Any argument that doesn't discuss Type I errors and Type II errors, and disclose the n and the p in the studies isn't an argument; it's just chanting tribal slogans Related: there are basically zero arguments, pro or con, out there. Two groups of monkeys chanting is exhausting.https://twitter.com/voxdotcom/status/1054412075483701248 …
-
-
so if I had to bet $1, I'd guess that some of it is attention seeking / madness of the crowds, some is real, and some is mental illness. Like cancer: 1,000 causes, no 1 solution
-
If you haven't already, read up on Dr Ken Zucker and his recent winning lawsuit against CAMH in Toronto. He's one of the few who actually cared about the science when working with gender dysphoric children:https://nationalpost.com/news/camh-reaches-settlement-with-former-head-of-gender-identity-clinic …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, as with the causes of cancer. And in many cases the etiology is likely similarly unknowable. But there are discrete outcomes that can be measured - transition or not, surgery/hormones/both/neither, desistance, re-transition, mental health (the biggie).
-
yep, agreed the point I'm making, tho, is that even w that, the numbers could be tricky Might find that for intervention X, 1/3 w result A, 1/3 w result B, and 1/3 w result C ... so you'd conclude X (perhaps "always transition" or "never transition" or whatever) is bad but >
- 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.