Read the articles, or perhaps should call them Op-Eds, seeing it lacks any clinical context and feels like it is has a passive aggressive bias.
The articles are loading the unclinical discussion with terms to insist there is a trans boom on going. Definitely pushing a Danger Will Robinson feel via a Mutilated Tranistioner in the Gaps argument.
They cite three people vaguely and then quote one person they interviewed and are extrapolating it to the entire system.
I wanted to elaborate a little more. The articles suffer from a clearly passive aggressive bias. They indicate that there isn't much data (this appears to be true), but whenever they look at the data, it isn't as Danger Will Robinson as they clearly want it to say. They say they might have missed some or those interviewed might have been dishonest or those that left and changed their might couldn't be found. Lots of excuses (all viable) to continue explaining why there is reason to fear, even when the data isn't close to there. More importantly, they make with the Moore Coulter crap equating left-wing intolerance to right-wing intolerance on transgenders. Gets even worse, as they then push an agenda that some parents are pushing their children to change so their kids are straight instead of gay... without really even raising the more obvious and almost certainly much more common issue of parents being in denial about their children. This is problematic, and no matter how legitimate it is that there needs to be more data on the subject, their objection is veiled over by a clear bias, even if presented passive-aggressively.
Their issue, and a
clinically reasonable concern, is the lack of data, both short and long term, across many bands of the spectrum. Drug tolerance, mental health, desire to continue with treatment, even to the amount of care a person receives before moving forward. But the problem there, which they fail to even raise (bias and all), is the right-wing response. The right-wing is making this stuff banned, arrestable... taking something extremely difficult to deal with and stigmatizing it even further. AM Radio is broadcasting names and places of work of doctors that work to help these patients.
So, Economic Times, there will be little data, because the right-wing, as you glanced over for a moment, is going to make certain there is none. And maybe you should think about the stigmatism that this national movement against transgendered people could impact the mental health and well being of these people magnitudes more than a puberty blocker ever could. We going to need these doctors in bullet-proof vests like doctors that worked at reproductive clinics?
