I’m a licensed professional counselor and it makes me want to resign my license. I have been trying to awaken people to this absolute nonsense for years and have had little success. In no other professional practice would a child lead treatment planning.
Although the evidence is sad, I am happy that people will be enlightened and move toward the direction direction of sane, ethical practice again.
If history has taught us anything, it is that it generally takes an atrocity to expose and correct systemic rot that run as deep as this. Despite the horrors that gender ideology has wrought on our youth, hopefully the aftermath in years to come will include not only measures to prevent these kinds of hormone experiments and sexual mutilations from ever happening again, but also a deep dive into the corruptions that plague our medical and research practices. It's sad that it had to come to this, but as with all the other dark stains in our history, this one too will spur a positive leap forward.
This is exactly the same false legitimacy that the DEI crew have employed. Let’s hope the gender ideologues collapse under a similar series of plagiarism scandals
How can we get the attention of the national news media in the US? Only a couple of weeks ago, The Five on Fox News (a show with very healthy ratings) discussed the UK NHS's banning of puberty blockers, yet the democrat on the panel, Jessica Tarlov, immediately leapt to the defense of their use in the USA by citing the AMA and American Academy of Pediatrics as authorities that recommend them. Is there anything to be done other than screaming at the TV? I did post comments on their X post for that segment but they probably didn't read it.
Thank you, Christina! I appreciate your thorough and precisely articulated work. The so called evidence for affirmation only was nothing but an enormous circle jerk.
I remember at least 3 years ago listening to a podcast with Dr. Will Malone, an endocrinologist, who explained that, when so-called "gender affirming care" involving the giving of synthetic cross-sex hormones, perhaps preceded by puberty blockers, to minors, was discussed at Endocrine Society conferences, there was NO DEBATE allowed. Nobody spoke on the side of the potential downsides of this new, incredibly shocking form of treatment. Questions were not allowed to be asked. This was, as per Dr. Malone, a huge departure from normal practice when discussing novel treatment plans. A new drug regimen, or testing regimen, for diabetes would prompt debate and discussion of both the positive and negative effects. Not so for "gender" medicine. All of the obvious and not so obvious downsides of synthetic cross-sex hormones were completely left out of the discussion. The Endocrine Society clearly lost its way.
Now, we also know about the WPATH "Standards of Care" and the fact that most of the people within that institution are completely confused about the treatments they are offering, and are spurred on by activists who are not even medical professionals. Discussions of unusual situations, such as people with multiple personality disorder, or non-verbal autistic youngsters, or homeless people seeking vaginoplasties, took place in the presence of individuals who themselves have had these treatments, causing the discussions to be limited and less likely to get at the potential negative side thereof. There was little to no concern for things that should have set off alarms, such as rare liver cancer in at least two female individuals, one a teen and one in her 40s., both on testosterone. It is worth mentioning that the WPATH's latest "Standards of Care" endorse castration to legitimize and normalize "eunuchs." In the end, WPATH forums are like one big Nike ad with the clear message of "Just Do It!"
Now knowing that the Endocrine Society and WPATH cross-referenced each other and colluded in sanctifying extreme body modifications based on no evidence whatsoever, I am angrier than ever. When will this horror end? When will my own daughter realize that there is no "medical consensus" that these treatments are safe, effective and medically necessary to treat a psychological phenomenon involving discomfort with one's sexed body and sex role in society - by teenagers!?
Great. This concept of citation cartels is a really important one, Boghossian and Lindsay (and Pluckrose) describe the related concept of Idea Laundering by Faculties of Grievance Studies, using citation cartels.
If you look at the children targeted for this ,they are the most vulnerable, eg autistic children whose parents are often targeted by snake oil merchants saying we can cure autism and I see this targeting of those with autism as the same, snake oil
This same kind of corruption is found more generally in peer reviewed psychology journals and related publications in any articles related to black and brown ethnic groups and street addicts of any ethnicity. The reporting on quantitative research, to the extent that it happens at all, commonly includes biased, superficial or incompetent reviews of prior investigations, and does not include critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of those studies. Direct instructions are typically given to the reader to accept without any evidence that a range of mental health problems in black, brown and addicted populations are all directly and completely attributable to "minority stress." On the American Psychological Association site I found "review articles" on race and crime in which the authors claimed that murder rates in black neighborhoods are entirely a function of the level of poverty and not ethnicity of the killers, without providing any evidence for that claim. In technical terms, the reviewers claimed that there was a "main effect" for level of income, but not an "interaction effect" for ethnicity x income. What is actually found is that people of various ethnicities in the U.S., when income is held constant, show variable rates of murder committed by their members. Murder is primarily perpetrated by males between about 15-35 years old, and rates are highest in large urban neighborhoods with high concentrations of black people. Accurate reporting should indicate effects on rate of murders for age, sex of the killer, his socioeconomic status, his ethnicity and ethnic concentration makeup of the neighborhood where crimes occurred.
In articles that review public health interventions for various populations many authors recommend interventions based on "harm reduction" ideology, without offering evidence that the "harm reduction" strategies they recommend are safe and effective. These strategies usually amount to enabling of the problem behaviors that led to the existing harms to the population being served. For example, decriminalizing hard drugs, supplying addicts with drug paraphrenalia (and even a steady supply of free drugs) is recommended to reduce harms like incarceration, overdoses and even withdrawal symptoms. In actual practice strategies like these have been associated with massive increases in the number of addicts on the streets in the cities that implement them, as well as increases in the number of overdose deaths.
The above behaviors on the part of authors of research reports and reviews violate scientific ethics regarding presentation of all findings, and reveal the authors' unwillingness or inability to critically analyze the full scope of research previously conducted on the same and related topics. The papers on recommendations for public health programs violate both scientific ethics for program evaluation and clinical ethics regarding documented safety and effectiveness of interventions.
That this is happening has been obvious for a long time, but seeing an actual analysis making clear how dishonest and manipulative these folks are is still shocking. These are not doctors nor scientists, they should all be stripped of any MD or licensure. Then have their tenure revoked, and then have criminal and civil charges launched against them by their 10s of thousands of victims. But that will never happen...Until we actually rip these scumbags out of power, they will not stop. Wake up, the time is very late.
This is of course only one unethical element of many in this atrocity of medical experimentation gone amok.
I would also advise writing directly to part of the constellation of perpetrators such as trans Lynn Conway who has been advocating for this experimentation for decades, he has a very powerful voice in the community.
A byline to this is AI, as in artificial intelligence. Many including writers here have worried publicly about “poisoning” the internet with AI’s producing false content which in turn is incorporated into the next generation of AI tools.
I’ve stated for sometime that humans are quite capable of poisoning research by fabricating results and then citing false research in a shell game which leads to nothing. A wonderful example is (phenomenally) bad, discredited COVID research by Jab Battacharya of Stanford now being called groundbreaking evidence of COVID “coverup”. I watched the very short evolution of his team’s ludicrously elementary arithmetic error cite its way into condemnation of COVID epidemiological efforts.
No artificial intelligence required at all, only malignant intellectual malevolence.
Your example of poison research should invalidate and cause systemic retraction of all articles citing either of the two organizations, and discrediting of all related “research”.
The scandal of plagiarism at Harvard is minor compared to this.
I’m a licensed professional counselor and it makes me want to resign my license. I have been trying to awaken people to this absolute nonsense for years and have had little success. In no other professional practice would a child lead treatment planning.
Although the evidence is sad, I am happy that people will be enlightened and move toward the direction direction of sane, ethical practice again.
This bullshit has been going on in the social and behavioral sciences for some time. It's beyond disappointing that it has metastasized.
If history has taught us anything, it is that it generally takes an atrocity to expose and correct systemic rot that run as deep as this. Despite the horrors that gender ideology has wrought on our youth, hopefully the aftermath in years to come will include not only measures to prevent these kinds of hormone experiments and sexual mutilations from ever happening again, but also a deep dive into the corruptions that plague our medical and research practices. It's sad that it had to come to this, but as with all the other dark stains in our history, this one too will spur a positive leap forward.
This is exactly the same false legitimacy that the DEI crew have employed. Let’s hope the gender ideologues collapse under a similar series of plagiarism scandals
How can we get the attention of the national news media in the US? Only a couple of weeks ago, The Five on Fox News (a show with very healthy ratings) discussed the UK NHS's banning of puberty blockers, yet the democrat on the panel, Jessica Tarlov, immediately leapt to the defense of their use in the USA by citing the AMA and American Academy of Pediatrics as authorities that recommend them. Is there anything to be done other than screaming at the TV? I did post comments on their X post for that segment but they probably didn't read it.
Thank you, Christina! I appreciate your thorough and precisely articulated work. The so called evidence for affirmation only was nothing but an enormous circle jerk.
I remember at least 3 years ago listening to a podcast with Dr. Will Malone, an endocrinologist, who explained that, when so-called "gender affirming care" involving the giving of synthetic cross-sex hormones, perhaps preceded by puberty blockers, to minors, was discussed at Endocrine Society conferences, there was NO DEBATE allowed. Nobody spoke on the side of the potential downsides of this new, incredibly shocking form of treatment. Questions were not allowed to be asked. This was, as per Dr. Malone, a huge departure from normal practice when discussing novel treatment plans. A new drug regimen, or testing regimen, for diabetes would prompt debate and discussion of both the positive and negative effects. Not so for "gender" medicine. All of the obvious and not so obvious downsides of synthetic cross-sex hormones were completely left out of the discussion. The Endocrine Society clearly lost its way.
Now, we also know about the WPATH "Standards of Care" and the fact that most of the people within that institution are completely confused about the treatments they are offering, and are spurred on by activists who are not even medical professionals. Discussions of unusual situations, such as people with multiple personality disorder, or non-verbal autistic youngsters, or homeless people seeking vaginoplasties, took place in the presence of individuals who themselves have had these treatments, causing the discussions to be limited and less likely to get at the potential negative side thereof. There was little to no concern for things that should have set off alarms, such as rare liver cancer in at least two female individuals, one a teen and one in her 40s., both on testosterone. It is worth mentioning that the WPATH's latest "Standards of Care" endorse castration to legitimize and normalize "eunuchs." In the end, WPATH forums are like one big Nike ad with the clear message of "Just Do It!"
Now knowing that the Endocrine Society and WPATH cross-referenced each other and colluded in sanctifying extreme body modifications based on no evidence whatsoever, I am angrier than ever. When will this horror end? When will my own daughter realize that there is no "medical consensus" that these treatments are safe, effective and medically necessary to treat a psychological phenomenon involving discomfort with one's sexed body and sex role in society - by teenagers!?
Excellent work. Thank you.
Great. This concept of citation cartels is a really important one, Boghossian and Lindsay (and Pluckrose) describe the related concept of Idea Laundering by Faculties of Grievance Studies, using citation cartels.
If you look at the children targeted for this ,they are the most vulnerable, eg autistic children whose parents are often targeted by snake oil merchants saying we can cure autism and I see this targeting of those with autism as the same, snake oil
This same kind of corruption is found more generally in peer reviewed psychology journals and related publications in any articles related to black and brown ethnic groups and street addicts of any ethnicity. The reporting on quantitative research, to the extent that it happens at all, commonly includes biased, superficial or incompetent reviews of prior investigations, and does not include critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of those studies. Direct instructions are typically given to the reader to accept without any evidence that a range of mental health problems in black, brown and addicted populations are all directly and completely attributable to "minority stress." On the American Psychological Association site I found "review articles" on race and crime in which the authors claimed that murder rates in black neighborhoods are entirely a function of the level of poverty and not ethnicity of the killers, without providing any evidence for that claim. In technical terms, the reviewers claimed that there was a "main effect" for level of income, but not an "interaction effect" for ethnicity x income. What is actually found is that people of various ethnicities in the U.S., when income is held constant, show variable rates of murder committed by their members. Murder is primarily perpetrated by males between about 15-35 years old, and rates are highest in large urban neighborhoods with high concentrations of black people. Accurate reporting should indicate effects on rate of murders for age, sex of the killer, his socioeconomic status, his ethnicity and ethnic concentration makeup of the neighborhood where crimes occurred.
In articles that review public health interventions for various populations many authors recommend interventions based on "harm reduction" ideology, without offering evidence that the "harm reduction" strategies they recommend are safe and effective. These strategies usually amount to enabling of the problem behaviors that led to the existing harms to the population being served. For example, decriminalizing hard drugs, supplying addicts with drug paraphrenalia (and even a steady supply of free drugs) is recommended to reduce harms like incarceration, overdoses and even withdrawal symptoms. In actual practice strategies like these have been associated with massive increases in the number of addicts on the streets in the cities that implement them, as well as increases in the number of overdose deaths.
The above behaviors on the part of authors of research reports and reviews violate scientific ethics regarding presentation of all findings, and reveal the authors' unwillingness or inability to critically analyze the full scope of research previously conducted on the same and related topics. The papers on recommendations for public health programs violate both scientific ethics for program evaluation and clinical ethics regarding documented safety and effectiveness of interventions.
That this is happening has been obvious for a long time, but seeing an actual analysis making clear how dishonest and manipulative these folks are is still shocking. These are not doctors nor scientists, they should all be stripped of any MD or licensure. Then have their tenure revoked, and then have criminal and civil charges launched against them by their 10s of thousands of victims. But that will never happen...Until we actually rip these scumbags out of power, they will not stop. Wake up, the time is very late.
I wonder how many medical guidelines are truly evidence based.
Beautifully written.
This is of course only one unethical element of many in this atrocity of medical experimentation gone amok.
I would also advise writing directly to part of the constellation of perpetrators such as trans Lynn Conway who has been advocating for this experimentation for decades, he has a very powerful voice in the community.
A byline to this is AI, as in artificial intelligence. Many including writers here have worried publicly about “poisoning” the internet with AI’s producing false content which in turn is incorporated into the next generation of AI tools.
I’ve stated for sometime that humans are quite capable of poisoning research by fabricating results and then citing false research in a shell game which leads to nothing. A wonderful example is (phenomenally) bad, discredited COVID research by Jab Battacharya of Stanford now being called groundbreaking evidence of COVID “coverup”. I watched the very short evolution of his team’s ludicrously elementary arithmetic error cite its way into condemnation of COVID epidemiological efforts.
No artificial intelligence required at all, only malignant intellectual malevolence.
Your example of poison research should invalidate and cause systemic retraction of all articles citing either of the two organizations, and discrediting of all related “research”.
The scandal of plagiarism at Harvard is minor compared to this.
This is beyond maddening and I hope these people and organizations are held accountable.
My niece’s 16 year old daughter is demanding to be called “they.” Let’s hope it goes no farther.