We need a general tweet of the day thread
- Thread starter RaceBannon
- Start date
https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-trans-child-molester-hannah-tubbs-4-year-old-girl-library
Hey they aren't after the kids!
Hey they aren't after the kids!
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
Doesn't deserve owen thread, but the article does deserve a read.https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1511727082799353859
It’s hard even to figure this out from reading the study, which omits some very basic statistics one would expect to find, but the non-result is pretty clear from eTable 3 in the supplementary materials, which shows what percentage of study participants met the researchers’ thresholds for depression, anxiety, and self-harm or suicidal thoughts during each of the four waves of the study:
At each time point, “PB/GAH” refers to the kids who reported being on puberty blockers or gender-affirming hormones, while “none” refers to the kids who reported no such treatment.
Among the kids who went on hormones, there isn’t genuine statistical improvement here from baseline to the final wave of data collection. At baseline, 59% of the treatment-naive kids experienced moderate to severe depression. Twelve months later, 56% of the kids on GAM experienced moderate to severe depression. At baseline, 45% of the treatment-naive kids experienced self-harm or suicidal thoughts. Twelve months later, 37% of the kids on GAM did. These are not meaningful differences: The kids in the study arrived with what appear to be alarmingly high rates of mental health problems, many of them went on blockers or hormones, and they exited the study with what appear to be alarmingly high rates of mental health problems[/b]. (Though as I’ll explain, because the researchers provide so little detailed data, it’s hard to know exactly how dire the kids’ mental health situations were.)
If there were improvement, the researchers would have touted it in a clear, specific way by explaining exactly how much the kids on GAM improved. After all, this is exactly what they were looking into — they list their study’s “Question” as “Is gender-affirming care for transgender and nonbinary (TNB) youths associated with changes in depression, anxiety, and suicidality?” But they don’t claim this anywhere — not specifically. They reference “improvements” twice (see above) but offer no statistical demonstration anywhere in the paper or the supplemental material. I wanted to double-check this to be sure, so I reached out to one of the study authors. They wanted to stay on background, but they confirmed to me that there was no improvement over time among the kids who went on hormones or blockers.
That’s why I think the University of Washington–Seattle, JAMA Network Open, and the authors of this study are simply misrepresenting it. Anyone who reads their publicity materials, or who reads the study itself in a less-than-careful-manner, or who finds Collin’s Reddit posts, will conclude that this study found that access to GAM improved trans kids’ mental health outcomes over time.
But that simply didn’t happen.
It’s hard even to figure this out from reading the study, which omits some very basic statistics one would expect to find, but the non-result is pretty clear from eTable 3 in the supplementary materials, which shows what percentage of study participants met the researchers’ thresholds for depression, anxiety, and self-harm or suicidal thoughts during each of the four waves of the study:
At each time point, “PB/GAH” refers to the kids who reported being on puberty blockers or gender-affirming hormones, while “none” refers to the kids who reported no such treatment.
Among the kids who went on hormones, there isn’t genuine statistical improvement here from baseline to the final wave of data collection. At baseline, 59% of the treatment-naive kids experienced moderate to severe depression. Twelve months later, 56% of the kids on GAM experienced moderate to severe depression. At baseline, 45% of the treatment-naive kids experienced self-harm or suicidal thoughts. Twelve months later, 37% of the kids on GAM did. These are not meaningful differences: The kids in the study arrived with what appear to be alarmingly high rates of mental health problems, many of them went on blockers or hormones, and they exited the study with what appear to be alarmingly high rates of mental health problems[/b]. (Though as I’ll explain, because the researchers provide so little detailed data, it’s hard to know exactly how dire the kids’ mental health situations were.)
If there were improvement, the researchers would have touted it in a clear, specific way by explaining exactly how much the kids on GAM improved. After all, this is exactly what they were looking into — they list their study’s “Question” as “Is gender-affirming care for transgender and nonbinary (TNB) youths associated with changes in depression, anxiety, and suicidality?” But they don’t claim this anywhere — not specifically. They reference “improvements” twice (see above) but offer no statistical demonstration anywhere in the paper or the supplemental material. I wanted to double-check this to be sure, so I reached out to one of the study authors. They wanted to stay on background, but they confirmed to me that there was no improvement over time among the kids who went on hormones or blockers.
That’s why I think the University of Washington–Seattle, JAMA Network Open, and the authors of this study are simply misrepresenting it. Anyone who reads their publicity materials, or who reads the study itself in a less-than-careful-manner, or who finds Collin’s Reddit posts, will conclude that this study found that access to GAM improved trans kids’ mental health outcomes over time.
But that simply didn’t happen.
Leftards lie and love to be lied to.
Doesn't deserve owen thread, but the article does deserve a read.https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1511727082799353859
It’s hard even to figure this out from reading the study, which omits some very basic statistics one would expect to find, but the non-result is pretty clear from eTable 3 in the supplementary materials, which shows what percentage of study participants met the researchers’ thresholds for depression, anxiety, and self-harm or suicidal thoughts during each of the four waves of the study:
At each time point, “PB/GAH” refers to the kids who reported being on puberty blockers or gender-affirming hormones, while “none” refers to the kids who reported no such treatment.
Among the kids who went on hormones, there isn’t genuine statistical improvement here from baseline to the final wave of data collection. At baseline, 59% of the treatment-naive kids experienced moderate to severe depression. Twelve months later, 56% of the kids on GAM experienced moderate to severe depression. At baseline, 45% of the treatment-naive kids experienced self-harm or suicidal thoughts. Twelve months later, 37% of the kids on GAM did. These are not meaningful differences: The kids in the study arrived with what appear to be alarmingly high rates of mental health problems, many of them went on blockers or hormones, and they exited the study with what appear to be alarmingly high rates of mental health problems[/b]. (Though as I’ll explain, because the researchers provide so little detailed data, it’s hard to know exactly how dire the kids’ mental health situations were.)
If there were improvement, the researchers would have touted it in a clear, specific way by explaining exactly how much the kids on GAM improved. After all, this is exactly what they were looking into — they list their study’s “Question” as “Is gender-affirming care for transgender and nonbinary (TNB) youths associated with changes in depression, anxiety, and suicidality?” But they don’t claim this anywhere — not specifically. They reference “improvements” twice (see above) but offer no statistical demonstration anywhere in the paper or the supplemental material. I wanted to double-check this to be sure, so I reached out to one of the study authors. They wanted to stay on background, but they confirmed to me that there was no improvement over time among the kids who went on hormones or blockers.
That’s why I think the University of Washington–Seattle, JAMA Network Open, and the authors of this study are simply misrepresenting it. Anyone who reads their publicity materials, or who reads the study itself in a less-than-careful-manner, or who finds Collin’s Reddit posts, will conclude that this study found that access to GAM improved trans kids’ mental health outcomes over time.
But that simply didn’t happen.
lol the guy ends up blaming Abbott and Texas for pushing back
'
I heart the narrative
'
I heart the narrative
Yet 90% of that congregation will vote for the RATs who demand this insanity be accepted. The same is true of the Catholic church. More than 50% of Catholics who actually practice their faith vote for RATs. It makes no sense but I live in an insane world where NOTHING makes sense anymore.
Jews are the ultimate white guilty liberals. Their personal life is totally driven by meritocracy. Get their kids educated and given a work ethic (Bernie Sanders the exception that proves the rule). Run their businesses with a budget and performance metrics. Pay the minimum of taxes allowed by law (like the dazzler who thinks he is undertaxed). Then they support the dems which have a large constituency of Jew and Israel haters
and are owned by the teacher unions who negatively educate the kids. Then toss in the government unions who are the antithesis of performance metrics. Then the BLM/antifa effort to destroy the cities which have most of the US Jewish population. None of that makes rational sense.
and are owned by the teacher unions who negatively educate the kids. Then toss in the government unions who are the antithesis of performance metrics. Then the BLM/antifa effort to destroy the cities which have most of the US Jewish population. None of that makes rational sense.
I agree completely but most "Jews" don't practice their faith or even believe in God. I once asked a very intelligent business man why he practiced some of the Jewish traditions he and his family did (knowing he didn't believe in God). His response was because he was Jewish. I responded with my knowledge of those traditions being rooted in religious practice. He looked confused when I asked the question and he said, "You know I've never thought about it that way." I guess he enjoyed the label and tradtion of being Jewish. To him it was more like being a Duck or Husky fan; I wear this or that because I'm a fan not a participant.
The anti-Semitic world doesn't care if a "Jew" is agnostic. Just like BLM doesn't care if a "white" isn't a racist. It's about race. Lots of hypocritical non-Jew whites whose private lives are totally inconsistent with their dem votes. They just aren't subject to the Jewish blood libel like the Jews.
SFGbob
New Fish
Their religion is liberalism, not Judaism. Dated a Jewish woman back in the day. Took me to my first passover dinner. Large, successful Jewish family living in the Hancock Park area of LA. Doctors, lawyers, and all high performing individuals. They were the perfect of example of the old adage about Jews made by Milton Himmelfarb. American "Jews earn like Episcopalians, and vote like Puerto Ricans."
Last edited:
