Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Phoenixmgs]

I'd love to know how you propose to form a control group here in a manner that isn't grossly unethical.

We do have baseline data. And we have before-and-after measures. These are the closest that are available for most long term medical research. You're dismissing standard procedure.

So the "first large-scale, controlled study to demonstrate an association between gender-affirming surgery and improved mental health outcomes" that is only a year old is enough science for you to proclaim transgender surgeries are medically necessary? Because that study is like the only decent study but, again, according to you, this is all settled science. Do you not know how long it takes for things to become settled science? Standard procedure is to do more than one good study on something because, you know, that one study may have had methodology problems.

 

[Silvanus]

Because that study is like the only decent study

According to you. You've dismissed any value at all in all the others that have been provided, just because you've spotted limitations. Fully acknowledged ones by the authors-- and all studies will have limitations.

This isn't how science is done. If presented with 5 or 6 studies, you don't just spot a limitation in each, discount it and move on. No study is perfect, and the breadth of different work pointing in the same direction is what constitutes consensus. A study with limitations is bolstered by the fact that others have pointed in the same direction.

 

[Gergar12]

I literally just replied what if I want more stuff.

 

[Gergar12]

Meanwhile with regards to Asians...

 

[Gordon_4]

Meanwhile with regards to Asians...

Well based on the timing of this apology, maybe in 2090

 

[Chimpzy]

Just Stop Oil activists throw soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers

Protesters then glue themselves to wall beneath painting at National Gallery in London

www.theguardian.com

Yes, I'm sure the oil executives of the world will be all shook by this and change their ways. Suggestion, maybe throw soup at the oil execs. Will probably achieve about as much, but at least it would be funnier to watch. Or take the far superior option of making the execs into soup.

 

[meiam]

Just Stop Oil activists throw soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers

Protesters then glue themselves to wall beneath painting at National Gallery in London

www.theguardian.com

Yes, I'm sure the oil executives of the world will be all shook by this and change their ways. Suggestion, maybe throw soup at the oil execs. Will probably achieve about as much, but at least it would be funnier to watch. Or take the far superior option of making the execs into soup.

I just wish the media would stop naming those "organization" that do this kind of publicity stunt. They just do this to collect donation from credulous people who think doing this kind of pointless things help. The organization itself does not give a fuck about stopping the oil and probably keep all the money for salary.

 

[Gergar12]

Facing criticism, Tim Ryan defends anti-China ad in Ohio Senate race - Roll Call

Asian American Democrats want Ohio Senate candidate Rep. Tim Ryan to halt an ad that repeatedly blames China for economic problems.

rollcall.com

So because Tim Ryan called China an enemy he is an anti-Chinese-American racist. Bullshit. I don't like the guy's approach to billionaires since at a neoliberal meeting in Columbus Ohio he defended them, but this is not how you attack him. Look I get it if the US were in a war with China attacks on Chinese Americans would go up like the attacks on Russian Americans but likely worse, but he is in right here because China did undercut Ohio jobs by having lower regulations, and labor costs. Again nuance is missed by AAPI.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I like how in every analysis of offshoring, the poor defenseless global mega corporations are entire devoid of blame

 

[Phoenixmgs]

According to you. You've dismissed any value at all in all the others that have been provided, just because you've spotted limitations. Fully acknowledged ones by the authors-- and all studies will have limitations.

This isn't how science is done. If presented with 5 or 6 studies, you don't just spot a limitation in each, discount it and move on. No study is perfect, and the breadth of different work pointing in the same direction is what constitutes consensus. A study with limitations is bolstered by the fact that others have pointed in the same direction.

Literally one of the studies you posted to "prove" your position literally said they saw no effect in surgeries. I didn't know discounting that a study found surgeries to have no effect is merely spotting a limitation and discounting it... The fact that the 1st large scale and controlled study (2 rather important aspects of a good study) happened a year ago is obviously not enough science to proclaim it settled science. Also, there's a difference between 1 thing improving mental health and that thing improving it so much that it's deemed medically necessary. There's lots of things that improve mental health that you can do to anyone that people wouldn't say is necessary. I'm sure that a woman getting beast implants would improve their mental health, that doesn't mean it's a medically necessary procedure. The 1st part of that hasn't been proven yet let alone the 2nd part of that.

 

[Silvanus]

Literally one of the studies you posted to "prove" your position literally said they saw no effect in surgeries. I didn't know discounting that a study found surgeries to have no effect is merely spotting a limitation and discounting it...

This is exactly an example of what I'm talking about. You spotted a limitation, and ignored the fact that we're not just talking about surgeries, and that study says a lot about the other approaches. All the rest of the information on the rest of the stuff has been disregarded... because they didn't find anything on one aspect.

The fact that the 1st large scale and controlled study (2 rather important aspects of a good study) happened a year ago is obviously not enough science to proclaim it settled science.

Indeed, hence why multiple studies were provided. The idea is that a breadth of information constitutes consensus. Every study ever will contain limitations.

Also, there's a difference between 1 thing improving mental health and that thing improving it so much that it's deemed medically necessary.

That would be why we get medical professionals to evaluate people in a one-on-one basis. To find when it is, and when it isn't. Rather than creating blanket-bans and preventing access to procedures.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

This is exactly an example of what I'm talking about. You spotted a limitation, and ignored the fact that we're not just talking about surgeries, and that study says a lot about the other approaches. All the rest of the information on the rest of the stuff has been disregarded... because they didn't find anything on one aspect.



Indeed, hence why multiple studies were provided. The idea is that a breadth of information constitutes consensus. Every study ever will contain limitations.



That would be why we get medical professionals to evaluate people in a one-on-one basis. To find when it is, and when it isn't. Rather than creating blanket-bans and preventing access to procedures.

I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT SURGERIES. I've said this before, that's what you initially replied to and that's what I'm discussing.

Providing multiple bad studies is not evidence of anything.

That's not how you determine is one thing is better than another though. Is having doctors do one-on-one with patients to determine if they should be given ivermectin for covid a good treatment in any way proof that ivermectin works? You gotta find out if something works first, then that thing becomes a treatment option for a patient in that scenario.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT SURGERIES. I've said this before, that's what you initially replied to and that's what I'm discussing.

Providing multiple bad studies is not evidence of anything.

That's not how you determine is one thing is better than another though. Is having doctors do one-on-one with patients to determine if they should be given ivermectin for covid a good treatment in any way proof that ivermectin works? You gotta find out if something works first, then that thing becomes a treatment option for a patient in that scenario.

...obvious question: how would you find out if surgery works without doing a bunch of surgeries? Like, we can test ivermectin v covid in animals, an ape isn't gonna be able to tell us if their gender dysphoria dissipated

 

[Silvanus]

I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT SURGERIES. I've said this before, that's what you initially replied to and that's what I'm discussing.

Yes, and I'm not interested in following you once the goalposts have moved.

Providing multiple bad studies is not evidence of anything.

Having limitations does not make a "bad study". Every study has limitations. What you're meant to do is take a breadth of reading, each with its own limitations, but the overall direction of findings giving you a strong indication. What you're not meant to do is what you've done: look at each study individually, find a limitation, then dismiss it entirely and move onto the next, treating each in isolation.

That's not how you determine is one thing is better than another though. Is having doctors do one-on-one with patients to determine if they should be given ivermectin for covid a good treatment in any way proof that ivermectin works? You gotta find out if something works first, then that thing becomes a treatment option for a patient in that scenario.

We know that SRS can work. There are countless people who have undergone the procedure and reported significant improvement. It has already cleared the bar we expect most potential treatments to reach.

Then, on an individual basis, the healthcare professional determines if that particular approach is appropriate for the individual. That's what they already currently do with drugs that can work but aren't always right. And it's how healthcare professionals approach SRS.

You're complaining about SRS and other forms of treatment, like HRT, being treated normally. Just as we do for other treatments.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

...obvious question: how would you find out if surgery works without doing a bunch of surgeries? Like, we can test ivermectin v covid in animals, an ape isn't gonna be able to tell us if their gender dysphoria dissipated

You can do studies based on people getting the surgeries as elective surgery...

Yes, and I'm not interested in following you once the goalposts have moved.



Having limitations does not make a "bad study". Every study has limitations. What you're meant to do is take a breadth of reading, each with its own limitations, but the overall direction of findings giving you a strong indication. What you're not meant to do is what you've done: look at each study individually, find a limitation, then dismiss it entirely and move onto the next, treating each in isolation.



We know that SRS can work. There are countless people who have undergone the procedure and reported significant improvement. It has already cleared the bar we expect most potential treatments to reach.

Then, on an individual basis, the healthcare professional determines if that particular approach is appropriate for the individual. That's what they already currently do with drugs that can work but aren't always right. And it's how healthcare professionals approach SRS.

You're complaining about SRS and other forms of treatment, like HRT, being treated normally. Just as we do for other treatments.

How did I move goalposts, I talked about surgeries, and you keep trying to talk about other things that I never talked about. You're the one moving goalposts.

I didn't say a study having a limitation automatically makes it a bad study. I said not having it be RCT makes it a bad study. Doing stuff that isn't random and without control groups are good starting points, but it's not proof of something working or not working. You're not claiming XYZ looks like it's good, you're claiming it's settled science, which is complete bullshit.

I only complained about surgeries and treatments for kids, that is all. And saying surgeries for adults is medically necessary has not been close to proven. There's many things we know work that aren't medically necessary procedures.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

You can do studies based on people getting the surgeries as elective surgery...

...these are all elective surgeries. Nobody is going to the emergency room for acute gender dysphoria

 

[Silvanus]

How did I move goalposts, I talked about surgeries, and you keep trying to talk about other things that I never talked about. You're the one moving goalposts.

We began discussing sexual reassignment approaches more broadly. Sexual reassignment may include surgery but often doesn't.

I didn't say a study having a limitation automatically makes it a bad study. I said not having it be RCT makes it a bad study. Doing stuff that isn't random and without control groups are good starting points, but it's not proof of something working or not working. You're not claiming XYZ looks like it's good, you're claiming it's settled science, which is complete bullshit.

What's pretty universally recognised in the relevant medical fields is that gender dysphoria exists, and that approaches that help the individual's body to match their gender identity have (by far) the highest success rate, judging by most accepted quality-of-life metrics. That's not seriously disputed.

What you did was take the raft of 4 or 5 studies you were presented with, find limitations in a few of them ("this one doesn't have a control group") and then dismiss it altogether as a "bad study", rather than looking at the breadth of work as you're supposed to.

 

[Trunkage]

Ethen Klein got kicked off YouTube. Dont know how permanent it'll be

 

[Trunkage]

Also, did anyone see this. Someone sent bees after police officers

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/10/20/woman-unleashes-bee-swarm-eviction/

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Also, did anyone see this. Someone sent bees after police officers

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/10/20/woman-unleashes-bee-swarm-eviction/

They're gonna need a lot of little handcuffs.