World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files

Jack Daw

More evidence emerges that prove that the practice of transgender medicine is neither scientific nor medical and that people have jumped the gun to quickly and that warnings from people about gender transitioning particularly of younger people were 100% valid.

More proof that activism in recent years has trumped concern for patients.

<Rant about moderation snipped>

https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1764799914918490287

Shoog

An anti-transgender activist produces a paper of selective quotes against transgenderism, what a surprise.

About the report author - this is not reporting this is militant activism;

https://www.transgendermap.com/issues/topics/media/mia-hughes/

No doubt you'll generate the controversy you want with this though.

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121859906#Comment_121859906

Attack the substance if you can, rather than dismiss on account of an author.

Unless of course you can't counter it, which explains why you have posted what you have

Jim2007

When someone relies on X or Twitter or whatever it's called now for their source of information, all it tells us is that they are easily led and not to be taken seriously.

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860063#Comment_121860063

Yes, but it's just been published on X/Twitter, the source of the information is not twitter , the source is internal files from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).The way most mainstream media outlets have gone these days Twitter/X is really no less or more reliable than any of them.Also I'd suggest reading the content of what was posted not judging it based on where it was published.

Shoog

The report is not linked to and the source material is not available.

Boggles

What is Environmental Progress?

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860307#Comment_121860307

An anti-trans front NGO. Call yourself something totally unrelated and innocuous to deflect the underlying reality.

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860302#Comment_121860302

The source material is there, you can see videos of the discussions they're having.

This is material leaked directly from WPATH

Shoog

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860413#Comment_121860413

The report mentioned in X isn't event linked to. Thats fairly **** poor, almost as if they think reporting the outrage would be enough for their target audience.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860413#Comment_121860413

There is 241 page document published by "Environmental Progress", as well as various other files.

I assume you have read all documents including the source documents and findings?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860374#Comment_121860374

What is with the absolute obsession with Trans people the past few years?

It's beyond creepy.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860307#Comment_121860307

Seems legit to me: the front page has a number of environmental projects. There's also a California group working on the Fentanyl scandal there. The WPATH files don't seem to be particularly highlighted at all:

https://environmentalprogress.org/

But of course shooting the messenger is always so much simpler than dealing with the issue itself.

I had to do a search for the WPATH files, but here they are with direct links:

https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/wpath-files?rq=WPATH

So anyone who's claiming the original files aren't linked to is just wrong. I'm sure they'll all immediately look at them so we won't have to reply on tweets from people like Gerald Posner (who has written exposés into, among other things, the US Oxycontin scandal and the Sackler family's role in it).

https://twitter.com/geraldposner/status/1764809524760686640?s=20

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860567#Comment_121860567

Seems legit to me

Really?

It looks like a lobbying front for the nuclear and fracking industry.

'Solar killed 30 Turtles'

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860643#Comment_121860643

So now it's not an anti trans NGO masquerading as an environmental group, but a pro fossil fuels group masquerading as an environmental group.

That's progress I suppose. 😄

What they actually say about themselves is that they show case a wide ranging group of opinions, rather than push a single "authorised" view. It's surprising to me how controversial an idea that is for some people.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS INCUBATES IDEAS, LEADERS, AND MOVEMENTS FOR NATURE, PEACE, AND FREEDOM FOR ALL. 

Our work consists of cutting-edge, independent, and nonpartisan research, organizing, and grant-making to defend and strengthen the pillars of civilization.

Anyway, now that we've established that they are NOT just an anti trans NGO masquerading as an environmentalist group, and that they have done that shocking thing of making to information on WPATH available for anyone to consult, maybe you'd put aside how much you dislike differences of opinion being allowed to be expressed for the moment and consider the information the WPATH leaks have put into the public domain?

Things like doctors seriously looking for information as to whether it's okay for a man to take viagra while he is "breastfeeding" a baby thanks to a cocktail of drugs, at least one of which is known to cause heart problems and to pass into breast milk?

When women are breastfeeding they're told not to take aspirin FFS, and not to eat cabbage, never mind drink alcohol - but unless there's actual data about the risks of giving viagra to babies, the default position is to try to enable the man to do this??

Why? It's obviously not about the baby's best interests. It's about "validating" a man's feelings. In fact the proof that they know he's a man is that a woman would never be allowed prioritise her feelings and "need for validation" over the baby's needs. Never.

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860513#Comment_121860513

I'd argue that having children and adolescents undergo life changing procedures at such a young age is infinitely more creepy.

If some activity/behaviour etc suddenly becomes more common it is perfectly acceptable to question why this has happened.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860743#Comment_121860743

It seems to be culture wars group.

Who funds them?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860745#Comment_121860745

But you havn't questioned it, you have come to a conclusion based on a tweet.

I assuming since you didn't answer my question,

I assume you have read all documents including the source documents and findings?

The answer is no.

So how is good faith unbiased debate even possible?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860743#Comment_121860743

I have no idea what they are, that's why I asked.

They would be some culture war lobby. Which is always a red flag. Along with the website.

Where does the funding come from??

CatFromHue

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860763#Comment_121860763

Safe and effective medicine is not a culture war item, it's the very basis of medicine. There's some very good reasons why the Cass review in the UK advised not to follow the WPATH guidelines and the same goes for any health body that's done a systematic review of the evidence behind the standards of care issued by WPATH.

I haven't read all of the document but of the bit I have there's some serious questions asked here about any Doctor in Ireland having anything to do with the WPATH.

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860779#Comment_121860779

I haven't come to that conclusion based on a tweet .I have come to the conclusion based on the videos of meetings WPATH have had, pictures of documents they have produced which is contained within that tweet.

It is not as if something has been tweeted and nothing has been produced to back it up.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860796#Comment_121860796

I assume you have read all documents including the source documents and findings?

So that is a hard no?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860795#Comment_121860795

I never suggested it was.

chopperbyrne

Direct link to the PDF for anyone who wants it: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56a45d683b0be33df885def6/t/65e6d9bea9969715fba29e6f/1709627904275/U_WPATH+Report+and+Files.pdf

Overheal

Oh look a transgender panic thread based from a trans panic account on Twitter sharing trans panic conspiracy theories. Better sit down for this

Shield

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860826#Comment_121860826

Move over a tad. Popcorn?

archfi

I sincerely hope readers of this thread can see who and what the ideological authoritarians are, I mean it's quite obvious 'shoot the messenger' is the height of their intellectual prowess.

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860513#Comment_121860513

It's obsessive hysterical trans bashing and fearmongering about a tiny miniscule percent of the population who harm nobody by existing.

Trans people in Ireland have legally existed since 2015. The sky hasn't fallen in. The world hasn't ended.

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860788#Comment_121860788

Yes, sorry I got confused who I was replying to: it wasn't you said "An anti-trans front NGO. Call yourself something totally unrelated and innocuous to deflect the underlying reality."

Why do you think they're a culture war lobby, and more importantly, what does it really matter considering they have made the source material available to all to judge for themselves? Is the source material now itself dependent on who has put it out there??

IOW, can we discuss the actual issues, rather than badmouth the people who've made it available for public scrutiny? That seems very much like shooting the messenger.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860861#Comment_121860861

Who the messenger is and what the messengers motivations are is completely pertinent before I would even consider reading 100s of page of documents.

That doesn't make one Authoritarian.

I'm going to go out and limb here and suggest you haven't read them either?

But but but, messenger, something, something...

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860904#Comment_121860904

Well again, I'm not reading 100s of pages from a group that raises on visual inspection numerous read flags. Nuclear Great, Solar kills Turtles. It's hardly a well of unbiased prose is it?

I assume you have read the 241 page document and all the associated other documents provided?

CatFromHue

What these files have uncovered really shouldn't be viewed as trans bashing. It's actually the opposite as it points out where healthcare isn't at the standard required for anyone.

One of the biggest, and valid, criticism of the standards of care is that they're not evidence based. Here we have documents showing that the WPATH, who wrote the document, know it's not evidence based. They're saying one thing in public but a very different thing in private.

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860904#Comment_121860904

Thats a weird take that the source of the materials shouldn't be up for debate and should be just accepted at face value without any questioning/analysis/investigating

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860924#Comment_121860924

What page(s) in the document are you referring to?

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860874#Comment_121860874

Almost 900 transgender people in Ireland officially changed their gender in less than seven years

The hysteria must be Fruedian in it's nature.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860924#Comment_121860924

Sounds like it just argues a negative and appeals to ignorance (logical fallacy)

Shoog

Let's be clear here, I went to the twitter post expecting to find a link to the said report so I could review it - but it was missing - huge red flag there.

The twitter post was just click bate outrage.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860984#Comment_121860984

Libs of TikTok and moms for Liberty level stuff.

chalkitdown1

What is this obsession with transgender people that a certain section of society has?

I'll bet that the vast majority of them have never encountered a trans person in real life, ever, nor has anything a trans person ever done had an affect on their life.

It's a really bizarre obsession.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861025#Comment_121861025

Where it regards the US: Fear is easier than good policy and rightwing politicians need something to run on to dupe people into voting for them so they have the votes for their favorite hobbyhorse: cutting taxes and regulations for their rich friends or their rich selves.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861054#Comment_121861054

Where it regards the US: Fear is easier than good policy

Nail on the head.

I can fully accept lobby groups for Nuclear, fracking, fossil fuel industry, etc. Because at least there something tangible in it for them.

But getting the weak minded whipped into a frenzy over a fraction of a fraction of society to garner votes is beyond insidious and obviously extremely dangerous.

Jack Daw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861025#Comment_121861025

Well maybe they see children being exploited and taken advantage of having unnecessary medical treatments and having their heads filled with all sorts of nonsense and they think this isn't a good thing to encourage.Maybe they see how it's effected women's sports, how Barbie Kardashian was allowed to be housed in a women's prison, how children have been given puberty blockers,how language has been changed by health organisations like Birthing person, chest feeding.Maybe they see all the illogical thinking associated with gender ideology as well and think this lack of logic isn't a good thing to be encouraged.

It may not be a big issue however it may become a bigger issue if it isn't nipped in the bud.People see gullible fools falling for this gender ideology nonsense and how it has influenced society already in a small way an want it nipped in the bud before it becomes an even bigger issue.

CatFromHue

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860931#Comment_121860931

The evidence would say that children and adolescents that age don't understand the decision they're making as they're too young.

Page 4 in the Excerpts section.

Concerning whether is it reasonable to expect children and young adolescents to grasp the effects of “gender-affirming care:”

“[It is] out of their developmental range to understand the extent to which some of these medical interventions are impacting them. They’ll say they understand, but then they’ll say something else that makes you think, oh, they didn’t really understand that they are going to have facial hair.”

Dianne Berg, child psychologist and co-author of the child chapter of WPATH Standards of Care 8

“We’re often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven’t even had biology in high school yet.” Dr. Daniel Metzger, Canadian endocrinologist

On the complexity of discussing fertility preservation with children and adolescents during an internal panel discussion:

“It’s always a good theory that you talk about fertility preservation with a 14-yearold, but I know I’m talking to a blank wall. They’d be like, ew, kids, babies, gross…

“I think now that I follow a lot of kids into their mid-twenties, I’m like, Oh, the dog isn’t doing it for you, is it?” They’re like, ‘No, I just found this wonderful partner, and now want kids…’ So I think, you know, it doesn’t surprise me…

“Most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of a brain space to really talk about [fertility preservation] in a serious way.” Dr Daniel Metzger, Canadian endocrinologist

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861235#Comment_121861235

Well maybe they see children being exploited and taken advantage of having unnecessary medical treatments and having their heads filled with all sorts of nonsense and they think this isn't a good thing to encourage.

Sounds like you mean religions imposing genital mutilation and religious indoctrination on children. And these lobbying groups love that ****.

It may not be a big issue however it may become a bigger issue if it isn't nipped in the bud.

Like like gender neutral bathrooms - if we don't nip this now, there might be 2, 2.5 gender neutral bathrooms in every house and home!

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861076#Comment_121861076

We're not in the US. I'm more concerned about women like Sonia Appleby losing their jobs for expressing concerns about child safeguarding, even though that was her actual job, or Allison Bailey, who was sanctioned for daring to set up an association for Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals. Or the women in Limerick prison who are constantly exposed to verbal abuse from male sex offenders, on the pretext that those particular sex offenders think they are women. And, to come to this particular topic, I'm concerned about the fact that WPATH is constantly cited by the NHS and HSE as the "evidence-based" protocol for treating children with gender dysphoria, when doctors involved with WPATH are clearly aware that there is little to no real evidence for treatment that is often irreversible - but they are doing it anyway.

If you think that's a "trans panic", then presumably you think the whole thalidomide scandal was a storm in a teacup?

As for a "fraction of society" - women are 51% of society. We are entitled to rights too. And children are entitled to be kept safe, no matter how few of them there are.

ceadaoin.

One of the more worrying parts (out of many worrying parts) is the concern that blockers and cross sex hormones may have caused liver cancer in at least 2 underage patients. I'm just a big transphobe for having concerns about off label prescriptions to children though. Some kids are getting these meds from Internet "doctor" services without their parents even knowing. What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/05/wpath-tansgender-hormone-therapy-cancer-links-leaked-emails/

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121860927#Comment_121860927

No, that's a weird take on what I said: someone complained that posters were posting tweets instead of the source material. So now when the source material is made available for discussion, that's wrong too, apparently?? Why don't you say what you disagree with in the original material?

Or say what exactly would satisfy you? "No debate"?

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861371#Comment_121861371

“I have one transition friend/colleague who, after about eight to 10 years of [testosterone] developed hepatocarcinoma [a form of liver cancer],” the doctor wrote.

“To the best of my knowledge, it was linked to his hormone treatment… it was so advanced that he opted for palliative care and died a couple of months later.”

Sounds very anecdotal and far from clinical or scientific. Which is funny because later in the article saying (of WPATH): "The experiments are not randomised, double-blind, or controlled." But anecdotes drummed up to clutch the pearls and leap to conclusions about what caused a patients cancer, A-OK.

ceadaoin.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861404#Comment_121861404

I said it's "concerning" and "may have caused" it. Not clutching pearls or leaping to anything, thanks. Can't you just have a discussion without misogynistic tropes and hyperbole?

volchitsa

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861404#Comment_121861404

Well that depends: the reason lung cancer was successfully linked to smoking, despite the tobacco companies best efforts to hide that fact was because it was a kind of cancer that was almost unknown in non smokers. Similarly, cervical cancer was associated with sexual activity and hence the Papilloma virus because, for instance, it was never seen among nuns and other celibate women.

So if the patient is of an age group/other category not normally vulnerable to this type of cancer, and if it is known that testosterone causes this cancer, then yes, while it's still anecdotal, it's perfectly reasonable for a doctor to start out by discussing it with other professionals to see whether a statistical link can be established. That's how the lung cancer issue was identified.

Note: I'm not saying that this is the case - I don't know. I'm just saying that there may be a very good reason for this sort of discussion among professionals. It's not the same as random internet users posting tweets about their uncle's friend's nephew's wife dying of the covid vaccine.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121861452#Comment_121861452

Misogynistic? I have no idea how you leapt to that now.

I'm replying to the content of the telegraph article thanks. It is hyperbolic if you want to use those terms, citing someone's anecdotes while citing people crowing about double-blind standards, the author of the piece states firmly that those hormone treatments caused the cancer when there isn't sufficient evidence to back that conclusion definitively. To your credit, you said it may have caused it, the author didn't even bother making that journalistic distinction in their opener.