Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
You should read the paper before posting it, This paper is clearly pro puberty blockers, while it is true that it is saying that trans women loses some bone density because of the treatment it is never clarified if they loses bone density for a male, thus having a female's bone density or even if they lack bone density at all. And even if that was the case .... What problems would it bring ? A slight increase in the probability of breaking your arm?
They clearly say that the reward outweight the risk "Concerns about skeletal losses become less significant in an adolescent with active suicidal ideations. While the significance of the risks may be unclear, there is strong evidence regarding the benefits of GnRHa in transgender youth: it can be a life-changing and lifesaving treatment for a vulnerable population who is at high risk for anxiety, depression, and suicide"