This is pay walled so I can’t read the whole thing, but some incredibly important context to the Cass report is that it examined 103 studies on trans youth and rejected 101 of them. Of the 50 studies on hormone blockers and 53 studies on hormone replacement therapy, miraculously the 2 they found to be ‘valid’ just happened to have inconclusive results.
Their excuse for rejecting them is that they weren’t double blind. But the thing is, it’s not always ethical or possible to do double blinds in medicine. If you have evidence that withholding medicine causes harm (guess what all those rejected studies found!!) then you’re never going to convince an ethics review board to let you withhold treatment. Even if it momentarily answers the “concerns” of terminally online transphobic freaks before they start hauling the goal post off somewhere else.
Anyway, Helen Lewis is a well known member of the terminally online transphobic freak club and has no background in any field of science to comment on any aspect of the Cass report, so here’s a breakdown of why the report sucks ass from someone who is qualified: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26895269.2024.2328249
NHS to discontinue delivery of babies until double-blind study is done vs just leaving it in there.
Is there a mirror link of the whole article?
When even The Atlantic is souring on a lefty position, you know the idea is on shaky ground.
Do you think the Atlantic is a lefty mag?
I think you’re confusing it with some other magazine. The Atlantic is for neoliberal centrists. It’s modestly liberal in the way The New Yorker is, but it’s for old, wealthy New England investors.
“We don’t have strong evidence” is not the same as what I think you’ve said.
