Author:
Blog About:
An article in today's Australian newspaper (Newscorp's description, not mine) claims that "new evidence" supports limiting childrens' access to blockers. The article claims that 34% of children in a survey reported deterioration in their mental health one year after using blockers, while 29% said they felt better and 37% felt no difference.
The article then quoted "a leading child psychiatrist" as urging restraint in prescribing blockers for trans children on the grounds that they could be deleterious to their mental health.
It was only in the last couple of paragraphs of this article that the reader discovered that the sample size of the survey was a total of 44 children, thus, by reducing the percentages to actual numbers it became clear that those children reporting adverse impact on their mental health numbered 15, while those reporting positive results numbered 13 and those who felt no effect numbered 16.
Thus, if one less child had reported "negative" effects and one more had reported "positive" the result of the survey would have been 50-50.
It was mentioned that this survey contradicted the results indicated in an earlier comparison (size not given) but in this instance it had not been peer-reviewed and that there was no control group. It also ignores any other factors which may have affected the minds of the children involved, e.g. external political, social and educational influences.
This is typical of the so-called factual reporting in mainstream media which has absolutely no scientific basis but is designed solely to instill anti-TG propaganda into the reader's mind. Make no mistake, they're out to get us. If you're not yet paranoid you ought to be.
Comments
sample size
Just like all those shampoo (and other) ads we see on TV/Streaming media service. 66% of 99 people thought...
While 66% is a majority and is statistically correct but the sample size is far too small to make it really interesting.
How about I ask you a question and you answer 'yes'. Then 100% of those polled agree with that question. See how silly it can get?
There are Facts, Statistics and Damm Lies. Put enough gloss on a lie and it becomes a Fact.
Samantha
Damn!!!
You beat me to it!!
Or as someone also said...
“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell” Carl Sandberg.
Our problem is that the folks without the facts are passing the laws!
Love, Andrea Lena
As someone who was *taught* statistics ...
Let me tell a relevant anecdote.
The first lecture started. About 600 of us in a large lecture hall. The lecturer arrived, followed by two teaching assistants pushing a trolley with massive stacks of paper on it. The lecturer starts ... (I am not word perfect, but the gist should be clear)
"Here are over seven hundred academic papers. All different. All produced by respected academics in their field. All accepted by governments, academic associations, trade bodies, unions, etc,, AND used as a basis for legislation, regulation, best practice, etc. EVERY ONE of these papers contains a fundamental flaw which invalidates the conclusions of the paper, making any legislation, regulation, best practice, etc., meaningless at best, and sometimes positively harmful.
Each of you is to take a paper when you leave the hall, and 20% of your grade will depend on finding and explaining the fundamental flaw."
It is possible, indeed probable, that politicians, bureaucrats and union reps do not understand sufficient statistics. In my opinion, it is unacceptable and reprehensible for the authors of the papers to submit a paper based on statistics without getting the statistics verified by a professional statistician. The ethos of "publish or perish" has resulted in bad science being used as a justification for actions.
Lies etc
Proof, if it were needed, of the old phrase “there are lies, there are damned lies, and then there are statistics”. You can use statistics to prove, or disprove any point you are trying to make.
Reminds me of the adverts for women’s beauty products we see on TV, where they claim that 87% of women agree (out of a sample group of 79 women!)
They do a column
in the i newspaper which is often referring to how out of context these figures are used to make an argument, which is often totally specious. I refuse to read Murdoch press because it is so biased and ill-informed.
Angharad
It's good to see statistics questioned
But you're just scratching the surface. Sample size is always suspect but how those samples were chosen from the population counts too. All results must show repeatability (same group, different time) and reproduceability (different group, similar sample).
Conversely, who is this group out to get us? Is it the National (International) assn. Of shaky statisticians or the spurious newspaper sellers group?
Ron
Perspective
The research evidence is clear: access to gender-affirming healthcare is life-saving. We are committed in continued advocacy for the rights and protections that all TGD youth deserve. American Academy of Pediatrics (March 16, 2021)
Love, Andrea Lena
Murdoch Media
Here Murdoch is Fox News and I just don't use them. They admittedly lie.
Gwen
And look...
MORE Perspective
APA members and affiliates are part of a thriving, diverse, global community of over 146,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants, and students.
APA Position: The American Psychiatric Association: Supports access to affirming and supportive treatment for trans and gender diverse youth and their families, including appropriate mental health services, and when indicated puberty suppression and medical transition support.
Love, Andrea Lena
And not to be outdone...
The American American Association listed its membership as 271,660 as of 2022.
The American Medical Association (AMA) passed sweeping resolutions that strengthen its commitment to advancing DEI training in medical school, its activism against legislation restricting “gender-affirming care,” and its opposition to the mandatory reporting of gender dysphoria in minors
SADLY, it should be noted that in most of the states that are passing or have already passed laws against youth gender affirming care, they are also removing DEI in their k - University educational systems AND state employee and management training. DEI?
Diversity, equity and inclusion
Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is a term used to describe programs and policies that encourage representation and participation of diverse groups of people, including people of different genders, races and ethnicities, abilities and disabilities, religions, cultures, ages, sexual orientations and people with diverse backgrounds, experiences, skills and expertise.
Love, Andrea Lena
It is a deliberate dumbing down
Because educated people won't accept such nonsense so you have to stop them learning to think. The Republicans have been doing it for a long time as part of their ongoing strategy and also with people like Trump confusing every issue people get confused. The easy answer is everything he says is good is bad and everything he calls as lies is probably true. If he wins again the US as a democracy is finished.
Angharad
Nine Out Of Ten
Who-evers or what-evers endorse this product. Just keep asking until you have the answer you want. I posted this because it will be used uncritically by politicians and other interest groups to "prove" what they want us to believe.
I buy a Murdoch "newspaper" to know mine enemy. I do not watch Fox News or, in my country, Sky News. They just lie.
not even fit for toilet paper
Ahhh the Australian, one of Murdochs totally fair and biased masthead rags that isn't even fit for Dunny paper!
Sample size
Sample sizes are usually very low in the transphobic articles, and when replied to with much bigger studies, the haters usually disappear into anecdata. Here's a sample of over 20K people
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/145/2/e20191...
Distortion is always used, as well. The claimed 80% desistence figure comes from conflating being trans with being gender-nonconforming, and then skewing the results deliberately. I use a fictional analogy for this
"In a survey of 100 Newcastle children, 90 said that they supported Newcastle United. 10 said that they hated football. This proves that 90% of proplr who hate football are keen Newcastle supporters"
I use a similar analogy to 'prove' how most vegans eat beef.
The nastiest of these distortions is "transition increases suicidality", in which the steps are simply ignored and the final comparison stressed.
Trans people post-transition have higher suicide/self harm rates than cis people, "therefore transition makes you suicidal". This deliberately ignores the more important comparison with the rate for PRE-transition, which is higher, as well as the reasons for high ideation post-transition. Those factors are the same as for the [very few] detransitioners, which are predominantly external: abuse, family pressure, lack of medical support, hostile press, etc.