Conversely, access to gender-affirming hormones in adolescence appears to have a protective effect. In one study, researchers followed 104 teens and young adults for a year and asked them about their depression, anxiety and suicidality at the time they started receiving hormones or puberty blockers and again at the three-month, six-month and one-year mark. At the beginning of the study, which was published in JAMA Network Open in February 2022, more than half of the respondents reported moderate to severe depression, half reported moderate to severe anxiety, and 43.3 percent reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide in the past two weeks.
[...]
So the study used to claim the enormous benefits of mutilating children studied 104 children around for a year. That is pathetic. Not just the number, but the time period and criteria. You are permantly ruining their ability to have sex and reproduce and all you do is check how they are doing a year later. What about when they are 30 and they have dealt with a decade of complications and maybe ow what children? That is what the study needs to look at.
Not sure I should even engage with Jon, since he makes stealthycat seem moderate, but wow are you wrong about all of this.
1) Please link to the "mutilation" of children. I know you guys on the right like to go to the most extreme examples hoping to prove a point to your fear mongering, but no one is getting their unit cut off here (before they are 18) so this does not fall under that concept. Hormonal therapy is reversible. so, you are wrong on part 1.
2) we have already refuted your parental consent nonsense, so I'll let that sit where it is.
3) 104 is well above the number needed for a study, and also speaks to the fact that this issue is much more rare than the fear mongers want you to believe. Kind of like Ye and the Jews. He is blaming the Jews for everything while meanwhile Jews make up less than 3 percent of the US population.
4) What business is it of yours what they do when they are 30? Not sure why any of this in any way is your concern. If you had a child who wanted this and you are opposed to it, you could simply say no, and then they likely will do it anyway when they are old enough (or not wait until 18 as there is plenty of underage drug use and smoking etc). It would be more tricky for them to do so without parental consent but I would argue (going slightly off tangent) that making it harder for underage kids to get weapons would be a better societal outcome than making it impossible for kids to get this sort of therapy.
Finally: the hypocrisy of the right to want to stop people doing things that affect them not at all (This, abortion, gay marriage, etc) while allowing things that are likely more harmful (guns, pollution, climate change) to everyone is so strange it is really hard to fathom. Its like "I don't like that planter in your yard" while a manure spitter is throwing crap on your lawn..