The LGBTQ protest thread

[Butler1000]

Are you actually serious? Did you even read the big box at the top of the page that says "As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more about our disclaimer." It's not a journal. It's a database that links to articles and journals and straight up says so.

Did you even look at the source of the article you linked though? First click the DOI link right below the blue "Archives of Sexual Behaviour" banner. It'll take you to the original source, where right at the top it says "Letter to the editor".

This is a letter from a Micheal Biggs, BA., PhD. to the editor of the a journal called Pediatrics , but the letter wasn't accepted by the journal so it was posted online. He's a sociologist, not a medical doctor or a psychiatrist or an endocrinologist. He has zero valid qualifications and what you linked is not his study but his unqualified, unreviewed remarks on another study. And given that you don't understand the difference between a study, a journal, an archive, a database, and a website, you're not qualified to evaluate it.

I know exactly what happened. You googled what you wanted to prove (immediate confirmation bias), find a link that backed you up, any immediately posted it and now you're stuck looking foolish and trying to defend your rash behavior in not actually looking into what you found.

You prove over and over and over that you not only don't know what you're talking about, but that you don't even fully read or look into things. Do you know how dangerous it is to push opinions based on such poor research? We're talking about children's lives here. Do you not care about that? You care so little you can't even read full sentences or investigate the sources of things you find? Are their lives worth so little effort?

Jesus Christ, have some fucking empathy and take at least 3 minutes to fully read things before you condemn children to half-formed, ill-advised opinions.

What he did was critique the methodology. It was included because they felt its valid enough to publish. Ate you stating you think this govt website published false information?

The simple premise is that the studies are flawed due to a lack of proper method used. He explanation clearly shows that.

My empathy is for long term proper treatment.

 

[Butler1000]

View attachment 243463

So you are claiming trans people are capable of procreation after gender reassignment surgery?

 

[Butler1000]

The expression "quote mining" comes to mind

Pretty direct quote. And definitive.

 

[DinkleMouse]

What he did was critique the methodology.

He did more than that. And different fields have different methodologies.

It was included because they felt its valid enough to publish. Ate you stating you think this govt website published false information?

So you're saying the websites own disclaimer is wrong? You can't really be this obtuse. Seriously?

Besides, it was an open letter. Meaning the journal rejected it and the author took it upon themselves to publish it. No one, except the author, felt it was valid enough to publish or it would have been included in Pediatrics.

 

[Butler1000]

He did more than that. And different fields have different methodologies.



So you're saying the websites own disclaimer is wrong? You can't really be this obtuse. Seriously?

Besides, it was an open letter. Meaning the journal rejected it and the author took it upon themselves to publish it. No one, except the author, felt it was valid enough to publish or it would have been included in Pediatrics.

The US govt did. Disclaimers are nice but publishing is stating you think the article makes valid points. Unless you think the US govt would publish false medical information?

 

[Butler1000]

FDA adds new warning for commonly used puberty blockers | Alabama News

The Food and Drug Administration is warning of potential side effects in certain puberty-blocking drugs used in transgender treatments. | Alabama News

1819news.com

Here is a new warning about side effects including sterilization. From the FDA. Which btw HAS NOT approved puberty blockers for transgender minors.

Basically doctors are doing the same thing they did with Ivermactin.

 

[Butler1000]

England's health service says it won't give puberty blockers to children at gender clinics

LONDON (AP) — The publicly funded health service in England has decided it will not routinely offer puberty-blocking drugs to children at gender identity clinics, saying more evidence is needed about the potential benefits and harms. The National Health Service said Friday that “outside of a...

halifax.citynews.ca

This one is from the British NHS. They are awaiting clinical trials. Like any other drug. Beyond that they are banning except "exceptional" circumstances.

 

[Butler1000]

Basically Dinklemouse you can't claim proper studies were done when they obviously weren't presented either to the FDA or NHS for approval for widespread use. Its buyer beware.

And in Britain until proper studies(one starting next year there, one underway in Canada now) are done they won't recommend it.

Game set match.

 

[DinkleMouse]

The US govt did. Disclaimers are nice but publishing is stating you think the article makes valid points. Unless you think the US govt would publish false medical information?

You're serious? The US government put a disclaimer saying "we didn't publish this, we're merely linking to it, the fact that we've linked to it doesn't mean we think it's true or correct", and you're seriously going to say that the fact that they've linked to it does indeed mean it's true???

You're not trolling? You legitimately believe that? Why do you think the US Government put that disclaimer if it wasn't true? I'm speechless here. Tell me you're just been an asshat troll and don't legit believe that that, because if you legit believe that then I don't even know how you matriculated from elementary school.

 

[DinkleMouse]

Game set match.

You literally don't know the difference between a study and an open letter, and literally dismiss disclaimers in big boxes on pages you link to. You cannot be trusted to understand anything you find.

If anyone depends on you for anything, may God have mercy on their soul.

Game set match? You're barely drooling on your bib sitting on the sidelines of a ping pong tournament, your definitely not winning any tennis matches.

 

[Butler1000]

You're serious? The US government put a disclaimer saying "we didn't publish this, we're merely linking to it, the fact that we've linked to it doesn't mean we think it's true or correct", and you're seriously going to say that the fact that they've linked to it does indeed mean it's true???

You're not trolling? You legitimately believe that? Why do you think the US Government put that disclaimer if it wasn't true? I'm speechless here. Tell me you're just been an asshat troll and don't legit believe that that, because if you legit believe that then I don't even know how you matriculated from elementary school.

My above links continue to hurt your claims of legitimacy in studies. Two of the largest approval bodies haven't approved them.

 

[DinkleMouse]

My above links continue to hurt your claims of legitimacy in studies. Two of the largest approval bodies haven't approved them.

Your continued defiance of a disclaimer on a website thaslt you reject out of hand and your insistence that an "open letter" is a "published study" continue to hurt you claims of anything you post actually saying what you think it does.

Nothing you have posted up to now has actually said what you said it did or been where you claimed it was. I'm not wasting any more time looking into them to explain to you to try and educate you when you're so dug in you can't even admit that a disclaimer exists for as reason.

As I said, God help anyone that depends on you to make decisions for them. Talk to the ether, because I'm not wasting anymore time talking to someone who literally can't admit they didn't read a disclaimer or didn't read an entire sentence.

So you have any idea how wrong and foolish and idiotic you look? And you claim "game set match"? This isn't a game. It's people's lives, and you can't even admit a disclaimer exists.

Get help, dude. Seriously.

 

[Butler1000]

Your continued defiance of a disclaimer on a website thaslt you reject out of hand and your insistence that an "open letter" is a "published study" continue to hurt you claims of anything you post actually saying what you think it does.

Nothing you have posted up to now has actually said what you said it did or been where you claimed it was. I'm not wasting any more time looking into them to explain to you to try and educate you when you're so dug in you can't even admit that a disclaimer exists for as reason.

As I said, God help anyone that depends on you to make decisions for them. Talk to the ether, because I'm not wasting anymore time talking to someone who literally can't admit they didn't read a disclaimer or didn't read an entire sentence.

So you have any idea how wrong and foolish and idiotic you look? And you claim "game set match"? This isn't a game. It's people's lives, and you can't even admit a disclaimer exists.

Get help, dude. Seriously.

Lol. Run rabbit run. The FDA haven't approved it for use with Transgender kids. The British NHS banned their use until a proper study is complete. Verify it with your own links.

No studies to approve the drug have been done and presented for approvals.

I hope they get them soon. That they come out as safe. But until they do giving them to kids is negligent.

 

[Frankfooter]

Lol. Run rabbit run. The FDA haven't approved it for use with Transgender kids. The British NHS banned their use until a proper study is complete. Verify it with your own links.

No studies to approve the drug have been done and presented for approvals.

I hope they get them soon. That they come out as safe. But until they do giving them to kids is negligent.

You really don't understand how badly you lost this argument, do you?

 

[DinkleMouse]

You really don't understand how badly you lost this argument, do you?

At this point he reminds me of Stolen Valour. Completely exposed, refusing to admit anything. Some people can't be helped.

 

[Valcazar]

Are you actually serious? Did you even read the big box at the top of the page that says "As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more about our disclaimer." It's not a journal. It's a database that links to articles and journals and straight up says so.

You're asking a lot of Butler's reading comprehension here.

I know exactly what happened. You googled what you wanted to prove (immediate confirmation bias), find a link that backed you up, any immediately posted it and now you're stuck looking foolish and trying to defend your rash behavior in not actually looking into what you found.

That would be consistent with Butler's MO.

Besides, it was an open letter. Meaning the journal rejected it and the author took it upon themselves to publish it. No one, except the author, felt it was valid enough to publish or it would have been included in Pediatrics.

I don't think that's quite right.
He did write to Pediatrics and had it rejected, but then got it published by Archives of Sexual Behavior.

Of course, that brings up the issue of the journal that did publish it.

After all, it's the kind of thing that must have popped up on a search Butler did, and given the kind of sources he likes to reinforce his beliefs, the algorithm was likely to serve him something along those lines. That would make one want to dig into any source Butler might cite as a scientific truth... just to be sure. It might be the kind of journal that has developed a reputation on a specific issue of late...

asbopenletter.com

Dit domein kan te koop zijn!

asbopenletter.com

 

[Valcazar]

Basically doctors are doing the same thing they did with Ivermactin.

Oh dear.
Please say more about this analogy.

 

[Butler1000]

You're asking a lot of Butler's reading comprehension here.



That would be consistent with Butler's MO.



I don't think that's quite right.
He did write to Pediatrics and had it rejected, but then got it published by Archives of Sexual Behavior.

Of course, that brings up the issue of the journal that did publish it.

After all, it's the kind of thing that must have popped up on a search Butler did, and given the kind of sources he likes to reinforce his beliefs, the algorithm was likely to serve him something along those lines. That would make one want to dig into any source Butler might cite as a scientific truth... just to be sure. It might be the kind of journal that has developed a reputation on a specific issue of late...

asbopenletter.com

Dit domein kan te koop zijn!

asbopenletter.com

Let m know when the drug gets FDA approval for trans minors.

 

[Butler1000]

Oh dear.
Please say more about this analogy.

You mean prescribing a drug for treatment not approved for usage that way by the FDA?

 

[Butler1000]

At this point he reminds me of Stolen Valour. Completely exposed, refusing to admit anything. Some people can't be helped.

So are puberty blockers approved by the FDA for transgender kids?