If you claim to be the party of science

[AuburnNTexas 7,157]

Homer is correct true Science requires reproducible data to back up a theory. Recently we have had two area of contention one Covid and its origin and the other the proper way to treat juvenile gender dysphoria.

In the first case with very little data to back it up were were told it was Settled Science that the Covid did not come from the Wuhan lab, but from a wet market. The problem with that is there was no examination of the wet market by outside entities and  there was no examination of the Lab.  Because of the Chinese stonewalling any true investigation from the beginning any theory is flawed.  The fact that the Chinese were not transparent while not true data does give the appearance they are and were hiding something.  There were Scientists who examined the Virus and said they saw signs that gene cutting had been involved where other scientists examined the same virus and said it did not appear that gene cutting had been involved. At that point what should have happened is an open discussion and a review of both sides of the coin. Sadly what happened was a total squelching of the possibility that it came from the Lab.  One of the Chief squelchers was Fauci who now claims as more evidence has presented itself that it might have come from the lab. I have no problem with Fauci and others accepting their initial conclusion might have been wrong as new evidence has come forward as that is how science is supposed to work.  My problem was the attempt to squelch other opinions within the scientific community and use the media to brand some fine scientists as nut cases.

In the second case despite many scientists having issues with irreversible operations on minors and hormone treatment on minors with no long term studies on doing these things. In this case less by the scientific community but more by politicians and media on both sides we are not getting the data that is needed.  There is a higher percentage of people with gender dysphoria who have committed suicide or hurt themselves then other groups of people.  There have been no studies that I know of that compares people with Gender dysphoria who have gone through either hormonal treatment or operations or both versus people with gender dysphoria who have not too show if the procedures reduce the suicide rate. There are other external factors on how people with gender dysphoria are treated by others that also must be considered in the higher suicide rate.  The second issue is for some groups saying we should do this type of treatment on minors without parental approval.  The argument parents don't know enough to make an informed decision as at this time neither do scientists or Doctors as there is not enough data to back either side.  

Sadly I am seeing opinions that often have not even reached the point of being an hypothesis being presented a settled Science.

Back when I studied Biology at Auburn there were certain steps that went in coming up with a theory.

Ask why you need a theory
• Find out what others have done
• Research for relevant data
• Develop a hypothesis
• Write a background for your hypothesis
• Test the hypothesis
• Modify the hypothesis where necessary
• Make predictions using your theory and test them
• Publish your theory

  Sadly we seem to be bypassing the above steps for political reasons instead of scientific reasons. 

[homersapien 11,393]

59 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

Homer is correct true Science requires reproducible data to back up a theory. Recently we have had two area of contention one Covid and its origin and the other the proper way to treat juvenile gender dysphoria.

In the first case with very little data to back it up were were told it was Settled Science that the Covid did not come from the Wuhan lab, but from a wet market. The problem with that is there was no examination of the wet market by outside entities and  there was no examination of the Lab.  Because of the Chinese stonewalling any true investigation from the beginning any theory is flawed.  The fact that the Chinese were not transparent while not true data does give the appearance they are and were hiding something.  There were Scientists who examined the Virus and said they saw signs that gene cutting had been involved where other scientists examined the same virus and said it did not appear that gene cutting had been involved. At that point what should have happened is an open discussion and a review of both sides of the coin. Sadly what happened was a total squelching of the possibility that it came from the Lab.  One of the Chief squelchers was Fauci who now claims as more evidence has presented itself that it might have come from the lab. I have no problem with Fauci and others accepting their initial conclusion might have been wrong as new evidence has come forward as that is how science is supposed to work.  My problem was the attempt to squelch other opinions within the scientific community and use the media to brand some fine scientists as nut cases.

In the second case despite many scientists having issues with irreversible operations on minors and hormone treatment on minors with no long term studies on doing these things. In this case less by the scientific community but more by politicians and media on both sides we are not getting the data that is needed.  There is a higher percentage of people with gender dysphoria who have committed suicide or hurt themselves then other groups of people.  There have been no studies that I know of that compares people with Gender dysphoria who have gone through either hormonal treatment or operations or both versus people with gender dysphoria who have not too show if the procedures reduce the suicide rate. There are other external factors on how people with gender dysphoria are treated by others that also must be considered in the higher suicide rate.  The second issue is for some groups saying we should do this type of treatment on minors without parental approval.  The argument parents don't know enough to make an informed decision as at this time neither do scientists or Doctors as there is not enough data to back either side.  

Sadly I am seeing opinions that often have not even reached the point of being an hypothesis being presented a settled Science.

Back when I studied Biology at Auburn there were certain steps that went in coming up with a theory.

Ask why you need a theory
• Find out what others have done
• Research for relevant data
• Develop a hypothesis
• Write a background for your hypothesis
• Test the hypothesis
• Modify the hypothesis where necessary
• Make predictions using your theory and test them
• Publish your theory

  Sadly we seem to be bypassing the above steps for political reasons instead of scientific reasons. 

Good post, but I don't remember the probable origin of Covid as being presented as "Settled Science". I can certainly imagine that experts in the field - like Fauci - presuming it was from a "natural" source - after all, that's where all previous viruses of this type originated.  But "settled science"?  I don't recall anyone saying that.

Excellent point re the gender dysphoric data on suicides.  There are several people on this forum who obviously do not take this condition seriously. And no doubt, it's hard for anyone to imagine the mental distress of waking up in the body of what you consider the "opposite" gender, not to mention the everyday social rejection.

We as a species feel compelled to organize everything in specific categories.  This makes it easy to simply dismiss gender dysphoria - or homosexuality for that matter - as unnatural or a moral aberration. 

But in the universe (nature), most things exist on a continuum.  Things or conditions that fall outside of the majority still exist and are no less "natural" than things that represent the majority. IMO, there's overwhelming scientific and historical evidence for homosexuality as being a natural condition. It may be too early to be as certain about gender dysphoria.  But  I am inclined to believe that - like homosexuality - it is. 

 

Edited March 30, 2023 by homersapien

[AuburnNTexas 7,157]

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Good post, but I don't remember the probable origin of Covid as being presented as "Settled Science". I can certainly imagine that experts in the field - like Fauci - presuming it was from a "natural" source - after all, that's where all previous viruses of this type originated.  But "settled science"?  I don't recall anyone saying that.

Excellent point re the gender dysphoric data on suicides.  There are several people on this forum who obviously do not take this condition seriously. And no doubt, it's hard for anyone to imagine the mental distress of waking up in the body of what you consider the "opposite" gender, not to mention the everyday social rejection.

We as a species feel compelled to organize everything in specific categories.  This makes it easy to simply dismiss gender dysphoria - or homosexuality for that matter - as unnatural or a moral aberration. 

But in the universe (nature), most things exist on a continuum.  Things or conditions that fall outside of the majority still exist and are no less "natural" than things that represent the majority. IMO, there's overwhelming scientific and historical evidence for homosexuality as being a natural condition. It may be too early to be as certain about gender dysphoria.  But  I am inclined to believe that - like homosexuality - it is. 

 

I probably should not have used the term Settled Science. I should have said it was a theory and as I said I had no issue as more data became available when people who pushed the Wet Market theory started to change their tune and say that a Lab Leak  was a legitimate possibility. My problem was a planned shutdown at that time of anybody who disagreed with the Wet Market theory.  We will never know the true origin as without Data from the wet market and the lab and an open investigation when it was discovered it is to late.

What is not to late is to never again allow some Scientists in a position of power to attack scientists who disagree with them and the total bypassing of a true scientific investigation which finally did occur much later and has shown both views could be correct. In Europe they studied the impact of Covid on children and early on opened their schools we followed Fauci blindly and ignored the data that Europe provided us and as such we hurt our kids academic and social development.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

The virus could have natural origins and,,, the pandemic, the result of a lab leak.

Sometimes the definition of "political science" is all political, no science.

[DKW 86 7,431]

On 3/30/2023 at 12:14 PM, AuburnNTexas said:

Homer is correct true Science requires reproducible data to back up a theory. Recently we have had two area of contention one Covid and its origin and the other the proper way to treat juvenile gender dysphoria.

In the first case with very little data to back it up were were told it was Settled Science that the Covid did not come from the Wuhan lab, but from a wet market. The problem with that is there was no examination of the wet market by outside entities and  there was no examination of the Lab.  Because of the Chinese stonewalling any true investigation from the beginning any theory is flawed.  The fact that the Chinese were not transparent while not true data does give the appearance they are and were hiding something.  There were Scientists who examined the Virus and said they saw signs that gene cutting had been involved where other scientists examined the same virus and said it did not appear that gene cutting had been involved. At that point what should have happened is an open discussion and a review of both sides of the coin. Sadly what happened was a total squelching of the possibility that it came from the Lab.  One of the Chief squelchers was Fauci who now claims as more evidence has presented itself that it might have come from the lab. I have no problem with Fauci and others accepting their initial conclusion might have been wrong as new evidence has come forward as that is how science is supposed to work.  My problem was the attempt to squelch other opinions within the scientific community and use the media to brand some fine scientists as nut cases.

In the second case despite many scientists having issues with irreversible operations on minors and hormone treatment on minors with no long term studies on doing these things. In this case less by the scientific community but more by politicians and media on both sides we are not getting the data that is needed.  There is a higher percentage of people with gender dysphoria who have committed suicide or hurt themselves then other groups of people.  There have been no studies that I know of that compares people with Gender dysphoria who have gone through either hormonal treatment or operations or both versus people with gender dysphoria who have not too show if the procedures reduce the suicide rate. There are other external factors on how people with gender dysphoria are treated by others that also must be considered in the higher suicide rate.  The second issue is for some groups saying we should do this type of treatment on minors without parental approval.  The argument parents don't know enough to make an informed decision as at this time neither do scientists or Doctors as there is not enough data to back either side.  

Sadly I am seeing opinions that often have not even reached the point of being an hypothesis being presented a settled Science.

Back when I studied Biology at Auburn there were certain steps that went in coming up with a theory.

Ask why you need a theory
• Find out what others have done
• Research for relevant data
• Develop a hypothesis
• Write a background for your hypothesis
• Test the hypothesis
• Modify the hypothesis where necessary
• Make predictions using your theory and test them
• Publish your theory

  Sadly we seem to be bypassing the above steps for political reasons instead of scientific reasons. 

As Titan said: "But Feelings...."

[DKW 86 7,431]

On 3/30/2023 at 1:13 PM, homersapien said:

Good post, but I don't remember the probable origin of Covid as being presented as "Settled Science".

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/02/26/science/covid-virus-wuhan-origins.html

“It’s very convincing,” said Dr. Thea Fischer, an epidemiologist at the University of Copenhagen, who was not involved in the new studies. The question of whether the virus spilled over from animals “HAS NOW BEEN SETTLED with a very high degree of evidence, and thus confidence.”

Please note that the two articles are EXACTLY one year apart.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a 

 

Lab Leak Most Likely Origin of Covid-19 Pandemic, Energy Department Now Says

U.S. agency’s revised assessment is based on new intelligence

Edited April 1, 2023 by DKW 86

[homersapien 11,393]

On 3/31/2023 at 8:05 PM, DKW 86 said:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/02/26/science/covid-virus-wuhan-origins.html

“It’s very convincing,” said Dr. Thea Fischer, an epidemiologist at the University of Copenhagen, who was not involved in the new studies. The question of whether the virus spilled over from animals “HAS NOW BEEN SETTLED with a very high degree of evidence, and thus confidence.”

Please note that the two articles are EXACTLY one year apart.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a 

 

Lab Leak Most Likely Origin of Covid-19 Pandemic, Energy Department Now Says

U.S. agency’s revised assessment is based on new intelligence

Good grief. 

This may come as a shock to you David, but ONE Danish epidemiologist does NOT establish what is - or isn't - "established science".  

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by homersapien

[DKW 86 7,431]

20 hours ago, homersapien said:

Good grief. 

This may come as a shock to you David, but ONE Danish epidemiologist does NOT establish what is - or isn't - "established science".  

 

Of course not. It was the fact that the NYT published that s*** as if it were. And then had half of North America quote the good doctor as if it was true. I could find dozens of articles saying the same thing, that the "Science was Settled" at natural transfer. But you would dismiss 1000 because it doesn't fit the narrative in your little head. It hard to keep a straight face around here sometimes.

And of course, you are the drive-by psychoanalysis guy that believes that what one so-called psychiatrist that has never been in the same room with his subject can get a 100% Crystalline Picture of the make up of an individual from 2000 miles away using sound bytes taken completely out of context and link such articles forever on this forum.

[homersapien 11,393]

9 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Of course not. It was the fact that the NYT published that s*** as if it were. And then had half of North America quote the good doctor as if it was true. I could find dozens of articles saying the same thing, that the "Science was Settled" at natural transfer. But you would dismiss 1000 because it doesn't fit the narrative in your little head. It hard to keep a straight face around here sometimes.

And of course, you are the drive-by psychoanalysis guy that believes that what one so-called psychiatrist that has never been in the same room with his subject can get a 100% Crystalline Picture of the make up of an individual from 2000 miles away using sound bytes taken completely out of context and link such articles forever on this forum.

You're posting it came across as an attempt to demonstrate there was a "scientific consensus" (by quoting just one scientist's opinion).  Sorry if I misunderstood your point - but taken in context as a response to my post - it was ambiguous.  It clearly looked as if you were disagreeing with my post.

As far as your ad hominem attack/rant about psychoanalysis in the second paragraph, please cite an example of what you are referring to. 

Otherwise, you just sound like a butt-hurt immature snowflake who's harboring a grudge against me for simply calling you out periodically for your iconoclastic BS.    

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by homersapien

[TexasTiger 12,961]

Worthwhile thread:

 

[TexasTiger 12,961]

An analysis of outcomes for minors who socially transition from UK’s gender clinic:

”Social gender transition is an increasingly accepted intervention for gender variant children and adolescents. To date, there is scant literature comparing the mental health of children and adolescents diagnosed with gender dysphoria who have socially transitioned versus those who are still living in their birth-assigned gender. We examined the mental health of children and adolescents referred to the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), a specialist clinic in London, UK, who had socially transitioned (i.e., were living in their affirmed gender and/or had changed their name) versus those who had not socially transitioned. Referrals to the GIDS were aged 4–17 years. We assessed mental health correlates of living in one’s affirmed gender among 288 children and adolescents (208 birth-assigned female; 210 socially transitioned) and of name change in 357 children and adolescents (253 birth-assigned female; 214 name change). The presence or absence of mood and anxiety difficulties and past suicide attempts were clinician rated. Living in role and name change were more prevalent in birth-assigned females versus birth-assigned males. Overall, there were no significant effects of social transition or name change on mental health status. These findings identify the need for more research to understand how social transition influences mental health, including longitudinal studies that allow for more confident inferences to be made regarding the relationship between social transition and mental health in young people with gender dysphoria.

[TexasTiger 12,961]

Mainstream media is finally starting to perform actual journalism:

 

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/04/05/the-evidence-to-support-medicalised-gender-transitions-in-adolescents-is-worryingly-weak

[TexasTiger 12,961]

 

[TexasTiger 12,961]

The most prominent “expert” voices in the USA keep repeating this is settle science and all agree. Except for the scientists not captured by an ideological position:

Results

In 21 studies, adolescents were given Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa) treatment. In three studies, cross-sex hormone treatment (CSHT) was given without previous GnRHa treatment. No randomised controlled trials were identified. The few longitudinal observational studies were hampered by small numbers, and high attrition rates. Hence, the long-term effects of hormone therapy on psychosocial health could not be evaluated. Concerning bone health, GnRHa treatment delays bone maturation and bone mineral density gain, however found to partially recover during CSHT when studied at age 22 years.

Conclusion

Evidence to assess the effects of hormone treatment on the above fields in children with gender dysphoria are insufficient. To improve future research, we present the GENDHOR checklist, a checklist for studies in gender dysphoria.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.16791

[TexasTiger 12,961]

The UK looked at the science:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/health/puberty-blockers-transgender-children-britain-nhs.html

[TexasTiger 12,961]

Interesting scientific review:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02626-2?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[Gowebb11 9,339]

On 4/5/2023 at 9:03 PM, TexasTiger said:

Mainstream media is finally starting to perform actual journalism:

 

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/04/05/the-evidence-to-support-medicalised-gender-transitions-in-adolescents-is-worryingly-weak

We agree on the media part. I would also offer this. The nations listed in your excerpt have competent and engaged governments that proactively seek solutions to big challenges. We are led by people who think mean tweeting and inflammatory rhetoric are part of the problem solving process. 

Edited June 11, 2023 by Gowebb11

[I_M4_AU 7,865]

1 hour ago, Gowebb11 said:

We agree on the media part. I would also offer this. The nations listed in your excerpt have competent and engaged governments that proactively seek solutions to big challenges. We are led by people who think mean tweeting and inflammatory rhetoric are part of the problem solving process. 

The nations listed have had a lot more experience dealing with sex reassignment procedures (whether it be puberty blockers and/or surgery).  We are lead by people that have legislated the ideology into existence regardless of what the other nations have rationally concluded.  We have even marketed the ideology as *gender affirming care* which is as a misleading of a slogan as the Inflation Reduction Act.

 

This flag was the dominate flag in the presentation.  The American flag was flanking this featured flag.  There is an agenda and it starts with the children.

 

[TexasTiger 12,961]

The lawsuits are starting in the USA. Double mastectomy at 13. Mental health issues not adequately addressed.

https://libertycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/1.-Complaint-1.pdf

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I'm 4 episodes in on this, but I highly recommend this podcast, "The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling."  Each podcast episode is about 45 mins to a maybe and hour and 10 minutes long.  It's hosted by Megan Phelps-Roper...who left the infamous Westboro Baptist Church several years ago (they of the funeral-picketing with "God Hates F*gs" signage fame).  

It's probably the most thorough, balanced and reasoned discussion on this whole topic of the clash of trans rights with women's rights, how the cultural debate has gotten to this point, etc.  She includes clips and interviews from various perspectives, though obviously it's primarily focused on the discussion between her and Rowling.  

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-witch-trials-of-j-k-rowling/id1671691064

[SLAG-91 1,483]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12202901/Midwest-teachers-trade-tips-subversively-quietly-transitioning-kids-without-telling-parents.html

Educational malpractice is about the nicest thing I can say about this.

[TexasTiger 12,961]

There’s a collective insanity surrounding this issue that needs to be called out and recognized. We’ve seen many on the right increasingly unable to see reality. This is now happening on the left. One can be reasonable, realistic AND kind to folks who are different. 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12211691/EXCLUSIVE-Mother-Year-8-pupil-scolded-gender-proud-her.html

 

[TexasTiger 12,961]

The utter lack of logic behind the ideological claims & assertions made by otherwise intelligent people is one of the most stunning things for me on this issue.

 

You can’t have it both ways. If becoming a trans woman is the ultimate rejection of the patriarchy then becoming a trans man is the ultimate acceptance of the patriarchy. Is it about some larger political agenda or finding one’s “true self”? And this is an attorney who is the director of this organization:

 

[TexasTiger 12,961]

Lawsuit:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12325059/Texas-woman-seeks-1M-doctors-testosterone-age-17-left-nipples-peeling-botched-trans-op-saying-treated-depression-instead.html

[auburnatl1 4,980]

Politicians of both parties better begin to better understand science. Gender change, mutating a virus, genome, weapons, AI, ect. Ie  if you don’t understand AI, install chatgbt on your device and simply ask it any question or opinion (most of your kids have -promise), it’ll write term papers, do homework, create legal arguments, write songs, hell it will do a better job debating a political pov on this forum than we can. It’s scary smart, almost human like, and evolving and improving by the day.

The point is tech is presenting us with accelerating “could vs should” debates.   It’s driving our culture and much of this forums topics.  So in addition to just  red vs blue - we have to up the bar on our politicians ability to… actually think. Some of this evolving tech will have to be regulated (and I’m not a pro- regulation guy).

Edited July 22, 2023 by auburnatl1