@PhilipSwallow2 @wdyecat @HPluckrose 0.6% is a well-established number in studies such as this one https://t.co/HmXqtJgtBI
Very important numbers in "the debate" over trans minors. For comparison, the population prevalence of gender incongruence is shown in several studies to be 0.6% https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@boggywood @BioAndy2 @kathrynosulli13 @_QueenMeabh @ColetteColfer @Athena_SWAN @LeoVaradkar @FineGael @MichealMartinTD @fiannafailparty Note that we are talking of gender incongruence (earlier term: dysphoria). Gender ambiguity is at 2-3% population. https
@DmitrysPlane @tradrmum @Psychgirl211 @JDHaltigan Moreover, a 2015 European population study shows 0.6% gender incongruence but 2-3% "gender ambiguity", which again coincides with rates in the old studies! https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@HerotodusAlive @routledgebooks It's 0.6% of general population for gender incongruence. Plus 2-3% for "gender ambiguity", which can lead to nonbinary identification and social adjustment but medical transition is not appropriate in this case. https://t.co
@RadFemCollectiv @WritersFreeto @TybilAlper There actually were prevalence studies - and they arrive at a number of 0.6%, which is remarkably similar among different estimates including the recent UK Census. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@TheFamilyBear @Lfromthenorth Population studies, however, consistently show an "organic" proportion of people with gender incongruence (as per ICD-11) at 0.6% . https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@LeorSapir This is dishonest as it includes many of the kinds of nonbinary identities that would not seek medical treatment. There are modern good studies where gender incongruence (modern term for dysphoria) is at circa 0.6% , but gender ambiguity at up t
@CjgbVictoria @sixgunronin1 @eva_kurilova Here is an example study - and "gender incongruence" is the (then-draft) ICD-11 term. https://t.co/HmXqtJxwDI
RT @ramendik: @BlueBoxDave @MForstater *Diagnosis* can easily increase - check how it happened with ADHD. And we know the organic numbers…
@BlueBoxDave @MForstater *Diagnosis* can easily increase - check how it happened with ADHD. And we know the organic numbers from recent research like this: https://t.co/HmXqtJxwDI
@SidTheGeeza @IsotopesReactor @romanov_von_ What do you call "standard" therapy? Who sets that "standard"? I would also refer you to modern works as to the population prevalence of gender incongruence, the ICD 11 term, as well as the separate wider catego
@BradRTorgersen @DrDebraSoh And that is bullshit by an order of magnitude. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@adhib @thomaswoodcock @nulgirl @Howlark1 @NeurolawGuy @_Lisa_Townsend The "scale" of this "phenomenon" is well-known, 0.6% of the population have gender incongruence. The entire increase in clinic referrals is due to approaching this natural number. https
@CritRacePapers What is happening is a rise to well-established population levels, which are 0.6% according to good studies, like this one: https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@AndresTam3 @PoesMyaa This is the number of AFAB patients approaching the population rate of 0.6% - which is repeatedly shown in studies, including those done BEFORE the jump. A similar jump in AMAB patients is next. Here is a good example of a study. htt
@eanderh Far from "defying explanation", the upswing in presentation is well in line with previous population studies. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@MShipworth Stephanie is not truthful. The well-proven reason of "growth in the number of trans kids" is simply that, at least for AFAB kids, the population is now more visible. AMAB "explosion in numbers" next; target is 0.7% as shown in this 2015 study.
@pobble21 @BlueMouseEeek @HJoyceGender The recent increase of patient numbers in GIDS clinics is in line with population prevalence research for AFAB people and has evened out already; a similar, but probably slower AMAB "explosion" is next. Here's popula
@Hardley76 @KatherineDanaRe @MavenOfMayhem Not "contagion", but coming out. In fact, *right before* this wave, a study came out that shows the true population prevalence. Now the rate of AFAB trans young people being clinically seen is evening out at the p
@RealityGirlZine @WomensSpaceIre Because they are free to, finally. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@WomensSpaceIre @HSELive The sole reason for increased demand is that minors with gender incongruence are now coming out; there is a 2015 study showing the true population prevalence at 0.6% and for AFAB people the numbers are evening out at that level htt
@anonymous_tami @betsvigi9 @acasorguk It is not "vanishingly rare". According to recent studies, the prevalence of gender incongruence is circa 0.6%, and gender ambiguity over 2%. Redheads are 1-2% and we are not "vanishingly rare"! https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@AuntMergatroyd @HylianApologist @ShannonBDouglas Find me any pharma funders of THIS study, which fully explained the recent rise in referrals BEFORE IT HAPPENED. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@ShantiPixie @IzzyKamikaze @goodtimesdotgov @6junej @ImWatson91 Well you see, anti-trans activists were claiming that the relatively recent (a few years ago) spike in AFAB minors presenting for gender treatment was a "ROGD" thing. My response was to refere
@nmdacosta The surge itself is well explained by existing population studies. What they do NOT explain is what holds back the trans girls. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@SEGMtweets This is outrageous, as there is NO unexplained rise. It is ENTIRELY explained by population prevalence. I am suspecting that Sweden's departure from mainstream medical advice on masks and social distancing is having a ripple effect. https://t
@ColdTimidSoul @Bob_L_Blaw @HannahBerrelli @gwpurnell The increase is not actually unexplained and has nothing to do with "ideology". Reliable population prevalence studies show that about 0.7% of people have gender incongruence. The increase simply approa
@melliellimelli @TwisterFilm @ALLIANCELGB @ImWatson91 By the way it *is* 0.7%, and with primary-level diagnostics being necessarily uncertain, the expected number of gender clinic referrals is about 1% of the age cohort - so the recent rise is entirely nor
@Sebastian_Hols @lecanardnoir @ETVPod Your number is simply made up. Here's the real numbers. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@BrawnSurgeon @Kiwipally @lecanardnoir @ETVPod A number significantly enough the well known population numbers of trans people in this demographic. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
Hey @ETVPod I am reading your letter exchange regarding trans issues and I wanted to give you a reference to a 2015 Belgian population study that, I think, resolves the "percentage increase" question entritely. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@HanniganCork "Old EU" research was always leading in this regard; in fact, the so-called surprise of the "increased references" could be fully predicted if one just looked at population numbers in a 2015 Belgian study. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@mccavfefe @AdamWagner1 @AudreySuffolk EU research, by the way, also had good population numbers predicting/explaining the current rise in referrals - back in 2015. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@VitaKnoxville @holly_char_ The "4000%" is from an extremely low baseline. The actual number of gender-diverse youth, by good research, is 0.7% gender incongruence and 2-3% gender diverse. The numbers of out transmasc people are slowly approaching this. Tr
@blackthugcat @holly_char_ It is skewed because transfem teenagers still have it harder coming out and being taken seriously. We have a very good idea of the numbers, and really, services should be scaled up to these numbers and not to current ones. http
@daringplurality @DrLauraEL We actually do have numbers from a good European study and I believe we should plan capacity if clinics based on those numbers. And that's 0.6-0.7% gender incongruence and 2-3% gender ambiguity. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@ImWatson91 @amyworldalive In fact, with lax referral standards the baseline might be as high as 1% of the population, based on this Belgian study (as some of the "gender ambiguous" group is likely to be referred as well) https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@etinc3lle @circesort Tu veux des sources plus sérieuses ? ok 2 etudes de 2007 et 2015 sur la prévalence des personnes transgenre en Belgique https://t.co/wnH9JIWSBY https://t.co/EmPX7WkNC1 Les chiffres tournent autour de 0,6/0,7%
@tastydip @KnownHeretic @Girlguiding The "4000% increase" is the easiest part. There are very good studies showing population levels of gender incongruence. Increase referrals are wholly explained by the cases previously being hidden. https://t.co/HmXqtJfV
@MCleaver @justthevax @Docstockk No. The only reason is that more people with gender incongruence, and also some with gender ambiguity, get "into the system". There is robust research on how many of them are there, which should inform provision of clinics.
@ErinInTheMorn Here is a research article that has both of these exact numbers. 0.7% for "gender incongruence" and 2-3% for "gender ambivalence". https://t.co/HmXqtJxwDI
@Anvesaka88 @ItsGoneAwry @Paul_Galletta There has been less repression, so things are slowly coming to the natural number, which is about 0.7% of population prevalence of gender incongruence, plus circa 2% gender ambiguity. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@Display_Geek @TrannyJust Whup sorry - got two of the studies screenshots mixed up Arch Sex Behav 2015 Prevalence of Gender Nonconformity in Flanders, Belgium https://t.co/NsD4rHlxqw https://t.co/suwq8hcRFY
@Display_Geek @TrannyJust Arch Sex Behav 2015 Prevalence of Gender Nonconformity in Flanders, Belgium https://t.co/NsD4rHlxqw https://t.co/JzWJ5LwCso
@Display_Geek Then when you go on to the science, you criticize the 0.7% figure as based solely on "identifying as a label". You might not know it but there is a far better study that arrives at the same figure for "gender incongruence", a newer term. http
@mapphilosopher Recent studies consistently place the prevalence of gender incongruence (the ICD-11 term) at about 0.6% of the population, or 600 per 100,000. https://t.co/HmXqtJfVMa
@oolon @AlliaPotestas @TameTheWolf @JolyonMaugham @JaneyGodley The different US percentages are likely explained by a wider meaning of trans. Here is a European study that has *both* numbers, lower for gender incongruence and higher for gender ambiguity. h
@PearloDepresso These were the numbers for Flanders in 2014, I find the used terminology a bit weird tho https://t.co/eq2OsJa9sj https://t.co/3XKuAxhWeg
@Cely65706515 @alienkid_ Etudes P-B/ Belgique https://t.co/xtoYcMsSss https://t.co/wlJxgInqd5 Pas de déséquilibre hormonal chez les personnes trans : https://t.co/kAKY6s8AQO Le sexe n'est pas binaire mais se place sur un continuum (taux d'hormones,
@shrew792 @allbimyself1126 @Transgendertrd Here is modern research adequately (on a much better preparation level than Liitman) assessing the expected prevalence of gender incongruence and gender ambivalence. https://t.co/8fs4OtfIUw
@LogicalMarcus @MadRiversong @emily_zinos Nope. Unless you think Belgium is unique. https://t.co/8fs4OtfIUw
@Display_Geek I think this study is a rather good estimate of prevalence. https://t.co/8fs4OtfIUw
@Autumn_Leah_ @ErinBrewerin Here is much more recent research, already running on modern terminology, on prevalence of gender incongruence (newer term for GD) and gender ambivalence (the wide criteria thing). https://t.co/8fs4OtfIUw
@pauldirks Your "usually listed" is archeologically old stuff. Here is modern research. https://t.co/8fs4OtfIUw "Gender incongruence" is ICD-11 term for gender dysphoria, and the study is European so uses CD not DSM.
@docamitay @vestigia33 @MaryHol86144349 @Nosci_fi @jpaulson49 @JulieRei @SylviaPankhurs4 @627river @4th_WaveNow @ZUCKERKJ @BlanchardPhD @profjmb If you do have recent sources on sex ratio in adult referrals I would appreciate that. All I could find were tw
Prevalence of gender nonconformity in Flanders, Belgium https://t.co/lf51f2YA35 #FW01
Trans* experience is more common than you think: 2.5-3% Flemish ppl are gender incongruent or ambivalent. http://t.co/XHU4xJEBRS
Trans* experience is more common than you think: 2.5-3% Flemish ppl are gender incongruent or ambivalent. http://t.co/XHU4xJEBRS
Trans* experience is more common than you think: 2.5-3% Flemish ppl are gender incongruent or ambivalent. http://t.co/XHU4xJEBRS