the gender transitioning of youth based on the literature review. It comes just after a watchdog group filed a scientific integrity complaint against Department of Health and Human Services official Rachel Levine for claiming that “there is no argument among medical professionals regarding “the value and the importance of gender-affirming care.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/pediatricians-group-says-research-doesnt-support-gender-affirming-treatments

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol try harder

 

Quote

The American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) is a socially conservative advocacy group of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals in the United States, founded in 2002.[1][2] The group's primary focus is advocating against abortion rights and against rights for gay, queer, and transgender people. ACPeds promotes conversion therapy and purity culture.[3][4][1] As of 2022, its membership has been reported at about 700 physicians.[5][6][1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_College_of_Pediatricians

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Occupational Hubris said:

lol try harder

 

 

According to wikipedia which can be edited by anyone.  Try harder?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

According to wikipedia which can be edited by anyone.  Try harder?

Notice the little blue words? We call those "hyperlinks". Each one connects you to a "source" 

Beyond that, the group is bunch of "judeo-christian value" losers. Grow up. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Occupational Hubris said:

lol try harder

 

 

You aren't kidding. 

What Is the American College of Pediatricians?

A fringe group of pediatricians, the American College of Pediatricians promotes misleading information based on the ideology of their very small group of members.

Every time you hear about or read something and quickly think to yourself, “did the American Academy of Pediatrics really say that?” – it’s almost certainly from the American College of Pediatricians.

Like the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) pushes and promotes “misleading and incorrect” recommendations based on the ideology of their members, not using science and evidenced based medicine.

“…ACPeds was born from an ideological split within a profession. It was founded in 2002 as a protest against the much larger American Academy of Pediatrics’ support for LGBT adoption rights — and that opposition remains central to the group’s identity…

But thanks to its deceptive name — which makes it sound as if it is the mainstream professional organization for pediatricians — ACPeds often serves as a supposedly scientific source for groups pushing utter falsehoods about LGBT people.”

Southern Poverty Law Center on how the American College of Pediatricians Defames Gays and Lesbians in the Name of Protecting Children

 

7 minutes ago, OverSword said:

According to wikipedia which can be edited by anyone.  Try harder?

It would have taken as much effort to confirm it as it did for you to type that post. 

What's it take? 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

You aren't kidding. 

What Is the American College of Pediatricians?

A fringe group of pediatricians, the American College of Pediatricians promotes misleading information based on the ideology of their very small group of members.

Every time you hear about or read something and quickly think to yourself, “did the American Academy of Pediatrics really say that?” – it’s almost certainly from the American College of Pediatricians.

Like the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) pushes and promotes “misleading and incorrect” recommendations based on the ideology of their members, not using science and evidenced based medicine.

“…ACPeds was born from an ideological split within a profession. It was founded in 2002 as a protest against the much larger American Academy of Pediatrics’ support for LGBT adoption rights — and that opposition remains central to the group’s identity…

But thanks to its deceptive name — which makes it sound as if it is the mainstream professional organization for pediatricians — ACPeds often serves as a supposedly scientific source for groups pushing utter falsehoods about LGBT people.”

Southern Poverty Law Center on how the American College of Pediatricians Defames Gays and Lesbians in the Name of Protecting Children

 

It would have taken as much effort to confirm it as it did for you to type that post. 

What's it take? 

Being an Aussie you may not know this, but the SPLC is merely a progressive fundraising organization, and not an actual authority on much of anything beyond stashing money outside of the country and hit pieces.  
 

You want to go beyond them to demonstrate how, actually, chemical castration and drag queen story hour are improving the lives of little kids.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Occupational Hubris said:

lol try harder

A study using Denmark’s national database, reviewing 6.6 million individuals over four decades, found that transgender people were 3.5 times more likely to kill themselves compared to normal people. If accommodating and supporting transgender people was a sufficient treatment, then that disparity shouldn’t exist since Denmark is “recognized by the European chapter of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans & Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe) as the third best country in Europe for its protection of sexual and gender minority rights.”

The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare concluded that “the risk of hormonal interventions for gender dysphoric youth outweigh the potential benefits,” stating that there is insufficient evidence supporting that the treatments work, especially considering that the population of purportedly transgender youth has exploded in recent years and experts cannot explain why. (One reason, the pediatrics group suggests, is that in a developing brain, a “desire for excitement via novel behavior may entice adolescents to experiment with alternative gender roles.”)

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WVK said:

A review of 60 studies of the mental health of transgender-identifying youth found that “there is no long-term evidence that current ‘gender affirming’ medication and surgical protocols benefit their mental well-being,” according to a group representing pediatricians.

The American College of Pediatricians issued a position statement on Wednesday opposing the gender transitioning of youth based on the literature review. It comes just after a watchdog group filed a scientific integrity complaint against Department of Health and Human Services official Rachel Levine for claiming that “there is no argument among medical professionals regarding “the value and the importance of gender-affirming care.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/pediatricians-group-says-research-doesnt-support-gender-affirming-treatments

The suicide rate doesn`t drop, the reason being their hypersensitivity hasn`t been treated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Cho Jinn said:

Being an Aussie you may not know this, but the SPLC is merely a progressive fundraising organization, and not an actual authority on much of anything beyond stashing money outside of the country and hit pieces. 

The source I linked to is written and maintained by Vincent Iannelli, MD. 

14 minutes ago, Cho Jinn said:

You want to go beyond them to demonstrate how, actually, chemical castration and drag queen story hour are improving the lives of little kids.

Because that has what to do with a sham organisation pretending to be legitimate?

You want to learn how to stay on topic. It seems a challenge for most conservatives.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, WVK said:

A study using Denmark’s national database, reviewing 6.6 million individuals over four decades, found that transgender people were 3.5 times more likely to kill themselves compared to normal people. If accommodating and supporting transgender people was a sufficient treatment, then that disparity shouldn’t exist since Denmark is “recognized by the European chapter of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans & Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe) as the third best country in Europe for its protection of sexual and gender minority rights.”

The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare concluded that “the risk of hormonal interventions for gender dysphoric youth outweigh the potential benefits,” stating that there is insufficient evidence supporting that the treatments work, especially considering that the population of purportedly transgender youth has exploded in recent years and experts cannot explain why. (One reason, the pediatrics group suggests, is that in a developing brain, a “desire for excitement via novel behavior may entice adolescents to experiment with alternative gender roles.”)

Why don't you post reputable medical advice as opposed to sham organisation opinion pieces? 

Do you not realise that you posted a sham organisation driven by politics as opposed to actual medical information? 

The Denmark study was focused on suicidal behaviour. It's not opposed to gender affirming treatment. Did you know that legal sex change is free in Denmark? 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9322260/#:~:text=According to Danish law%2C a,6 months of reflection time.

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, WVK said:

A study using Denmark’s national database, reviewing 6.6 million individuals over four decades, found that transgender people were 3.5 times more likely to kill themselves compared to normal people. If accommodating and supporting transgender people was a sufficient treatment, then that disparity shouldn’t exist since Denmark is “recognized by the European chapter of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans & Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe) as the third best country in Europe for its protection of sexual and gender minority rights.”

The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare concluded that “the risk of hormonal interventions for gender dysphoric youth outweigh the potential benefits,” stating that there is insufficient evidence supporting that the treatments work, especially considering that the population of purportedly transgender youth has exploded in recent years and experts cannot explain why. (One reason, the pediatrics group suggests, is that in a developing brain, a “desire for excitement via novel behavior may entice adolescents to experiment with alternative gender roles.”)

You don't know a single trans person, do you? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so sick and tired of hearing this bulls!t over and over again.  People need to shut the “F” up, and just be thankful they’re alive.  Entitled b*******.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Occupational Hubris said:

You don't know a single trans person, do you? 

Does transvestite count?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kind of feels like when someone posts sources of a group of climate scientists saying climate change isn't real...

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

This kind of feels like when someone posts sources of a group of climate scientists saying climate change isn't real...

Yes, the dogma flies off of the screen.  Those disbelievers need to be smoten!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Occupational Hubris said:

Each one connects you to a "source" 

Which could be from absolutely anywhere for all I know.  I'm not going to waste time clicking hyperlinks in wikipedia over something I don't really care about but if you would like to do that go right ahead.

edit: Pediatricians being conservative on behalf of children does not make anything they stand for illegitimate. It just means you don't like what they said.

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, psyche101 said:

It would have taken as much effort to confirm it as it did for you to type that post. 

 

Assuming I give enough of a crap ;)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Occupational Hubris said:

Notice the little blue words? We call those "hyperlinks". Each one connects you to a "source" 

Beyond that, the group is bunch of "judeo-christian value" losers. Grow up. 

and we all know you can't be a jew/christian and a good pediatrician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Occupational Hubris said:

Notice the little blue words? We call those "hyperlinks". Each one connects you to a "source" 

Beyond that, the group is bunch of "judeo-christian value" losers. Grow up. 

do you realize the source is another wikipedia page that doesn't explicitly address the summarized claim? are you aware how poor that is as a backstop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, psyche101 said:

You aren't kidding. 

What Is the American College of Pediatricians?

A fringe group of pediatricians, the American College of Pediatricians promotes misleading information based on the ideology of their very small group of members.

Every time you hear about or read something and quickly think to yourself, “did the American Academy of Pediatrics really say that?” – it’s almost certainly from the American College of Pediatricians.

Like the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) pushes and promotes “misleading and incorrect” recommendations based on the ideology of their members, not using science and evidenced based medicine.

“…ACPeds was born from an ideological split within a profession. It was founded in 2002 as a protest against the much larger American Academy of Pediatrics’ support for LGBT adoption rights — and that opposition remains central to the group’s identity…

But thanks to its deceptive name — which makes it sound as if it is the mainstream professional organization for pediatricians — ACPeds often serves as a supposedly scientific source for groups pushing utter falsehoods about LGBT people.”

Southern Poverty Law Center on how the American College of Pediatricians Defames Gays and Lesbians in the Name of Protecting Children

 

It would have taken as much effort to confirm it as it did for you to type that post. 

What's it take? 

the circular reasoning is impressive. the ACPeds split from the AAP over some key differences. since ACPeds upholds those differences, it is an illegitimate organization. presumably everyone involved would be more credible if only they stayed within the control of the AAP and simply shut up about their differences. the fact that they couldn't help but disagree is evidence that they are wrong and, in fact, unserious pediatricians now that they have this new affiliation.

that's entirely an ad hominem bit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DayoOlabisi said:

the circular reasoning is impressive. the ACPeds split from the AAP over some key differences. since ACPeds upholds those differences, it is an illegitimate organization. presumably everyone involved would be more credible if only they stayed within the control of the AAP and simply shut up about their differences. the fact that they couldn't help but disagree is evidence that they are wrong and, in fact, unserious pediatricians now that they have this new affiliation.

that's entirely an ad hominem bit.

Can you not comprehend the link? 

It's a protest group. That's how it started. Aholes who can't accept modern results and need to turn to conservatism and religion for guidance. Key differences alright. Studies vs dogma. 

You will know when I ad hom. You won't need a personal interpretation. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Occupational Hubris said:

Notice the little blue words? We call those "hyperlinks". Each one connects you to a "source" 

Beyond that, the group is bunch of "judeo-christian value" losers. Grow up. 

Most of those hyperlinks all lead to generic wikipedia articles that exist simply to define the terms being used in the quoted article. If you want the sources that wikipedia actually used you need to scroll to the bottom of the page to click the hyperlinks down there (or the very specific numbered hyperlinks in your paragraph). The paragraph you quoted included 4 such links: 

The very left wing Wired: https://www.wired.com/story/american-college-pediatricians-google-drive-leak/

A broken-and-no-longer-working-link (someone should inform wikipedia, lol): https://www.virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/Larsen_Book.pdf

The very left wing activist organisation known as the Southern Poverty Law Centre: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/american-college-pediatricians

The very left wing Daily Beast: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-religious-rights-favorite-medical-association-is-a-hate-group

None of these are scientific sources that prove anything beyond wikipedia having a preference for left wing news sources. 

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Can you not comprehend the link? 

It's a protest group. That's how it started. Aholes who can't accept modern results and need to turn to conservatism and religion for guidance. Key differences alright. Studies vs dogma. 

You will know when I ad hom. You won't need a personal interpretation. 

that's still an ad hom though... is a protest group always wrong? or just in this case? or just in selective cases?

the link is an ad hom and using the link as an argument is ad hom. an example of something with merit would be reading the evidence provided and disputing it with other evidence. now, to be clear, that doesn't mean that the original evidence is 'debunked'. it means there's the beginning of a discussion point. and i didn't even read what the ACPeds based their conclusion on. i'm not saying i found it to be convincing. i'm saying, the reaction makes me think a proper rebuttal was too difficult to obtain. that in itself can often be revealing (to a degree).

Edited by DayoOlabisi
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Most of those hyperlinks all lead to generic wikipedia articles that exist simply to define the terms being used in the quoted article. If you want the sources that wikipedia actually used you need to scroll to the bottom of the page to click the hyperlinks down there (or the very specific numbered hyperlinks in your paragraph). The paragraph you quoted included 4 such links: 

The very left wing Wired: https://www.wired.com/story/american-college-pediatricians-google-drive-leak/

A broken-and-no-longer-working-link (someone should inform wikipedia, lol): https://www.virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/Larsen_Book.pdf

The very left wing activist organisation known as the Southern Poverty Law Centre: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/american-college-pediatricians

The very left wing Daily Beast: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-religious-rights-favorite-medical-association-is-a-hate-group

None of these are scientific sources that prove anything beyond wikipedia having a preference for left wing news sources. 

it wasn't until i started coming to these forums that i discovered that some people think merely providing a hyperlink is evidence. i'm legitimately unsure how to proceed with that type of intellect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.