They are also only using letters and notes from physicians informing the gender clinic of an event, so events could certainly be undercounted, especially if they occurred out of town.
-
-
Show this thread
-
These findings, while not surprising to those of us already paying attention to this issue, are significant. Will they exclude this info from informed consents moving forward? Will they continue to say "risks are unknown" or "risks are small?"
Show this thread -
Ten thousand malpractice lawyers have just seen the bat signal.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
TRAs WILL say "the heart attack risk for transmen is simply the same as it is for cis men." Yet, notably, the transmen's risk of STROKE is higher either women's and men's (even if just shy of statistical significance at the tender age of 24). Screwed on both accounts.
-
Yeah, it's close...after only about 4 years on average. That's not very long on a lifelong drug. (Diabetes significantly increases heart disease too, and they are independently increasing their odds of that.) All of this keeps going up over time. It's a mess.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Of course: this article might be helpful, as is the fact that the makers of Vioxx shelled out $4.85 BILLION to settle claims. https://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/reporter/index.html?ID=2305 …
End of conversation
-
-
-
And we are talking about YOUNG women, right? Median age 23?
-
Yes. They age matched the control numbers, but yeah we aren't looking at data from many people in their 60s-70s. And there is no reason the risk would increase linearly with age. It would increase exponentially. Plus, once you've had one event, odds of more go WAY up.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.