Jon the Hat Posted 12 March Share Posted 12 March (edited) 16 hours ago, Voll Blau said: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/11/biggest-tory-donor-looking-diane-abbott-hate-all-black-women Absolutely fine because she done maths wrong once. The more you hear about this, the worse it gets. Appalling thing to say, yesterday or 5 years or 50 years ago. No doubt if they Conservatives had millions to hand back they would do. @daggers just think, if the Conservatives didn't have to counter the union funding Labour has, they wouldn't need rich people to be donating millions. And yes I appreciate the unions started Labour to counter the rich power in politics and elsewhere, but again that is no reason to keep that model forever. Edited 12 March by Jon the Hat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March I see the NHS has finally confirmed they will no longer prescribe puberty blockers to children. The evidence was never there to support this, and no doubt the legal cases will now continue to grow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: The more you hear about this, the worse it gets. Appalling thing to say, yesterday or 5 years or 50 years ago. No doubt if they Conservatives had millions to hand back they would do. @daggers just think, if the Conservatives didn't have to counter the union funding Labour has, they wouldn't need rich people to be donating millions. And yes I appreciate the unions started Labour to counter the rich power in politics and elsewhere, but again that is no reason to keep that model forever. I think you are massively over estimating the integrity of this Tory party 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 2 minutes ago, Facecloth said: I think you are massively over estimating the integrity of this Tory party Yes indeed. None of them have handed back any serious donations despite the donors being accused or even prosecuted of all kinds of shit. I'll turn it around, no doubt they have already spent most of it and therefore cannot afford to give it back even if they had an attack of the moral compass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionator Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March All of this from the tories so they can cling onto 2% of the voters who may switch to the reform party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 13 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: The more you hear about this, the worse it gets. Appalling thing to say, yesterday or 5 years or 50 years ago. No doubt if they Conservatives had millions to hand back they would do. @daggers just think, if the Conservatives didn't have to counter the union funding Labour has, they wouldn't need rich people to be donating millions. And yes I appreciate the unions started Labour to counter the rich power in politics and elsewhere, but again that is no reason to keep that model forever. This has to be the most pathetic attempt at trolling since radio bloke used to post polling forecasts before he shat it and ran away. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretPro Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 50 minutes ago, Daggers said: This has to be the most pathetic attempt at trolling since radio bloke used to post polling forecasts before he shat it and ran away. I miss those days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 17 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: I see the NHS has finally confirmed they will no longer prescribe puberty blockers to children. The evidence was never there to support this, and no doubt the legal cases will now continue to grow. I mean that's wrong on both accounts but sure. The evidence is there to support the position that puberty blockers are safe, on account of them having FDA and MHRA licensing and the posology being the same for precocious puberty and gender dysphoria (even if the latter is technically off-label) and given a total of 83 kids are currently prescribed them you can see why they're a) off-label (barely worth a pharmaceutical companies time to shift from special to licensed medicine for that indication given the tiny income they'd bring) and b) that lawsuits won't happen 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March (edited) Has the body of that poor lad in Leicester (River Soar?) been found yet? Edited 13 March by Wymsey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicesterpool Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March Putin's madness continues now bragging that his missiles are there to be used. I'm still can't get my head round how even Russian's top generals can't see danger in all this, whoever fires the missile basic ends the world. Russia attacks a nato nation then, nato will hit Russia back 10x the amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weller54 Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 4 hours ago, Leicesterpool said: Putin's madness continues now bragging that his missiles are there to be used. I'm still can't get my head round how even Russian's top generals can't see danger in all this, whoever fires the missile basic ends the world. Russia attacks a nato nation then, nato will hit Russia back 10x the amount. Don't worry... Trump has promised to sort Putin out within 48hrs when he gets back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zear0 Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 2 minutes ago, weller54 said: Don't worry... Trump has promised to sort Putin out within 48hrs when he gets back in. He's unscrewing the vaseline as we speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parafox Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March 5 hours ago, Wymsey said: Has the body of that poor lad in Leicester (River Soar?) been found yet? No news is bad news in this case. Nothing has been reported for several days. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parafox Posted 13 March Share Posted 13 March (edited) 17 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: Yes indeed. None of them have handed back any serious donations despite the donors being accused or even prosecuted of all kinds of shit. I'll turn it around, no doubt they have already spent most of it and therefore cannot afford to give it back even if they had an attack of the moral compass. Even if they've got millions, which I'd wager they have, multi times over, they won't ever give it back. Sunak himself could pay them off but he won't. If Labour, or any other political party being funded millions from whoever or wherever, were in the same situation, I highly doubt they would either. Mainstream (let's say most) politicians have no moral compass. Edited 13 March by Parafox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 11 hours ago, Daggers said: This has to be the most pathetic attempt at trolling since radio bloke used to post polling forecasts before he shat it and ran away. I amuse myself at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 1 hour ago, Parafox said: Even if they've got millions, which I'd wager they have, multi times over, they won't ever give it back. Sunak himself could pay them off but he won't. If Labour, or any other political party being funded millions from whoever or wherever, were in the same situation, I highly doubt they would either. Mainstream (let's say most) politicians have no moral compass. Honestly I doubt they have any reserves of note, they spend it as they have it, or at least commit to spending it. There will be contracts in place for the coming election etc. The News Agents have it right, the Tories are more concerned that the donor gives a chunk of cash to Reform UK instead if they piss him off, which given his views I would say is a serious possibility. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 3 hours ago, weller54 said: Don't worry... Trump has promised to sort Putin out within 48hrs when he gets back in. By which he presumably means he accepts Russia has a right to control Ukraine, and will stop their funding and block any future move to join Nato. I cannot see any other way he could do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunge Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 3 hours ago, weller54 said: Don't worry... Trump has promised to sort Putin out within 48hrs when he gets back in. Depends whether you count going to Russia, bending over then going back to America walking funny as “a deal” I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 10 hours ago, The Doctor said: I mean that's wrong on both accounts but sure. The evidence is there to support the position that puberty blockers are safe, on account of them having FDA and MHRA licensing and the posology being the same for precocious puberty and gender dysphoria (even if the latter is technically off-label) and given a total of 83 kids are currently prescribed them you can see why they're a) off-label (barely worth a pharmaceutical companies time to shift from special to licensed medicine for that indication given the tiny income they'd bring) and b) that lawsuits won't happen The new NHS clinical guidelines, issued following a public consultation, said: “We have concluded that there is not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of puberty-suppressing hormones to make the treatment routinely available at this time.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said: The new NHS clinical guidelines, issued following a public consultation, said: “We have concluded that there is not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of puberty-suppressing hormones to make the treatment routinely available at this time.” You get the idea of the NHS being hijacked by politics not evidence here right? Not least since the consultation was overwhelmingly in favour of keeping them available, with input from paediatricians and medical researchers. That statement from the NHS is pretty straightforwardly a lie, the method of administration, the treatment length, the dosage (i.e. the posology) remains the same whether for precocious puberty or gender dysphoria. Them being safe for the treatment of precocious puberty a priori means safe for treatment of gender dysphoria and it's only the fact that it's not a licensed use (because again, patient base is not big enough for it to be worthwhile going through the licensing and variation to marketing authorisation process for pharmaceutical companies - this is why all HRT prescribed to trans people is off-label) that makes this even slightly complicated in terms of lawsuits for discrimination (because otherwise it would be a cut and dry case of medical segregation intended to cause harm to a demographic with a protected characteristic) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 6 minutes ago, The Doctor said: You get the idea of the NHS being hijacked by politics not evidence here right? Not least since the consultation was overwhelmingly in favour of keeping them available, with input from paediatricians and medical researchers. That statement from the NHS is pretty straightforwardly a lie, the method of administration, the treatment length, the dosage (i.e. the posology) remains the same whether for precocious puberty or gender dysphoria. Them being safe for the treatment of precocious puberty a priori means safe for treatment of gender dysphoria and it's only the fact that it's not a licensed use (because again, patient base is not big enough for it to be worthwhile going through the licensing and variation to marketing authorisation process for pharmaceutical companies - this is why all HRT prescribed to trans people is off-label) that makes this even slightly complicated in terms of lawsuits for discrimination (because otherwise it would be a cut and dry case of medical segregation intended to cause harm to a demographic with a protected characteristic) Yes the NHS certainly was hijacked by politics, but fortunately Stonewall, Mermaids and the like have been called out for their nonsense and we seem to be back to reality a bit more. Using these drugs to treat precocious puberty presumably means delaying puberty to a more normal time? Whereas for gender dysphoria the intention and treatment purpose and length is different and the outcome therefore unknown, and certainly not proven by studies for the former. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March Just now, Jon the Hat said: Yes the NHS certainly was hijacked by politics, but fortunately Stonewall, Mermaids and the like have been called out for their nonsense and we seem to be back to reality a bit more. Using these drugs to treat precocious puberty presumably means delaying puberty to a more normal time? Whereas for gender dysphoria the intention and treatment purpose and length is different and the outcome therefore unknown, and certainly not proven by studies for the former. The Cass Advisory board literally had members of a conversion therapy advocacy group on it, your hatred of trans people doesn't change the facts. This is not a progression to reality, it's a massive blow to bodily autonomy, not separable from the case going through the Texas 5th circuit at the moment regarding parental consent for teenagers to get birth control, the repeal of Roe and the recent trend towards prosecuting UK women for abortions. In all cases the point is that "your body is not yours, it's ours, and you will be fertile and reproduce" because we're in a fascist resurgence and they're obsessed with birth rates. The intention doesn't change the posology. The treatment length remains the same (couple of years at max), the method of administration and the dose remains the same. To give an example that people are not blinded by their anti-trans bigotry towards: Amitriptyline is a SSRI used for treatment of anxiety, however has reasonable efficacy as a prophylactic for migraines. If an Amitriptyline product is licensed for use in the treatment of anxiety but migraine prophylaxis isn't on the list of indications for the product, it can still be prescribed off-label for that. If the maximum daily dose for the product is the same in that off-label use, and the treatment course is the same, then the posology remains the same and the safety for migraine prophylaxis can be inferred from the safety for treating anxiety. The push to claim otherwise is of concern for trans adults as well, since for all the ridiculous conspiracy theories by people who don't know their arse from their elbow, pharmaceutical companies make basically nothing off HRT for trans people, because the patient base is so small that going for license variation to add treatment of gender dysphoria as an indication doesn't make financial sense for them. So, all medications prescribed for treatment of gender dysphoria is prescribed off label. This "off-label means not safe" position taken regarding puberty blockers presents a grounding to attack transitional care for adults as well despite the clear efficacy. And make mistake, that is the point, the far right will not be happy until trans people are forced into the closet because, as with abortion and birth control, transition is an affront to their "you must breed for the nation" approach. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHawk Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 18 minutes ago, The Doctor said: The Cass Advisory board literally had members of a conversion therapy advocacy group on it, your hatred of trans people doesn't change the facts. This is not a progression to reality, it's a massive blow to bodily autonomy, not separable from the case going through the Texas 5th circuit at the moment regarding parental consent for teenagers to get birth control, the repeal of Roe and the recent trend towards prosecuting UK women for abortions. In all cases the point is that "your body is not yours, it's ours, and you will be fertile and reproduce" because we're in a fascist resurgence and they're obsessed with birth rates. The intention doesn't change the posology. The treatment length remains the same (couple of years at max), the method of administration and the dose remains the same. To give an example that people are not blinded by their anti-trans bigotry towards: Amitriptyline is a SSRI used for treatment of anxiety, however has reasonable efficacy as a prophylactic for migraines. If an Amitriptyline product is licensed for use in the treatment of anxiety but migraine prophylaxis isn't on the list of indications for the product, it can still be prescribed off-label for that. If the maximum daily dose for the product is the same in that off-label use, and the treatment course is the same, then the posology remains the same and the safety for migraine prophylaxis can be inferred from the safety for treating anxiety. The push to claim otherwise is of concern for trans adults as well, since for all the ridiculous conspiracy theories by people who don't know their arse from their elbow, pharmaceutical companies make basically nothing off HRT for trans people, because the patient base is so small that going for license variation to add treatment of gender dysphoria as an indication doesn't make financial sense for them. So, all medications prescribed for treatment of gender dysphoria is prescribed off label. This "off-label means not safe" position taken regarding puberty blockers presents a grounding to attack transitional care for adults as well despite the clear efficacy. And make mistake, that is the point, the far right will not be happy until trans people are forced into the closet because, as with abortion and birth control, transition is an affront to their "you must breed for the nation" approach. Isn't the issue with puberty blockers the fact that children are too young to fully understand who they really are and gender reassignment treatment should only really happen when they are older? I ask this from a place of ignorance I suppose, I find the trans debate tiresome. As a human being I'm very much a person who thinks people should live how they want too. But just reading your replies on this page are very aggressive and one sided, and that usually turns me off the debate completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgtuk Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 2 minutes ago, RobHawk said: Isn't the issue with puberty blockers the fact that children are too young to fully understand who they really are and gender reassignment treatment should only really happen when they are older? I ask this from a place of ignorance I suppose, I find the trans debate tiresome. As a human being I'm very much a person who thinks people should live how they want too. But just reading your replies on this page are very aggressive and one sided, and that usually turns me off the debate completely. That’s strange because I read the opposite, one side has an argument based on bigotry, the other seems to be scientific… I also come from a place of relative ignorance, although I had two very close friends who transitioned in the 80’s and I know what a difference it made to their lives. I have also seen how homosexuality has been treated historically and see a parallel regarding the bigotry in the media and parts of society. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 14 March Share Posted 14 March 20 minutes ago, RobHawk said: Isn't the issue with puberty blockers the fact that children are too young to fully understand who they really are and gender reassignment treatment should only really happen when they are older? I ask this from a place of ignorance I suppose, I find the trans debate tiresome. As a human being I'm very much a person who thinks people should live how they want too. But just reading your replies on this page are very aggressive and one sided, and that usually turns me off the debate completely. That's the claim however it's not borne out by the evidence. The sole piece of evidence in support is a paper by Zucker which claims an 80% desistance rate but has some pretty fatal flaws; a) a large proportion of the subjects wouldn't meet the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria and indeed are clear about not being trans to start with, and b) makes the assumption that anyone lost to follow up also desisted (rather than filtering them out of the data set). Other studies indicate the desistance rate is more like 2.5%: https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/150/2/e2021056082/186992/Gender-Identity-5-Years-After-Social-Transition?autologincheck=redirected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts