Vanessa's Tranny AMA Blog Thread

How goes with the new shoulder pics, Vanessa ?

Should really repost the videos that were once circulating. They're more honest than pictures.

But I already said that, I even gave the specific example of the trans kids + puberty blockers debate.

Click to expand...

We all ration our attention. I don't think I represent the majority of Americans in any meaningful way aside from basic shit like "I would like functional government please." If I have any priorities, it's that.

Really not trying to do a "gotcha"--but if you are acknowledging now that mutiliating children because SJWs have effectively corrupted a lot of the science around it, is a step too far--then how was the other side not right in their warnings that these people are a new kind of religious zealotry?

Yeah, but the difference is--whether you agree or disagree with the /politics thread or other political forums, the people there usually devote more attention to politics. People in the politics thread know a lot more about the details of politics--again, you can argue their bias ensures they only know one side and thus are wrong or whatever, but they devote a lot more bandwidth to the issue. Most Americans do not. Which is fine, but it also makes it interesting to talk to someone who doesn't devote a lot of his attention to see what gets through anyway.

Vanessa said:

So this is how the cookie crumbles on this... when the data, research, and papers have all been laid out on the table, the last straw of it all is that the evidence points to the powers that be "corrupted" the science around it, is that it?

I ask with sincerity because if we cannot trust the highest echelons of higher learning/doctors/medical experts on fact-driven data and research, then who can you trust in this world? You're essentially setting yourself up for a turtled existence of solipsism when even the esteemed amongst our society is (your words) effectively corrupted.

Click to expand...

Puberty blockers still have not been approved by regulatory agencies due to the lack of long term evidence of their side effects vs benefits. The one paper you linked had a skewed data set because it relied on voluntary, self ID of trans as adults who went through puberty blockers, rather than tracking a proper cohort through to adulthood. They are not the same thing, and the "evidence" of one is not significant.

Right now we are administering off-label medication to children that we know will lead to sterilization and significant loss of sexual function, and other severe side effects (From bone loss on down), and that's just what we know--because these medications were not meant to be used through the healthy window of development, only for precocious puberty. And we're doing it with the scarcest of evidence of benefit. That's not how medicine is supposed to work--if you need to choose harm by doing nothing, or potential harm by doing the wrong thing, you choose the former.

There is no defense of giving off-label medication like this to minors. None.

Vanessa said:

Treatment of Central Precocious Puberty

Long-acting analogs of GnRH (GnRHas) have been the gold-standard treatment of central precocious puberty (CPP) worldwide and have an enviable track record of safety and efficacy. Recent years have witnessed much growth in the availability of longer-acting ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"Long-acting analogs of GnRH (GnRHas) have been the gold-standard treatment of central precocious puberty (CPP) worldwide and have an enviable track record of safety and efficacy."

So again, the question is "who do we trust"? If we cannot trust scientists, researchers, doctors etc.

I'm glad it's you, Lithose, and not the usual canon of retards that come in here wanting a piece of me. You have my respect, therefore you won't get my usual "Lulz I pwn u" shit that I give the more prevalent dunces here because (pssst: they haven't figured it out yet) they get what they give.

Click to expand...

Precocious puberty is not the same as blocking puberty during developmental years. One shifts the window into a timer period where we know puberty is safe, and interacts well with other systems in the body. The other moves puberty into a time period we know very little about because its outside the normal development cycle. There are all kinds of systems that work in congruence with puberty (Which is why there is a huge variance child to child in terms of how puberty develops), and we have very little data on how those systems work outside the normal window of change.

Delaying puberty into the window where we have data is not the same thing as delaying outside of that window. Assuming the side effects are the same is a massive assumption that should not be made.

You shouldn't trust anyone without question. I bring this up all the time, but Lobotomy won the Nobel prize in medicine--hundreds of children were effectively turned into zombies for minor behavioral problems, all because the medical community was under enormous ideological/popular pressure to continue what the public saw as a 'miracle cure'. This butchery continued well after a large amount of evidence had been accumulated showing the procedures efficacy on most issues was non-existent, and in fact significantly worsened outcomes. All because popular pressure made it difficult for contrary evidence to be published (Take a look at the papers who simply don't allow contrary evidence on trans issues because it will lead to "hate" for someone's identity--that is not a healthy scientific environment, and if we were at all logically minded, we'd all be skeptical.)

Right now, the evidence to do this to adults is thin; but at least they can be cognizant of the risks, and we can gather data on them. The idea that we as a society balk at children not being mature enough to accept the consequences of their behavior, but we're okay with sterilizing healthy reproductive organs due to a strong belief from a child, without overwhelming amounts of data? Is wrong. This is not something we can be "pretty sure" about.

Lithose said:

We all ration our attention. I don't think I represent the majority of Americans in any meaningful way aside from basic shit like "I would like functional government please." If I have any priorities, it's that.

Really not trying to do a "gotcha"--but if you are acknowledging now that mutiliating children because SJWs have effectively corrupted a lot of the science around it, is a step too far--then how was the other side not right in their warnings that these people are a new kind of religious zealotry?

Yeah, but the difference is--whether you agree or disagree with the /politics thread or other political forums, the people there usually devote more attention to politics. People in the politics thread know a lot more about the details of politics--again, you can argue their bias ensures they only know one side and thus are wrong or whatever, but they devote a lot more bandwidth to the issue. Most Americans do not. Which is fine, but it also makes it interesting to talk to someone who doesn't devote a lot of his attention to see what gets through anyway.

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your categorization of it as religion, never have. Aside from that I'm not sure what you're trying to get here. I already said that was something I hadn't anticipated directly related to the SJW nonsense we're talking about.

As far as the /pol shit, fucking l o l. The idea that some maga cultist or communist apologist came to their views through thorough research and education, really just paying attention to the facts, that's just silly. Most Americans don't pay attention because when they do, those are the people that they see, and maybe you can't see it but to everyone else it is disgusting.

I just don't agree with his take on it. At least last time I participated in those threads I didn't, and I doubt I would now.