Comment on Review says puberty blocker curb has not led to suicide rise
IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 1 month ago
“We only saw a small rise, so until statistically significant numbers of children kill themselves, the brutality will continue.”
Why is “suicide” the metric for healthcare to begin with? Imagine if dentists acted like this. “No one committed suicide from not receiving a root canal in the last 3 years, so we’ve determined them to be medically unnecessary.”
galmuth@feddit.uk 1 month ago
It’s not used as a healthcare metric. This is just debunking reports that a healthcare policy was directly causing an “explosion” in suicides.
IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Except they also say “The evidence on suicide risk in children and young people with gender dysphoria is generally poor.”
That’s not debunking. That’s denial of the problem.
galmuth@feddit.uk 1 month ago
That’s not denial, it’s looking at the evidence.
mecfs@lemmy.world 1 month ago
More like suggesting there is no reliable evidence.
As the law of funding bias says, only research that corroborates powerful interests will get the funding necessary to create a reliable body of evidence.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_bias
HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 month ago
Plenty of reasons to reconsider this stupid extreme ban, And this is clearly weighing the limited evidence of suicide higher than the lack of evidence of harm.
IE, it’s a bit hypocritical to ban something with no real evidence of harm. Simply because it has not been proven to be safe, And then argure the limited evidence of suicides, is a reason to continue.
But words matter. So no it is not a denial. It is saying the difference between pre ban suicides and post ban suicides is statistically irrelevant. IE the changes are not usable as evidence. (yet as honestly the ban is far too recent for any of this data to be of value)
IzzyScissor@lemmy.world 1 month ago
In the article, they only count 3 minors that have committed suicide since the ban, because they put additional qualifiers like that they had to already be on a specific treatment plan in order to count.
Your preliminary numbers already destroy their argument, which is kind of my point.
ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 month ago
You’ll find the nuance is age