Ok, so the Cass report creates recommendations for care in the UK. Does it also provide evidence that US medical experts are charlatans pushing an agenda for big pharma as is claimed? Big, if true.
Replies
No, it does not impute motive. That's the couch-lover's conspiracy brain kicking into overdrive. HOWEVER, from a purely consequentialist standpoint, pre-Cass Report GUM in the United Kingdom was known for its progressive excesses (again, without imputing motive).
jun 19, 2025, 10:22 pm • 0 0 • view
Ok, but that sounds like something the medical professional community should be sorting out based on most reliable evidence. The notion that expertise or science are subject to approval by politicians is my issue with these kinds of statements.
jun 19, 2025, 10:30 pm • 1 0 • view
The problem was that until the Cass Report came out, the default position (not supported by any MEDICAL evidence, but instead by soft-science Gender Theory "researchers") was "you MUST allow trans patients to self-identify", "you MUST allow pubescent trans patients to take puberty blockers" etc.
jun 19, 2025, 10:36 pm • 0 0 • view
The ENTIRETY of trans care is based on MEDICAL evidence. There are literally THOUSANDS of papers of MEDICAL evidence on the matter, all supporting Trans affirming care. I can give them to you, but you wouldn't read them. The default position was ALWAYS to evaluate a person after they self I.D
jun 20, 2025, 5:41 am • 0 0 • view
That's outright false. Trans patients before the cass report had to have a pcp or family doctor refer them to a clinic with a years long waiting list, something they could, and more often than not, did, refuse to do. On top of this. Gender "theory" is not "soft science" it's replicable & supported
jun 20, 2025, 5:35 am • 0 0 • view