This is a follow up post to the two posts recently made about the False Assumptions of current gender science practices. Leor Sapir’s thread below is well worth your time.
+++
What Are We Doing To Our Children?
American Board of Family Medicine – Captured
Place this in the Institutional Capture Column. The ABFM asked the following question in its certification exam:
A 13-year-old who was assigned female at birth has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. His parents fully support their child and affirm his gender as male. On examination the patient has a sexual maturity rating of Tanner stage 3.
Which one of the following steps would be appropriate for optimal support and therapy for this patient?
Companion Posts
+++
Institutional Capture
The Myth of Reliable Research In Pediatric Gender Medicine
A new study identifying flaws in gender medicine research demands urgent attention from the medical community
A new open-access publication, “The Myth of Reliable Research in Pediatric Gender Medicine,” focuses on the two Dutch studies that gave rise to “gender-affirmative” care for youth worldwide. The authors convincingly demonstrate that rather than “solid prospective research” or even the “gold standard” in research, as these studies are frequently described by the proponents of “gender-affirmative care,” the Dutch research suffers from profound, previously unrecognized problems. These problems range from erroneously concluding that gender dysphoria disappeared as a result of “gender-affirmative treatment,” to reporting only the best-case scenario outcomesand failing to properly examine the risks, despite the fact that a significant proportion of the treated sample experienced adverse effects.
+++
Love Refuses To Affirm Confusion