![](https://uploads.ovarit.com/027212b0-059c-5c1c-9dd8-93f055cc1520.jpg)
Incredibly biased article. How can such a respected institution publish this? They have their hands over their ears... they haven't listened to a word we are saying.
Whenever I see stuff like this published, it makes me wonder how much of their other work is also garbage. A life lesson on how deep misinformation goes, as long as one has enough money to get their opinion to be the "right opinion".
I used to scoff at my Fox News watching father for claiming that there was a MSM conspiracy to suppress information about Dems, etc. Then this happened, and it seemed so much less crazy. The crazy part was not about distrusting MSM, but about trusting any news media at all. They are all biased and hiding information that goes against their narrative.
THIS THIS THIS! For everything. Actually, it kind of frees the mind in some ways, realising you don't know whether anything is true or not anymore, and when you did, you were probably wrong.
And also realizing everything evolves, especially in science. A lot of people act like what we know right now is cold hard facts(true for some things) but science keeps evolving and what is practiced today may be seen as obsolete or even wrong in the future. Especially in a nebulous field like psychiatry/psychology. Also my ass always equations sociology because I never trust male to see the world how it is, rather then how they make it.
Medicine and especially pharmaceuticals too. A couple of years ago they were telling older people to take baby aspirin a everyday as prevention for heart issues, now they're saying it doesn't work and might actually cause issues. And I'm not even touching female healthcare and how barely fuck all is tested on female bodies, so the entire things is experimental crazy when it's practiced on women.
Then there's history, and when I read female history I realize how much of what's commonly known is just bull. I think forming a strong sense of self and morality, and then wading cautiously into the world is a person's best bet. Not letting yourself be too influenced, finding out who is behind the message you're reading and why they want to send it and have you believe it also helps a ton. Truly follow the money.
Well said. Another example: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/07/220720080145.htm After decades of study, there remains no clear evidence that serotonin levels or serotonin activity are responsible for depression, according to a major review of prior research led by UCL scientists.
I know the anti depressant SSRI drugs do work for some people, but, I've tried many of them and they do nothing for me.
I don’t know why people assume science knows everything and is always right. It relies on humans to interpret, so it’s always going to be flawed. Like before we had DNA testing, for example, there were assumptions that were thought to be the absolute truth in areas like phylogeny, and now that we’re actually testing them we’re finding out that it’s often very different to what we had previously thought.
Studies get published and are later shown to be false. Either because of them being flawed to begin with and often unreproducible, we develop new technologies, or the researchers were making up results (rare but it’s happened, just look at STAP cells. Those papers were published in Nature).
Also, non results don’t get published. If I set out to prove that trans brains are like the brains of the sex they identify with, and I get results that prove nothing, that study is never getting released.
Insanely biased, and it cites some new shitty article that 95% of trans people identify as trans 5 years later. BUt when you look at the methodology you find:
A total of 317 binary socially transitioned transgender children (Mage = 8.07; SD = 2.36; 208 initially transgender girls, 109 initially transgender boys; see Table 1 for additional demographics) joined this longitudinal study (The Trans Youth Project) between July 2013 and December 2017. For inclusion in The Trans Youth Project, children had to be between 3 and 12 years of age and had to have made a “complete” binary social transition,10 including changing their pronouns to the binary gender pronouns that differed from those used at their births.
Yeah, if you pick kids who 'transitioned' from 3-12, its pretty easy for them to still be 'trans' at 8-17. They cherry picked kids deep in the genderwoo. Talk to me when those kids are 21 and its going to be a very different story.
To listen is to blaspheme Lord Gender^©️
It’s not just one article. It’s all of reality flooding in no matter how hard they try to patch the leaks in the wall of denial.
Streisand effect. Maybe if the TRAs hadn't done so much to keep the research out of the public eye, it wouldn't have drawn so much attention.