The transphobes ready to do pile-on rants given the smallest openings is part of what drives the denial of science uncertainty on the pro-trans side: any admission there is more to learn is, unfortunately, not taken as nuance but instead used to springboard unfounded attacks.
density was “partially recovered” after a transgender child shifted from puberty blockers to gender-affirming hormone therapy.
The reduced bone density in recently transitioned teens is not a risk for them in their youth or middle age. The risk is that the only partially recovered density sets them up for higher rates of osteoporosis and debilitating bone fractures in their 60s and up. Definitive answers won’t be available - leaving the science unsettled - until they reach their 60s several decades from now.
Like I said, I’ve never seen a denial of science from trans people. I’ve ready many journals and studies, and they all seem to support the understanding that transitioning changes our physical abilities. Trans women often score around the same, sometimes higher, sometimes lower with other cis women in a range of variables - but overall comparable. We certainly need more studies into things such as timelines for HRT changes as studies cut-off after 3 years, or the effects of Progesterone - but the science of the sports debate is much clearer.
As for the puberty blocker/bone density thing he easy solution is to allow children to access HRT and go through the correct puberty. Puberty blockers largely exist as a political compromise with cis people over the ownership of our bodies.
Also them.us (pinknews, and one other that escape me) are considered to be a bit transphobic out of most queer media.
The transphobes ready to do pile-on rants given the smallest openings is part of what drives the denial of science uncertainty on the pro-trans side: any admission there is more to learn is, unfortunately, not taken as nuance but instead used to springboard unfounded attacks.
The unfairness of the situation doesn’t make the science actually settled, though. For example, even a pro-trans site (https://www.them.us/answers-and-advice/health/puberty-blockers-bone-density) defense of puberty blockers dropping bone density is that
The reduced bone density in recently transitioned teens is not a risk for them in their youth or middle age. The risk is that the only partially recovered density sets them up for higher rates of osteoporosis and debilitating bone fractures in their 60s and up. Definitive answers won’t be available - leaving the science unsettled - until they reach their 60s several decades from now.
Like I said, I’ve never seen a denial of science from trans people. I’ve ready many journals and studies, and they all seem to support the understanding that transitioning changes our physical abilities. Trans women often score around the same, sometimes higher, sometimes lower with other cis women in a range of variables - but overall comparable. We certainly need more studies into things such as timelines for HRT changes as studies cut-off after 3 years, or the effects of Progesterone - but the science of the sports debate is much clearer.
As for the puberty blocker/bone density thing he easy solution is to allow children to access HRT and go through the correct puberty. Puberty blockers largely exist as a political compromise with cis people over the ownership of our bodies.
Also them.us (pinknews, and one other that escape me) are considered to be a bit transphobic out of most queer media.