I'm reading "Trump’s Attack on Trans Youth Research Is a Tragic Error" by Jesse Singal (in the NYT).
Singal writes:
Singal writes:
I’ve long been a critic of American youth gender medicine. Researchers in this field have often produced slipshod work and drawn premature conclusions about the benefits of blockers, hormones and surgery. There are serious unanswered questions about the safety and efficacy of these treatments, which have been banned or restricted in about half of American states and a number of European countries in the wake of several damning government-sponsored reports.
But cutting back on research about these treatments would be a tragic error. What this field needs — and what gender-questioning youth deserve — is reform, oversight and higher methodological standards. To cripple this field in its infancy would be to leave countless families in intolerable limbo.
Wasn't it the bad science that crippled the field in its infancy? If that hadn't been so ghoulish and awful you wouldn't have Trump's attack. You probably wouldn't even have Trump as President.
I regularly hear from parents whose kids express severe distress about their biological sex.
That's a badly miswritten sentence, and I don't want to be lectured about "good science" by someone who lacks the critical awareness of why it's so wrong.
What part of what he's asserting does Jesse Singal know? Assuming he's not mistaken or lying, he knows that he regularly hears from people who say they have children who say they feel distress about what the purported parents characterize as "their biological sex." Who knows what is really going on? But Singal wants us to help these poor families out of what he calls "intolerable limbo" — help them with "good science."These parents desperately want to help their children, but are torn about whether medical interventions are worth the potential risks. Reliable, evidence-based research on these questions is hard to come by....
So keep funding, in the hope of funding something that will rescue parents who are desperate to find a medical/surgical solution to their child's distress but just make sure we're only funding good science. That's Singal's idea.
Posts
90 comments:
1st sentence of article is written even worse: "President Trump has made his hostility toward transgender people abundantly clear." Trump more likely thinks, as I do, that there is no such thing as a transgender person.
"I’ve long been a critic of American youth gender medicine, but Orange Man is worse, so, yeah. Plus I get to write for the New York Times! Woo-hoo! Suck it, losers...!"
More research needed! That’s always the answer.
I thought the civilized world stopped medical experiments on humans after WW 2. The real Nazis are on the Left.
Really one of the most shameful and disgraceful trends in medical history. Right up there with intentionally giving Black guys VD.
We do need research on TDS.
Lol... oh annie.
People didn't vote for Trump because of trans issues.
Don't you have a flood of non-English speaking families overtaxing your local resources and helping your menfolk maintain "your properties" yet?
Lol, silly lady. Wisconsin will be the first to fall after Schmiel and the ladies on teh court fall in line with the redistricting that matters... #KnowYourRole #TheGoodFigTreesProduceFruit #YourHusbandMustTakeAConcubine
Drop a bunker bomb on the children
who are not worthy of life...
Do you think they are paying Israel to test these weapons to keep them in storage. #PRide
But don't worry... Chrissy is homosexual,
not trans. He won't be touched in the upcoming days, surely. And I've heard he too carries a weapon, for defense, in the family tradition... Praying for you and yours. Can you adopt??
The No True Trans Youth Research fallacy!
There has been a lot of this going around lately--on Twitter the people who've called for shutting down unruly/unlawful anti-semitic protests at the Ivies are tut-tutting foreign national students who engaged in those protests being kicked out of the country. "I called for this result but Trump isn't doing things the right way so I have to complain and attack him!" All these years later people still can't understand how Trump "happened."
“ Starting in 1932, 600 African American men from Macon County, Alabama were enlisted to partake in a scientific experiment on syphilis. The “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male,” was conducted by the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and involved blood tests, x-rays, spinal taps and autopsies of the subjects.
The goal was to “observe the natural history of untreated syphilis” in black populations. But the subjects were unaware of this and were simply told they were receiving treatment for bad blood. Actually, they received no treatment at all. Even after penicillin was discovered as a safe and reliable cure for syphilis, the majority of men did not receive it.”
Government research that continued until 1972. High ethical standards for government-funded research.
We know what blockers, hormones, and surgery do. The rest is simply experimentation on children.
Dave, you might consider another far more recent, mass scale medical experiment.
"To cripple this field in its infancy... intolerable limbo" — that sent me down a side road of trying to connect this post to the previous one about the legless woman who didn't want to be regarded as a "supercrip." The metaphorical use of "cripple" and the word "limb" within "limbo" took me into a wordplay reverie that I had to abandon. I couldn't do it. But I wanted to get somewhere that would compare distress about one's physical sex with having no legs. The legless woman just wanted to be treated like any other person.
The legless woman did not descend into desperation, tragedy, or intolerable limbo.
Signal knows but won't say it's socially acceptable homophobia.
“Good” science is needed to protect them from the coming lawsuits.
Government funded research often comes with implicit expectations about findings. For example, Gender Studies. As Althouse has pointed out numerous times, such "research" comes with a expectation that results will be interpreted as either a) female natural superiority, or b) men's superiority is a result of structural sexism.
Just heard on CNBC from the Dean of Cornell Medicine, “Research funding is never enough.”
The legless woman just wanted to be treated like any other person.
And if she wanted to get prosthetics like Oscar Pistorius, that would be fine as well.
W”hat gender-questioning youth deserve” are mental health coping skills to utilize until they are an adult. Around that time, 80%+ of these youth have gone through puberty and no longer question the reality of their own body.
Trans Science means, you ignore actual science to achieve your desired end goal of destroying the definition of established words because you want to re-define everything.
Recent high quality studies have been published on this subject, and they showed no benefit/harm from these treatments. Those findings are what led to so many European countries abandoning these treatments.
Singal seems to advocate for more high quality studies mainly because the ones that already exist don't reach the conclusions he prefers.
Singal is such a disappointment. He's what you get when you live in moral relativism. There is no medical intervention for transgenderism. There's cognitive intervention, but that's not possible with what passes for good science today.
When the “science” so far is slipshod at best, and certainly politically driven, isn’t it reasonable to assume that more money would just buy more of the same?
There is no such thing as trans. What’s needed here is prosecution and imprisonment of the monsters who inflict trans on kids. The death penalty might be justified.
“…he regularly hears from people who say they have children who say they feel distress about what the purported parents characterize as "their biological sex."
Not only is that double hearsay, it’s double he/hersay.
Singal has been a longtime critic of the gender medicine industry, and he's been ostracized by the left for pointing out the lack of science behind it. He's legit in recognizing his science works and respecting what it says. The difference with him and other critics is that he still seems to believe in at least the possible existence of gender and the possibility that medical treatment (beyond just therapy) could help those who are in that kind of distress.
I tried to find some "gender medicine" to turn male pronouns into female pronouns and vice-versa automatically, but my grammar pharmacist said best he could do was give me a some "their" pills.
One would think there would be universal agreement mutilating kids is a bad thing.
But that's not where we are now, is it ....
How did we go from never hearing about these people, and in my case, not even knowing they exist, to them being a protected group that we must constantly defer to?
Unlike Gays, the number of people who are "gender confused" must be miniscule. 1 out of 1000? Why are we now stating their "essential to our Military" or demanding they use the girls bathroom?
First of all, historically, science has developed most when it has been done by aristocrats with their own wealth and lots of time on their hands.
In contrast, "science" that is funded predominantly by the government is no science at all. It is noodling within the prevailing paradigm.
Or put differently, nobody is getting government grants to look for the undiscovered planet in our solar system, because the powers that control the funds already "know" that there is no undiscovered planet in our solar system.
And that example shows what is happening in all the areas of science. Government grants fund the prevailing paradigm. They don't fund the next "truth" that science has yet to discover, that utterly destroys the prevailing paradigm.
And secondly, but most important to the topic of this post: I would argue that what is being discussed here is not science at all. It is engineering. And most people don't know or keep it clear in their minds, but science is not engineering, and engineering is not science. No scientist built a microwave oven. Engineers did. And engineering is about attempts, failures, and new attempts until some end is achieved. The evil is more apparent when thought of in this more accurate way.
The invaluable site Retraction Watch provides regular reminders that science is hard and scientists sometimes get it wrong, sometimes deliberately.
It seems to me that many people in the medical and scientific fields have squandered the presumption of authority these fields once had.
I have no idea how they get it back.
Althouse, how have you resisted connecting Singal with Signal?
Science funding is dictated by expert peer review groups who evaluate grant proposals. The problem is that the expert scientists are often narcissistic biased assholes. This leads to grants being written not for good science per se but instead directed to subjects that appeal to the grant review panel’s ego. How does one identify good science?
As in so many things, it comes down to who determines what is 'good' science and what is 'bad' science. Just a few years ago, transgender 'science' was all considered...well...The Science. And then it wasn't.
Now do climate change Science.
"How does one identify good science?"
By looking back. But here's the question: is good science the science that has lasted unchanged for a long time? Or the science that has left a lot of discarded "truths" in its wake?
Is good science, the science that maintains the prevailing paradigm? Or the science that challenges it to see if it can break it? (See e.g. "Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge" by Paul Feyerabend.)
"If our government is going to fund science, it should be good science."
And, the science is good because it was funded by the government. Isn't that what Fauci taught us?
Singal talks about gender dysphoria, but the broader point he implies, is true of all science research.
For decades, new physicists went into String Theory because that's where the grants and opportunities were. It didn't produce results, so they modified the theory and proposed bigger projects to test the new theory. Like CERN in Europe. Really smart people wasted their time and our money.
This is happening all over science.
Singal proposes that science do a better job because this is important. He doesn't suggest a general solution.
It's been suggested that universities move away from research, and focus on instruction. Research institutes, like NIH and CDC, direct research toward actual problems. Greater transparency must be required.
About those lobotomies...the Nobel Prize for Medicine or Physiology in 1949 went to António Egas Moniz for his work on the prefrontal lobotomy. Science on the march! More surgery for mental problems! Let's do for confused children what we used to do for the adult mentally ill! All fly over the cuckoo's nest!
Ahhh, the "Mengele Conundrum".
Do we cut the torso or excise some part of the brain?
When the sales pitch is, "Do you want a live son or a dead daughter?", you know it is all good science. No emotional blackmail there. Nope. Just pure rationality at work.
"First, do no harm" is so yesterday.
Improved diet, exercise and wholesome and engaging activities and hobbies provided in a living and honest family environment should be completely explored and exhausted before considering anything medical.
There is no such thing as good science or bad science. The universe is indifferent.
How one identifies good science is a difficult problem within the current system. My roommate in grad school (a chemist) once said that science is whatever a scientist says it is. This in response to non-scientists questioning what gets funded. My problem is that scientists are biased and don’t necessarily make the best decisions. That was the reason I decided to work in a company as a scientist- I figured a company would make decisions based on financial rationale that was not biased. I was wrong because companies hire the same experts from academia to serve on their scientific review boards.
Also the least possible reliable way to judge the quality of a scientist is by their ability to write clever and engaging pros like a shyster lawyer or other type of liberal arts major. People who excel in science have brains that are wired for deep symbolic n-dimentional thinking not superficial artifice that is so important in our quote unquote modern civilized world.
Science isn't anything other than a imperfect method to try and figure out how shit works so that we may make predictions on future occurrences.
I believe there is good science. This is science that, at a minimum answers legitimate questions, and as a bonus provides a return on investment.
"Also the least possible reliable way to judge the quality of a scientist is by their ability to write clever and engaging pros[e] like a shyster lawyer or other type of liberal arts major."
Cripes, Howard. You just disqualified 100% of my comments.
There is successful and unsuccessful applications of the scientific method. Any results or outcome from using the scientific method isn't science. Science is not a thing it is not a result is simply a method of attacking problems. The proper use of the scientific method produces a result that is reproducible by others. As Barbie would say, math is hard.
Hiker: "I'm worried we'll get lost. I've heard stories..."
Guide: "Don't worry, I have a map."
Hiker: "Wait a minute...is this even the right map?"
Guide: "I don't know, but it's better than nothing."
"1st sentence of article is written even worse: 'President Trump has made his hostility toward transgender people abundantly clear.' Trump more likely thinks, as I do, that there is no such thing as a transgender person."
There are plenty of transgender people around the world and going back beyond the current historical era that indicate otherwise.
"The science is settled!" is the most anti-science staeement the left make.
The science project I'd like to see funded would explore the demographics of the young transgender cases. I would posit that a disproportionate number are from families of Progressive Democrats. Bid for attention from the kid, reinforced by parent's need to virtue signal. Politically approved Munchausen by proxy.
I oversaw research projects for a federal agency covering transportation in the state of Alabama. Everything from pavements to environmental impacts t congestion.
One universal truth was researchers know what will be funded and why. And they'll damn sure provide it.
I shudder when I think about the waste of money when we were "encouraged" to make sure a substantial percentage of the research funding went to HBCU's.
I work as a physician and authored scientific studies and of course read science journals critically as one should. As Howard alluded science is nothing more than application of the scientific method to answer a question.
Make an observation. Make a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon. Devise a prediction to test it. Test it. To the extent the outcome is consistent with your prediction your hypothesis is supported and vice versa. If the outcome is different than your prediction you must reject the hypothesis and make a hypothesis as to why and retest.
This is why social science is nonsense. In general they already have their conclusion and are searching for data to support it. This is also why climate science is nonsense. We found from the email scandal that when the conclusion is different as to what the hypothesis predicted, they do not revise the hypothesis. They revise the data.
If I understand correctly, it was a private company, not the academic community who identified the enormous reproducibility crisis in published science. I think it was Bayer but may have been another company. They were investing major sums based on accepted science. Their ideas should have worked, but reliably did not. Eventually, they went back and tested the foundational science upon which they were relying and found they could not reproduce it. Since then, a lot of published science has been retested and found not to be reproducible. Reproduceability should be one of the most basic foundations of science. If Studies cannot be reproduced. It really isn’t science, is it?
In contrast to what one of the other posters said, I trust private corporation science more. A lot more. There’s no personal cost to be paid for fudging data and academics. From personal experience, you are rewarded based on your ability to bring money to the university, in this specific example based on bringing in grants. No one in academic science seems to care about the reproduceability crisis. in distinct contrast, the corporation is giving you a few million dollars here and a few million dollars there to run experiments with the specific goal of profitability. If you make up data and consistently fail at some point, surely you will be removed from the lovers of responsibility. I do not work in corporate, so I don’t know this to be true but my observation of big corporations is that they are pretty ruthless and you will be rewarded if you produce, and you will be let go if you do not.
From the post: "Who could disagree? But what are the chances of getting good science on transgender medical treatments for children? "
It isn't, and has never been, about science. The narrative overrules all - because the purpose is to overturn social norms, to make way for socialism. So also, the use of tribalism, and intersectionality, to pit one class against the other so that all will be surrendered to the State.
Spock said the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
In industry research is funded to the degree that it promises profitability. In government research is funded so that the money is spread over certain registered voters.
Bad scientists need money too. But government funding cures should be balanced by how many lives are saved, pharma companies can fund research on the for profit fields of gender and cosmetic surgery. I’m sorry, but I’m going to kill myself if I don’t get to be a boy is not good enough.
Moral panics need research, But only on how to prevent them from happening.
Cook - no one disagrees that transgender ism is a thing and that it is real and that it has always existed. As of let’s say 10 or 15 years ago the number of these people was vanishing small. Do they exist? Yes. Extraordinarily rare. Like let’s say on the level of people with ambiguous genitalia. They do exist. At pretty close to 0.0% of the population. They exist at a rate too small to list as a percentage of population. Something happened in the culture to the point where A meaningful percentage of the population now identifies as such. And it’s not like this occurred over 10 years or 20 years or 100 years. It occurred literally over less than five years. Which implies that it is not real, but rather there is some infectious spread. The infection obviously is social approbation.
In my medical practice over the course of the first 15 years of practice, I saw one person so identified who clearly was transgender. Over the last say five years I would say I see maybe not one a week but certainly more than one a month nearly all of them come from well to do hyper educated families, who appeared to be left-wing. Clearly well to do. Clearly, well educated. I don’t ask about politics so I guess from social cues.
It seems to be pretty clear that this is a social choice where there are great rewards for being special. It is very hard to be a special. You need to put in an enormous amount of effort to become a scholar or an athlete or discover something new. You do not need to put in any effort to be transgender. And yet you are universally acknowledged as being special whether you punish your body every day to become an accomplished athlete, or an accomplished Academician. But you really don’t have to do any hard work at all to be special if you declare yourself transgender.
This is especially so when you consider the population so identifying. You’re talking about people around middle school age who find that they are not confident about who they are and uncomfortable with their bodies as they are going through big changes. They are not quite sure who they are. Historically, this has been called middle school. Everybody in middle school is Anxious, and angsty about their place in society, who they are, what changes their bodies are going through, and so on. What is new is that nowadays when you express this the system, medical and educational, seem to be systemized where you are first asked then gently nudged toward identifying as transgender with more and more vigorous pushing. I think this is an abomination. This is the same difficult time it has always been for everyone. But in the past, we did not have adult adults, encouraging mental illness.
The analogy I think about which I think is a very good analogy is anorexia. Clearly these children have emotional or psychiatric issues. The analogy to transgender ism is if this were an anorexic person who identified as someone thinner than she is, would your advice be to teach her how to restrict calories more or would your advice be to acknowledge that this is mental illness and address the underlying mental illness. What the left is doing now is taking an anorexic and confirming their mental disease and discovering ways to help them restrict their calories even more. This is dangerous and evil. The right thing to do for the anorexic is the right thing to do for the transgender child. Acknowledge that there is some degree of mental or emotional illness and address that illness, not mutilate the body.
I've read enough from Singal to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's as honestly as possible evaluating studies based on things like sample sizes and the correspondence between the prose and the actual statistics. He's in a bind because his political allies on the Left who "fucking love Science!", and the gays, keep returning to discredited research to justify grooming, drugs, and surgery while criminalizing any approach that might result in a heteronormative resolution to the child's issues so they won't be mistaken for the Christers who try to Pray The Gay Away. I don't think he's looking for studies that validate the current "treatment" regime as much as for a silver bullet study that will get the Left to back off the 20% ledge without providing more credit to the Right for being correct.
I wonder how Singal would feel about research into something like conversion therapy for homosexuals who would rather be heterosexual?
Having a non traditional sexual orientation is the only way you can opt in to become part of a victim class. Unless you are Elizabeth Warren.
"If our government is going to fund science, it should be good science. Who could disagree?”
The conclusion is sound; the thesis is not.
Robert Cook said...
There are plenty of transgender people around the world and going back beyond the current historical era that indicate otherwise.
Definitions matter. The existence of intersex bodies with ambiguous genitalia is not disputed, nor is there any dispute that people from time to time present as the opposite sex for a variety of reasons. Neither should not be confused with the concept that gender exists in a way that a physically normal human body should be considered deformed.
A trouble among the troubles is that this isn't initially an issue of science. They have an assumption about what it means to be human, a philosophical assumption, they then declare as absolute. The philosophical issue is whether humans exist as a integration of our body and our mind/soul, so we're more like a turtle with its shell. You can take a shell off the turtle, it is the turtle. Or are we really just enfleshed souls, our real self is our consciousness around which we have a body, more like a hermit crab searching for the best fitting costume.
The incoherence is that saying we're really souls, that our spirit or self or whatever is the only thing that matters and determines reality historically has coincided with a declaration that matter is evil, the old gnostic turn. But in our less philosophically astute age we are effectively immaterialist materialists. We embrace materialism as a source of satisfaction, all is to be enjoyed as pleasure, but we don't our self is defined by our physical trappings.
Which makes me wonder if there's an underlying despair about materialism within these transgender discussions (and so much more). Many despair about materialism but don't believe in a kind of redemptive integration of the physical and spiritual parts of humanity. So they rage against their materials while trying to adopt the role of God in creating their matter the way they think they want.
It's sad. But it's still a fundamental philosophical question, since science can't really tell us what it means to be a integrated self at peace.
Howard is actually making sense. Did hell freeze over? I missed the weather report.
Keith at 9 am. Thank you.
Perhaps instead of investigating the costs and benefits of hormones and surgery, science could look into what we are doing to our children that has created this epidemic of mental illness. But science would first have to acknowledge that it is mental illness and needs to be combatted rather than encouraged.
Perhaps instead of investigating the costs and benefits of hormones and surgery, science could look into what we are doing to our children that has created this epidemic of mental illness. But science would first have to acknowledge that it is mental illness and needs to be combatted rather than encouraged.
The Left seems eager to lead their party right off the cliff with transgender issues.
Robert Cook said...
"1st sentence of article is written even worse: 'President Trump has made his hostility toward transgender people abundantly clear.' Trump more likely thinks, as I do, that there is no such thing as a transgender person."
There are plenty of transgender people around the world and going back beyond the current historical era that indicate otherwise.
--------
There's a solution, like with the Palestinians...
In funding the "soft sciences" the funder gets proof of whatever they ask for, 99%. In my early days I was a grunt for a little group of academics funded by the Reagan-era dept of education.
We steadily undercut busing, a boogie man of the time. It didn't actually sit well with some of the crew, who had been students of James "Crazy" Coleman. Then Coleman came to visit, blessed our efforts, and left us his son who needed gainful employment.
Keith said...
"It seems to be pretty clear that this is a social choice where there are great rewards for being special."
Bingo! Not only for the children, but for the parents who now have a special, special child, and that means the parents can partake in the specialness. You wouldn't want the world to think you are an awful parent for mutilating your child - oh no! The world must recognize you as special, riding on the glory of your special child. But one day there will be too many special children, and the anointing authorities will move on to something else. And the trans industry will go ker-flop.
I think... ann is feeling guilty about not getting chrissy the help she needed and wants the pool of homosexual men as broad as possible for her son to sample. They can't admit they made mistakes in getting their children the medical help now available, with access.
Lol@there is no such thing as transgender people.
Denying science and history. Go make meade a sandwich, pretty lady. ;-)
Eric Hoffer: “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” We are in stage 2, moving rapidly to stage 3. I sincerely hope stage 4 involves prosecutions, jail and humiliation for this wretched industry.
Personally, I don't think you can kill all the trans people OR all the Palestinians off, but you place your bets where you will.
Good luck!
"Science is the belief in the fallibility of experts."
- some clown named Feynman
Being a child going through puberty and all the social awkwardness of growing - There's a pill for that!
Not only for the children, but for the parents who now have a special, special child, and that means the parents can partake in the specialness.
Yes. We see that with the huge surge of parents with kids who have "special needs". It seems that almost everyone has a kid "on the spectrum" or with "AD/HD".
Kids are confused and parents seem to be even more confused and unable to help their kids. Therefore, we have to label them in a way that takes responsibility away from the parents.
A few months ago I was sitting in a restaurant and overheard a teacher explaining how to do a science project, the usual stuff, come up with a research question, a hypothesis, a way to test the hypothesis, etc.
After 35 years in the business I almost went over and corrected her. "No, see, first you find out what's being funded. . . . . "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNbhyJYt4SI&t
Gender is sex-correlated attributes (e.g. sexual orientation). Trans refers to a state or process of divergence. The transgender spectrum is Diverse and inclusive. Is transgender conversion therapy another wicked solution a la human rites a.k.a. planned parenthood?
Sounds like Iike the author has dived into this area as part 9f writing a book and sees a classic case of throwing the baby our with the bathwater.
stlcdr said...
Being a child going through puberty and all the social awkwardness of growing - There's a pill for that!
3/27/25, 11:08 AM
Yes that was my point exactly. Puberty (I called it middle school) is a period of confusion and discomfort and anxiety and lots of bad things. There is a fair amount of suffering and then you work your way through it, hopefully look at a lot of options in consideration of "who am i?" and choose a good model then spend your life working toward that ideal or deciding that ideal was not for me and reorienting yourself.
I would think for most people there is a bit of suffering at that age as you are transitioning from a child to an adult and you don't have enough guidance to help in that transition. Nonetheless we all pass through that period and hopefully become functioning successful adults.
It is at that precise time where you are unsure of yourself and confused that adults need to support a child. If we just ignore it the kids will probably be fine. But adults are not ignoring it. They are actively harming these children. And of course, as I suspect no Nazi or communist thinks of himself as evil but rather someone saving the world, these parents cannot allow themselves to acknowledge that what they are doing is monstrous. And the more monstrous their actions the stronger must be their denial.
Hawkeyedjb-
in this particular case at least, Hoffer got the sequence wrong.
Transgenderism truly did start as a cause, but became a (victimization) racket next and is now business.
Big Business.
Dr Az Hakeem is a UK psychotherapist who has spend years specializing in the treatment of sexual dysphoria. HIs findings do not go down well with the trans activist community. For instance, he would no more "affirm" someone's gender confusion than he would affirm an anorexic that they need to be thinner or a suicide that they need to be dead. He can be found various places on the web, but he talks fast with a London accent so it would be best to turn on subtitles.
There's no such thing as a "gender confused" pre-pubescent, all are the product of parental abuse and/or 3rd party mis-treatment.
"More medical experiments on children needed!" - Josef Mengele
Good science or bad science, a substantial percentage of government research grants are meant to "keep the lights on" and "train the next generation" rather than discover anything of substance. Research labs cost a lot to build, require the hiring and training of skilled niche staff, and some think their resources "should to be available for unforeseen circumstances."
This all turns to rampant waste. The same logic applies to many military/defense contractors. Still, MANY politicians want to fund nominal waste for evermore.
Watched a youtube dude who tried to equate TRT to Trans procedures.
Many years ago, I overheard a group of Botany grad students discuss how the best way to get research funded is to tie it to global warming.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.