>The American College of Pediatricians warns educators and legislators that “a life of chemical and surgical impersonation of the opposite sex” is dangerous for children.
>In a strongly worded statement issued today, the professional association of pediatricians says “a person’s belief that he or she is something they are not is, at best, a sign of confused thinking.” It describes such thinking as problem that exists in the mind and not the body and “it should be treated as such.”
>The American College of Pediatricians will release a full statement this summer. The statement released today explains, “human sexuality is an objective biological binary trait: ‘XY’ and ‘XX’ are genetic markers of health — not genetic markers of a disorder.”
It's so cute to see another /pol/tard so excited about non-news. You can almost imagine their hands trembling as they copy/paste the link, their minds racing..."Yes! Validation! This article will show those fags once and for all!" Adorable.
>>5900330
The American College of Pediatricians is comprised of about two dozen Christian conservative medical doctors who hate faggots. They formed this "college" in the early 2000's in protest against gay adoption.
>the moar you know
>>5900364
Are you trying to say organisations actually call themselves by some neutral sunding friendly name whilst in reality being heavily biased?
You see some inconspicious name like: "American Family Association" and then they turn out to be a neo-nazi group who wants to promote "aryan family values" or something.
>>5900330
Why do people care so much about genders?
It'll be less embarrassing if you just talk to a therapist about it now.
>>5900330
This thread is problematic and triggering.
>>5900383
Yes. This is why morons will believe anything such organizations spew out. If it sounds official and governmental, people accept it as truth and fact.
Not one person would have even picked up on the story if it came from an organization called "Pediatricians Against Homosexuals".
>>5900330
It's obvious that it is a issue that derives from a person's brain makeup and IDEALLY it should be treated as such, but until we can find something effective sex change surgery can be used to aid.
The issue we need toworry about are people promoting sex change surgery and denying scientists who try to look into the heart of the issue.
We had this thread just yesterday and you fucks.
I'm not anti trans, but could someone tell me how we can reasonably know a child is trans? I'm talking about first graders etc.
>>5900996
You can't. That's why when a professional thinks there's a big chance a kid is trans they give them a (revesrible) treatment to stop the effects of puberty until they are older and can confirm.
Just like infant circumcision, amirite College of Pediatricians?
>>5900996
>>5900921
>American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds) is a socially conservative association of pediatricians and other healthcare professionals in the United States. The College was founded in 2002 by a group of pediatricians including Joseph Zanga, a past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), as a protest against the AAP's support for adoption by gay couples.[1][2] The group's membership has been estimated at between 60 and 200 members.
They aren't scientists, just a disgraced group of about sixty doctors who tried naming themselves after a respected group. Pathetic.
>>5900330
http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/hod/a08resolutions.pdf
“An established body of medical research demonstrates the effectiveness and medical necessity of mental health care, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery as forms of therapeutic treatment for many people diagnosed with GID ... Therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the AMA supports public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender identity disorder.”
>>5901423
Why are you quoting me?
Your post is irrelevant.
>>5901384
>You can't. That's why when a professional thinks there's a big chance a kid is trans they give them a (revesrible) treatment to stop the effects of puberty until they are older and can confirm.
And you see no problem in stopping the effects of puberty on a child?
>>5902114
if they want it to be harmlessly and reversibly delayed a few extra years while they make up their minds? yes, no problem at all.
>>5902102
You aren't too bright if you're decreeing that all doctors doctors save for a tiny fringe group that talks about how they exist to fight gays lie.
>>5902114
Not stopping, reversibly delaying where they won't suffer in growth at all and could back away and go back to normal whenever they want.
It's also no more hazardous than placebo. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474442210701824
>American College of Pediatricians
>a socially conservative association of pediatricians founded as a protest against the AAP's support for adoption by gay couples
>Zanga has described ACPeds as a group "with Judeo-Christian, traditional values"
>Support for abstinence until marriage sex education
>Opposition to abortion and euthanasia;
>Slogan: "The Best For Children"
>>5900330
>organization of outcast doctors formed for the purpose of working against "the gays" says something bad about part of lgbt
very surprise
much unexpected
>>5902145
I said zip about the institution, though.
>>5902141
Anon, please, there is very little research on side effects and long term effects of such a practice overall. Long term wait could lead to things such as sterility but simple delays can be far less drastic in effect. Given what you're messing with and the little research on side effects I wouldn't be so careless as to call it "harmless".
I am okay with the practice insofar as it seems effective but I find out outright carelessness to think it's harmless and entirely reversible. Especially when puberty suppression effects more than your muscles and organs but your brain development as well.
>>5902217
Gah, typo.
>puberty suppression effects more than...
"puberty effects more than", rather.
So sorry.
We had this very same thread just yesterday and all it resulted in was transphobes covering their ears and ignoring both the fact that the "American College of Pediatricians" is a right wing fringe group that was initially founded by a handful of doctors as a means to oppose the rights of homosexuals and the fact that the much larger and ethically reliable American Academy of Pediatrics supports supportive access to health care for gay and transgender youth. Just a quick google search will give you some info on how this process works for adolescents and how well off they are in the long term during treatment.
>https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/AAP-Supports-Access-and-Health-Care-for-Sexual-Minority-Youth.aspx
>http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/132/1/198
>http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/02/24/peds.2015-3223
>https://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/transgender-kids-show-consistent-gender-identity-across-measures.html
>http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/09/02/peds.2013-2958.abstract
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3114100/
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9031580
>>5902217
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474442210701824
It isn't hazardous, and it's been tested for two decades and had zip impact on cognitive development or organ health.
Kids who underwent delay like Andrej just grew to be taller and healthier than their siblings.
>>5902291
Where does your link defend that at all?
The clearer interpretation of its findings read as follows:
>48 weeks of treatment with leuprorelin did not show significant effects on swallowing function in patients with spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy, although it was well tolerated. Disease duration might influence the efficacy of leuprorelin and thus further clinical trials with sensitive outcome measures should be done in subpopulations of patients.
That's extremely limited in scope and nigh irrelevant given the point you're trying to defend.
>>5902217
Puberty suppression isn't only used for trans kids.
Do you suggest we stop all usage of puberty suppression?
While we're at it, cancer treatment is very unhealthy, so we should probably stop it as well.
>>5902378
>Do you suggest we stop all usage of puberty suppression?
The post you're responding to literally has in it "I am okay with the practice insofar as it seems effective".
Don't shit your pants and think you're dealing with an intelligible redneck at the first sign of dissent.
>>5902362
>There were no significant differences in the number of drug-related adverse events between groups (57 of 100 in the leuprorelin group and 54 of 99 in the placebo group; p=0·727).
Do you know what a phase one trial is?
It cleared those long ago and all these repeated studies where they take half dead patients and even in them it's harmless just repeats that.
Treat it as adinfinatum retests of Phase1 where it's consistently shown to be no more dangerous than saline.
>>5902394
Your going into conspiracy theories to try to defend a point that you don't even dare to openly defend.
Your whole post is pointless.
>>5902394
>dissent
You're talking about some fictional heroic scientists being muzzled by the Illuminati when in real life the only people backing your stance are a batch of crackpots who blame AIDS on Gay-Straight Alliances.
Not even kidding.
>>5902416
This is getting silly, man.
My entire point since the beginning was that it seems effective but given what it works with it is nothing to consider harmless and should be applied with care. The fact you think this is conspiracy theorizing is testament to how biased you are in this conversation. Hopefully you won't join >>5902449 and say I'm defending the institution that the thread is about when I have not said ANYTHING in support of the institution whatsoever. You're seriously just jumping at the first sign of dissent. I get that the LGBT community gets that a lot, so it's expected, but that doesn't make it justified.
In the immortal words of Ice Cube:
>Check yo'self before you wreck yo'self
>>5902403
>There were no significant differences in the number of drug-related adverse events between groups (57 of 100 in the leuprorelin group and 54 of 99 in the placebo group; p=0·727).
Yes, and this line is in direct relation to the analysis on the reduction in barium residue mentioned the sentence before. It is silly to say that this one study controls every possible variable in the entire body in relation to the drug itself. It's a study on a very specific and important thing but it's not at large a claim as you wish it to be. The interpretation of the findings say just that much.
Meanwhile you have visible dangers that need be monitored so we cannot be careless with such a prescription.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8867506
http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/8651006
>>5902574
Uh, but your brave scientists from >>5900921
Don't you want to support their good fight?
>>5902574
And that said, the true nature of side effects of both the medicine and its application (particular in that of suspending puberty) need be studied more. >>5902403 is right that the specific medicine being used in the study has been thoroughly examined but its application is what needs to be examined more, particularly in light of known side effects of the medicine generally.
That we are only recently getting studies out there that the practice itself is viable and effective is testament to how far we are from fully examining its long term effects.
>>5902574
>"It's just a single study"
>have visible dangers
>In a 35 year old woman
>Not peer reviewed or controlled
>N of 1
Uh, hypocritical at all?
They deprived a middle age woman of estrogen and induced premature menopause.
http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/101/19/2258.short
Litterally, every effect can be attributed to menopause. Delaying puberty by a year or two is hardly harmful considering the Europeans have later puberty due to low fat.
>It is silly to say that this one study controls every possible variable
It's three hundred patients is certainly more relevant than your N-1 anecdotes.
It's also coming ontop of phase 1, 2 & 3 trials that already established its safety and simply replicates it's effects. You're demanding we pretend those trials were never carried out.
>>5902609
>examining its long term effects
You're in open denial now.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/09/02/peds.2013-2958.abstract
They've already carried out longitudinal studies and found it to be quite safe for this use. Your argument hinges on begging the question.
>>5902607
...
Read what >>5900921 says about scientists:
>The issue we need to worry about are people promoting sex change surgery and denying scientists who try to look into the heart of the issue.
This is not defending the legitimacy of the association nor even speaking on the core point that the association considering sex change/hormonal practices as a risk or child abuse is right or wrong. I simply said that "the issue we need to worry about is" people who only promote solutions that rely on the body and deny trying to resolve this issue where it stems in the brain.
I have no problem with either solution and this says nothing really about the association the thread is about whatsoever. I think it's best to resolve the complication as effectively as possible, which is precisely why I hold my view.
>>5902648
I think what they're trying to say is that there really aren't people trying to shut down investigation into "alternative treatments", that's just an excuse the conversion therapy crowd makes up when their laughable "studies" get criticized for being unscientific. The real problem is that fixing the brain isn't currently a problem that can be attacked directly right now; we know what part of the brain causes gender identity, but we really need to wait for a revolution in brain surgery techniques before we can even consider fixing the problem.
>>5902630
>Uh, hypocritical at all?
For goodness sake, man. I literally NEVER SAID OR IMPLIED "It's just a single study". I said it was a study on specific effects and hardly useful for your main point that includes all possible side-effects and how there are none.
The only hypocrisy you mention comes from your own disingenuously applied premises.
>Delaying puberty by a year or two is hardly harmful considering the Europeans have later puberty due to low fat.
And here we've gone from "harmless" to "hardly harmful". No doubt slight use will lead to slight effects by comparison but my entire point was that it is not harmless and should be done with care and not thought to be something entirely reversible right out the get-go.
And you are right about the menopause thing, it could be precisely that, but there is very little in the way of studies to even check if suspending puberty (for whatever length) could give greater risk of osteoporosis. And the little amount of studies on that kind of side effect correlates to what I have been already saying >>5902609 and >>5902217
That side effects have little in the way of research and so we shouldn't be so careless about the effects of treatment. I get it that people want to tout "it's okay" to ward of dissenters but we cannot be so careless about developing treatments and medicine.
>It's three hundred patients is certainly more relevant than your N-1 anecdotes.
The sample size does not matter when they're trying to control for two very different things. Your study you used did not back up what you were trying to say. That's the beginning and end of it.
Part 1
>>5902853
Part 2
>It's also coming ontop of phase 1, 2 & 3 trials that already established its safety and simply replicates it's effects. You're demanding we pretend those trials were never carried out.
On Leuprorelin, the drug of question that we've been speaking about? Yes, most definitely. On the practice of puberty suspension no matter what medicine used? No, it really has not. These studies such as the one in >>5902639 are extremely recent and still no late into testing itself. You can grasp that by the kind of findings they gave.
And no, the line
>That we are only recently getting studies out there that the practice itself is viable and effective is testament to how far we are from fully examining its long term effects.
does not mean there are no long term studies out there.
This is getting silly so I'll give you the last word.
>>5902853
>And here we've gone from "harmless" to "hardly harmful"
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/09/02/peds.2013-2958.abstract
Harmless
>>5902853
>when they're trying to control for two very different things
When they carry out the safety trials like in Phase 1, it doesn't matter what you're treating them for. Simply that it's established to be harmless. Fact is it doesn't matter if you use half dead patients or not, it isn't dangerous.
>>5902853
>The sample size does not matter when they're trying to control for two very different things. Your study you used did not back up what you were trying to say. That's the beginning and end of it.
There really isn't any case where a sample size of 1 provides useful statistical information.
>>5901394
>comparing modern medicine to forcing your son to be a girl
>>5898649
I think this might be relevant to your interests, OP
>>5900364
Yeah, and? Graduate-level academia is comprised of mostly liberals and progressives, who push narratives that fit their own ideologies.
>>5901423
>unironically using Wikipedia
>a website with a heavy-left userbase that shuts out opposing viewpoints on social and political issues.
>>5902178
Again, there are plenty of far-left organizations that promote issues that you favor, but I never see you critiquing them on their biases.
>>5903795
>My ideas don't hold up to scrutiny
>On Wikipedia
Haha.
>>5903087
Don't know what you're talking about, but the only one in favor of FORCING children to be anything is the anti-trans crowd, who think that someone being AMAB means they should be forced to be a boy.
>>5903795
Do you have any actual critique of the medical establishment other than "hurr durr librul bias"? Because when WE criticize the far right's anti-trans propaganda, we don't just say "it's biased so let's ignore it" WE POINT OUT WHAT IS FACTUALLY WRONG WITH THEIR CLAIMS. Like, you know Dr. Paul McHugh? The guy from Johns Hopkins who claimed sex changes are ineffective? The guy's a Christian fundamentalist who thinks abortion is unacceptable even in the case of underage rape victims. That's plenty of material to make an ad hominem attack against him. But that's not the argument we use - the argument we use is that the studies he cites don't even say what he claims they do.
>>5903803
Wikipedia has annual "Edit-a-thons" where they make Wikipedia fit into the leftist/feminist narrative
On a scale of 1-10 for trustworthyness, Wikipedia is about a 9 for non-political stuff (given correct citations), but for political shit it goes down to a 1.
>>5904386
Okay, so you reject the claim that the ACP was founded specifically to oppose gay adoption?
>>5904396
No, I'm just saying that you shouldn't use Wikipedia as a source for political shit, it's proven inumerous times that it's not trustworthy at all
Also kill yourself you strawmanning tranny
>>5904400
Okay but regardless of whether Wikipedia is biased or not, the ACP still is an anti-LGBT organization so I don't see why we should trust them to tell the truth on trans stuff.
>>5900330
I wish I could go back in time and make myself a girl
>>5901437
>Citing long discredited AMA
>citing non peer reviewed study
nice biased sources with absolutely zero credibility
>>5903795
>medical school and neurology is a plot by the liberal media!
Hilarious you would blame apolitical hard sciences as brainwashing. Studying natural law can't stop just cause it triggers you.
>>5904642
Your "study" wasn't even peer reviewed and all medical groups call them a fringe group.
On the other hand the AMA cites peer reviews studies.
Op just take out your bible and scream about you love of Allah, already.
>>5904642
>Citing long discredited AMA
Deluded
>The American Medical Association (AMA), founded in 1847 and incorporated in 1897,[3] is the largest association of physicians—both MDs and DOs—and medical students in the United States.[4
>The AMA's stated mission is to promote the art and science of medicine for the betterment of the public health, to advance the interests of physicians and their patients, to promote public health, to lobby for legislation favorable to physicians and patients, and to raise money for medical education. The Association also publishes the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), which has the largest circulation of any weekly medical journal in the world.[5]
>>5900385
because some insane idiots think you should be putting kids on hormones and playing with their genitals before they're old enough to tie their shoes.
>>5905700
You are deluded in the extreme. Cite even one case of that. Just one.
>>5905727
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2043345/The-California-boy-11-undergoing-hormone-blocking-treatment.html
Say it with me now
Trannies B T F O
>>5906478
Tabloid, and it's the 100% reversible thing that puts off by 6 mo.
Keep crying about how the AMA lies sad little man.
>>5906478
>hormone blocking
It's just blocking puberty temporarily. The kid gets to wait and see if they still feel trans in a few more years, to make sure it isn't a phase.
If it was, they just take them off the blockers and the kid just has a late puberty, no differently than if the kid naturally had a late puberty.
If they are trans, then that would save them from a lot of pain going through the wrong puberty, MtFs get a much better chance of passing without going the effects of testosterone, and FtMs don't develop breasts, so they don't have to get surgery to remove them.
>>5906478
The child, at the time of the news article, was:
Old enough to tie their own shoelaces,
Not being placed on hormones, but rather blockers, and
Not receiving any genital surgery.
Your cited example contained none of the things you were asked to cite a single example of. There are no participation awards to be handed out here.
>>5906660
>>5906585
>>5906504
D A M A G E C O N T R O L
>>5900330
Is OP addicted to confirmation bias?
>>5906673
You failed to defend your statements completely. Why are you OK with that?
>>5906478
>>5906673
It's nothing more than typically tabloid exaggeration. Despite the talk of "sex changes", the only treatment done at this point is hormone blockers, i.e. what the vast majority of medical professionals recommend as treatment for gender-dysphoric adolescents. Even HRT isn't being done at this point, and SRS isn't mentioned at all. The article calls this treatment "controversial", which it isn't, and implies that it may increase suicide risk, but the only "evidence" they can provide to support that claim is that gender variant children have an increased suicide rate. No attempt is even made to connect the suicide rate to the use of blockers.
>>5906673
You were asked to provide a single example of this:
>some insane idiots think you should be putting kids on hormones and playing with their genitals before they're old enough to tie their shoes.
All you could provide was an article about a gender dysphoric adolescent being put on blockers. Which doesn't even remotely fit the claims you made.
>>5904396
No just using a non-sequitur to distract from not being able to support their opinion.
When in doubt whine about da libruls.
>>5905700
>putting kids on hormones and playing with their genitals before they're old enough to tie their shoes
This factually does not happen in the actual real-life medicine of transition.
Are you so upset because you've mixed up your paranoid delusions with reality?
Are there some medications you're supposed to be taking?
lmao I think lgbt is the easiest board to troll...
>>5907238
Well if you openly admit to breaking global rules, then we can just get this over and report. Have a nice vacation from the site.
>>5907288
>pointing out how naive posters are is against the global rules
feel free to report me if it gets you hard m8
