They're not my gen.

Thiel was born in 1967. Basically, a boomer.

Musk is an older Gen X.

In any case, that die was cast by boomers and their pulling up the economic ladder after themselves to push us down this path of runaway rabid "capitalism," which is really just unbridled greed.

The peak of our country and start of its decline was during the 80s and 90s, when boomers were starting to exert influence and electoral power. It's been downhill under the greedy eyes ever since.

Own it.

I'm aware of the context and don't think it matters.

This is a data driven discussion being hijacked by people for their own reasons.

I guess after five years of the pandemic and subsequent fall out I have zero tolerance for medical issues being turned into culture war footballs.

We need a yawn flag.

No ... just reality.

#151 | Posted by Danforth

They are real, yes. But meaningless as an argument.

That is unless you want to also discuss vaccines causing autism?

How Libertarian of you.

We constantly seek government to regulate things that could easily be described as what you've listed there.

Seat belts. Helmets. Illicit substances. Firearms. Increasingly, food and/or ingredients. Property uses. Construction codes...

The linked article is also not the state, but members of the medical community asking whether they are truly following their oath of "first do no harm" in these instances.

The data shows quite clearly the boomers have left and are leaving a worse off world for their children and grandchildren.

Things they enjoyed like education, a sound economy, a functional government and Republic, affordable housing...all gone now as they seek to liquidate as much as they can for as much $$$ money as they can before they kick the bucket.

Obviously, there are exceptions to that.

But generationally, things are really really awful now compared to what the boomers had when they were in their peak years.

I notice it's only been two days since JPW accused someone of blowing their dog.

#161 | Posted by lfthndthrds

It's creepy that you look for that kind of thing you sick f*&^.

Right wing loser *ahem* influencer peddled, oversold BS trying to make themselves the next hottest grifter to fleece the MAGA rubes?

Which is exactly the treatment path that US doctors most heavily rely on.

The therapy or the puberty blockers?

There are a group of patients with physical and/or hormonal differences that make it so they can't be easily classified into the male/female/trans trichotomy that the discussion so often focuses on and none of the data that I've read appears to address how many of those patients are included among the total who have received puberty blockers or surgery.

#144 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce

All the more reason to avoid permanent solutions to what may not be a long term issue.

Sorry corkandsniff, the "intergenerational conflict" is chock full of valid points.

Including the GWoT along with the vast majority of our current economic dumpster fire.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - the best anti-2A argument around is simply your average gun owner.

On the contrary, it was in response to a claim that only one percent of folks are happy with gender-affirming transitions. My personal life experiences tell a completely different story. I also believe knowing a trans person, before and after, helps with understanding.
Part of the joy of knowing them now, is knowing the torture they had to go through to get happy.

#130 | Posted by Danforth

Restating your anecdote doesn't *poof* them into the realm of evidence.

Unless those four people constitute more than 1% of folks with gender-affirming transitions, you're just broad brushing in the same way others do.

Awww man. Why did you change my headline?

Probably the run up to corrupting and taking control over the election infrastructure for the mid-term elections.

The kangaroo court trials of officials that have no intention of being serious will be the cover for serious, deep corruption and destruction of election integrity and security to ensure a miraculous GOP and Trump win in 2026.

Until you address the efficacy of this these procedures FOR MINORS and then answer whether you support ANY health care regulations, the discussion, assuming you are interested in actually discussing this, cannot move forward and becomes circular.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger

You're not addressing efficacy either. You've just posted two doctors' opinion piece and then acted like anyone who questioned it wasn't as informed as you...

I'm done reading comments on this thread. Between the confirmation bias-driven bigotry and virtue signaling misplaced passion, it's a prime example of why our current situation is what it is and why it is unlikely RFK and his merry band of idiots (or, at least, their type of thinking) isn't going anywhere soon.

I 100% oppose you sticking your nose between doctors and patients.
Clear enough for you?

#32 | Posted by Danforth

What about the two doctors who wrote the column who are writing it to express an opinion or suggest guidance on where the medical field should look or move when considering these cases?

Should they not point out data driven flaws in the current system to improve outcomes for patients, lest it be "sticking [their] nose between doctors and patients"?

BTW, how many post-trans folks do you know in real life?

#14 | Posted by Danforth

Completely irrelevant. Equivalent to 'I'm not a racist, I have black friends."

You are either onboard with evidence-based care, or you are not. The authors are arguing that evidence doesn't support current standards of care.

Stop virtue signaling and start arguing numbers or stats with links. That's the only legit territory this argument falls in.

Your answer always is to lop off 11 year old Jonny's dong if he decides to put on lipstick.

#12 | Posted by BellRinger

You know, if you want to be taken seriously, you should drop the troll shtick once in a while.

That is literally nobody's position. Ever.

This article suggests puberty-blockers should be revisited. Not much more.

#8 | Posted by Danforth

No, it does not.

It was these Scandinavian social democracies"not U.S. red states"that were first to conduct systematic reviews and conclude there is no reliable evidence supporting pediatric medical transition. Finland sharply restricted the practice in 2020, followed by Sweden in 2022. The U.K. was next, and other nations are pulling back, too.

The HHS review's evidence analysis arrives at the same conclusion regarding the sorry state of the evidence. Weighing the purported benefits against the risks (which include not only infertility and sexual dysfunction but also decreased bone density, delayed cognitive development and inability to breastfeed after mastectomy) the review concludes that the harms of pediatric medical transition far outweigh the unproven mental health benefits.

Emphasis mine.

It's pretty clearly about more than simple puberty blockers. Especially given the section following the above text laying out support for mental health issues to work through the frustrations and feelings to avoid the negative effects of early transition. They even flat out say that minors receiving therapy/counseling resolve their issues without permanent medical intervention/modification.

I've known four people before, and after, transitioning.
To a person, they were tortured souls who never fit into their own skin.
Now, to a person, they're gloriously happy.
Some folks would deny them that chance. I, for one, don't feel like it's my decision.

#7 | Posted by Danforth

Don't fall into the same trap as the RFK supporting morons who think the plural of anecdote is data.

I've read the opinion piece and only 7 comments on the thread, but I felt the need to comment since these are two co-authors speaking, both in medical fields associated with the topic who provide links to their claims in the column.

Another foreign war by the man who fooled MAGA into believing that he hated foreign wars.

#4 | Posted by Zed

They didn't actually believe it. They just bobble headed along with whatever Dear Leader said.

Just watch. They'll be bookoo fans of bombing Venezuela. They love beating up on the little guy where there's little chance of a loss or embarrassment. That support will vanish in X number of years when the folly becomes fully apparent.

I fell like we've lived this movie before...

"Big Policy Change Needed" = "Big Constitutional Violations and Stomping of Citizens Civil Rights Needed"

But then again, that's likely the point, isn't it?

Meanwhile, 14 months ago, someone shot at Trump, and I doubt anyone reading this can name the guy without looking it up.

#19 | Posted by Danforth

Probably because he shot at the audience, not Trump.

And people know that deep down, even if it's not explicitly acknowledged.

B(*&^az ran from his own thread like the cuck he is.

This is what happens when you elect an idiot and a narcissist.

Probably because his supporters are idiots without the extreme narcissism. Duhhhhh BiThNiThMahNz!!!