Transing Children"Puberty-blocking procedures promoted by the Biden/Harris Admin are child abuse" - Tulsi Gabbard posts video about recent FDA announcement, 25k likes (USA)

submitted by reluctant_commenter from twitter.com

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]INeedSomeTimeAsexual Ally 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don't get how it's even debatable. Even if there are drugs with bad side effects but they are never talked about as some harmless drug to take just try out. That's just insane. Such drugs are given at the last resort. Issue is there is evidence how kids also tend to grew out of their gender incongruence so it's never sure if puberty blockers are a last resort for them.

[–]Mikulbleu 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Remember all the doctors recommending camel cigarettes? I hope to hell we look back on this with the same lens

[–]INeedSomeTimeAsexual Ally 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Damn yeah. Or at some point it was coke seen as healthy. When will the science world finally learn?

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Well, in the US psychiatrists are practically prescribing meth as "ADHD medication," so there's still that, too.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Are you referring to amphetamines like Adderall? Are you against the use of amphetamines in the treatment of ADHD?

ETA: My tone is curious not accusatory, just to be clear.

[–]reluctant_commenter[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are you referring to amphetamines like Adderall?

Yes.

Are you against the use of amphetamines in the treatment of ADHD?

I think it's highly questionable, at best. I commented about it in a Sunday thread from a few weeks ago-- commonly-recommended psychiatric drugs have been one of my minor interests I've been reading about recently. This website I linked is incredibly well-thought-out and resourced, and discusses the little-known side effects and limited evidence bases that apparently characterize ADHD meds, as well as a few other types of drug: https://www.theinnercompass.org/learn-unlearn

The TLDR is that most ADHD meds, from what I can tell, were only found to be "effective" when taken for periods of a few months, at maximum. (I say "effective" in quotes because the details of those studies suggest that their apparent effectiveness may be due to the presence of confounds. For example, the "not on ADHD meds" groups that were compared to the "on ADHD meds" groups were suffering from withdrawal symptoms during the study since they were abruptly taken off their ADHD meds in order to participate in the study. That type of sudden withdrawal likely had a large impact on their ADHD symptom scores... and could be the main cause of the finding that the "on ADHD meds" groups had relatively better ADHD symptom scores.) However, many people I've met who use ADHD meds have actually taken them for years at a time-- some even since early childhood.

Part of why I started reading this more was because I stumbled across an article talking about how SSRIs (for depression) cause sexual dysfunction, lack of libido, inability to orgasm, etc. in people. I was kind of shocked because (as all of us here know) that's an under-discussed side effect of puberty blockers. I hadn't realized that there were similar issues going on with other types of psychiatric drugs. I haven't read enough to be convinced yet that all psychiatric drugs are harmful/useless, to be clear, but several commonly-prescribed types seem to be and I find that incredibly concerning. And of course there's the $$$ incentive with psychiatrists, same as with transitioning drugs.

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

And they immediately spam Russia derangement syndrome stuff.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What is Russian derangement syndrome supposed to be?

[–]Q-Continuum-kin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The name sort of started with "Obama derangement syndrome" where certain right wingers would lose their minds over everything he did no matter how insignificant. Like he would wear a tan suit and they would freak out over it for months. This was extremely frustrating for the left because he would be given a pass for the shitty liberal and neocons policies he pushed.

Then trump got elected and liberals started doing the same thing to trump. Except now the shit expanded because instead of just freaking out about Trump they expanded their brain rot to blame everything they didn't like on Russia.

This expanded to everything and anything which went against Hillary Clinton. Tulsi Gabbard was working pretty high up in the DNC. A Clinton ally named Debbie Wasserman Shultz was maneuvered into position as head of the DNC. The DNC is supposed to act neutrally just to promote all democrats and run the primary elections etc but it became an arm of the Clinton campaign to the point that they were siphoning off money from all the state and local funds unto the Clinton campaign. Gabbard decided this was ridiculous corruption and was told she wasn't allowed to publicly disagree so she resigned from the DNC and the revealed the corruption she was seeing behind the scenes.

.

When Clinton inevitably lost to Trump her staffers gathered and decided the political spin was going to be a grand conspiracy where Russia was the total cause of her loss and anyone who had ever criticized Clinton during the campaign was labeled as either Russian or a bot or a usefull idiot etc.

Gabbard herself was accused by Clinton of being a Russian agent even though Gabbard was actively serving in the US military. It was just insane levels of defamation because Clinton and the other liberals in government couldn't cope with the idea that she was legitimately a terrible candidate.

.

So fast forward to now and every time Gabbard comes up in any context. No matter what she says, the liberals in the media and here the blue checks on Twitter just ignore here words and start screaming about Russia. So what does Russia have to do with Lupron? Who the fuck knows other than the fact that Twitter still thinks Russia hacjed the election and put evil orange man in office.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, thank you. I missed a lot of that. Explains why Russia gets brought up so irrelavently so frequently lol

[–]automoderatorHuman-Exclusionary Radical Overlord[M] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

RIP Snappy, I AM THE NEW GOD!

Click below to view and/or archive snapshots:

If this comment is being added for sites which cannot be usefully archived - for example, video hosts or an existing archive site - please let the Moderators know by sending ModMail. REPLIES TO THIS COMMENT ARE NOT SEEN BY MODS

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this sub if you have any questions or concerns.