28

Appendix 4 in the Cass Review revealed that 6 out of the 7 adult GDC clinics currently operating in the UK refused to collect or share their patient followup data. If you want better care for struggling LGBT kids, you need the data.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 8 points 7 months ago

That looks really, bad, doctors of all people should know that evidence is everything in medicine.

[-] stsquad@lemmy.ml 10 points 7 months ago

The lack of follow up and record keeping at Tavistock was shocking. I'm all for expanding the range of providers to tackle waiting lists but they have to bring a more professional approach to providing care and a more holistic view if the patients.

[-] CatTrickery@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 7 months ago

Its important to note that the evidence is there, they just applied an impossible and unethical standard to it to dismiss all but one study. Of those identified to be involved in this report, multiple conversion therapist organisations were consulted but no trans advocacy organizations.

The way in which they dismissed the evidence was notably the exclusion of double blind studies. Imagine if they said the same of cancer treatments.

[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 3 points 7 months ago

I'd have to look at their exact rationale to know for sure why they excluded those studies.

Unfortunately disproportionately high standards for evidence isn't a new thing in the UK medical establishment though, NICE's recent rejection of ketamine for depression was pretty shaky IMO.

[-] CatTrickery@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 7 months ago

In this case, they used an adaptation of Newcastle Ottowa scale, however they didn't provide an appendix of what those adaptations actually were. The specific points were raised that the studies weren't double blind, which would obviously be a violation of basic ethics in this case. There were multiple conversion therapists involved in the report so its pretty reasonable to assume malicious intent.

[-] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Ah, okay, I misunderstood what you meant by "The way in which they dismissed the evidence was notably the exclusion of double blind studies." I thought you meant they had excluded studies for being double blind, which would obviously be quite weird.

It's frustratingly common in mental health (which gender dysphoria is still officially considered) for regulators to demand double blind studies, no matter how strong the evidence from observational studies is.

this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
28 points (86.8% liked)

United Kingdom

4094 readers
171 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS