AFAICT, spermarche occurs at variable Tanner stages, but often not prior to Tanner stage 3; menarche is typically at Tanner stage 4. I keep trying to not throw myself back into this because there is absolutely nothing for me to gain here, but it is what it is.
-
-
Replying to @webdevMason @KelseyTuoc
Truth be told, there is one correct answer, Kelsey, and you already have it.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason
Have you found anything indicating that the 96% and 91% numbers are atypical?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @webdevMason
"91% of transgender females had progressed beyond Tanner stage 2 and were offered an opportunity to bank sperm; 96% of transgender males were postmenarchal and were offered a referral to a reproductive endocrinologist at a nearby fertility practice."
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KelseyTuoc
Tanner stage 2 *is not* confirmatory or disconfirmatory for spermarche. Tanner stage 1 is literally "no signs of puberty," so it doesn't make sense to even consider sperm banking prior to stage 2. Postmenarchal AFAB patients are Tanner stage 4 & in a much better position.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason
Right, but "beyond Tanner stage 2" presumably means they're stage 3 or later? Agree that "in Tanner stage 2" wouldn't mean much but that's not what the paper says.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KelseyTuoc
I don't know. I read this as "inclusive of Tanner stages 2 and greater." Either way, not indicative of spermarche, though 3 is significantly higher likelihood than 2. Guidelines for suppression of puberty with blockers call for Tanner stage 2 at minimum, AFAB or AMAB.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @webdevMason @KelseyTuoc
> WPATH guidelines recommend Tanner stage 2 at minimum, but notes that some clinics may require stage 3-4 https://www.wpath.org/media/cms/Documents/SOC%20v7/Standards%20of%20Care_V7%20Full%20Book_English.pdf … > Endocrine Society recommends blockers at Tanner stage 2 https://endocrinenews.endocrine.org/blocking-puberty-in-transgender-youth/ … > UCSF says Tanner stage 2-3 is ideal https://transcare.ucsf.edu/guidelines/youth …
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason
Thanks. Changing my mind towards "the guidelines permit transition early enough that the tradeoff with fertility is in fact quite absolute; few transitions actually occur that early but that does not seem to be because guidelines discourage it". WIll email study authors re >=T2.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
Curious why you think few transitions happen that early? Presumably not because of this study? I'm finding a number of clinical refs that argue for intervention as close to Tanner 2 as possible & having a hard time finding arguments in favor of delay. Fertility rarely discussed.
-
-
Replying to @webdevMason
The average age in the study was 15, which is part of why the T3 or later interpretation seems so likely to me. I think that even if the guidelines say ASAP, in practice wheels grind slowly, and as you observed many clinics do wait for T3.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @KelseyTuoc
The study was conducted at a single pediatric facility. Is there a reason to think it's representative?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 1 more reply
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.