• muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I was a kid same as u i have 18 years of experience being a complete dumbass (i suspect u have significantly more than me) im neither but said dockers in multiple countries have advised against it citing the fact they are ineffective for a majority ofcases.

    As for small government isnt that one of the thibgs the american right wingers go on about? I dont know a lot about the concept feel free to enlighten me any good YouTube’s cover it?

    • eskimofry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      You think you’re more qualified than a doctor to assess whether a kid is capable of making bodily decisions? You can only speak for yourself.

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’re still nowhere near the expertise of doctors who go through nedical school for a decade or more and some even write papers for those peer reviewed journals. And some of their doctor peers review those papers before publishing journals.

          Nobody is going to listen to you or some insurance company bean counter about medical advice over a qualified medical professional. They certainly should make it illegal for insurance companies to deny care contradicting doctors.

      • muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        If u went and read the meta study commissioned by the nhs that reviewed all the literature on the topic you would find that gender modifying treatments are mostly ineffective at reducing self harm anxiety and suicide.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yes, you have already been shown by others why your meta-study, which predates the study the article I linked to discusses, is both faulty and doesn’t make the argument you think it makes.

          You should be aware that when new information replaces old information in science, you should defer to the new information. You are doing the opposite.