view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
blockers give a increased risk for cancer this is why you read the little booklet they give you when getting the drug if you dont get it ask the pharmacist for it it tells the risks and the side affects
A medication might have a miniscule increase in chance for cancer? Say it ain't so! We shouldn't let kids eat processed meats then. Or have direct tap water. Or eat donuts. Or fly anywhere. Or go out in the sun. Or have diabetes. Or have a cell phone anywhere near their heads. Or drink soda. Or drink anything out of a plastic bottle. Or be around a scented candle. Or fall asleep with the TV on. The fact is that just existing increases your chances of cancer. To use that as a reason to not do something that'll make you happier is insane and it will lead to you hiding under your bed for the rest of your life. Except that being at all sedentary will also increase risks of cancer so you can't just hide either.
Or any meats. Watch the cons' heads explode about "social engineering" if more and more authorities start trying to warn children away from the dangers of any meat. The cons are already cranking up their culture war against other healthy efforts like milk substitutes and have always had an uneasy detente with veg*n diets - but are increasingly getting more and more agitated about any change to their "way of life", even if it's wayyyy better for them.
Which specific puberty blocker drug do you believe increases the risk of cancer?
His silence says more than his "facts" or "evidence" ever could 😬
To be fair, it's kind of hard to come up with a defense when your premise is "Cancer treatments cause cancer" 😄
Try explaining to them even if that was the case, the risk of suicide and extreme self-harming is way more prescient than any long-shot cancer risk, but preferably blow thru their bullshit by pointing out all the things they defend to the death that are more harmful and more predictably so
From this paper.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5868281/
The biggest risk seems to be HPV causing cancer, which may not be related to hormones at all, but the fact that trans people may be more likely to have HPV to begin with. And how HPV will interact with gender affirming surgery, rather than with hormones.
In other words, the jury is still out and what you are repeating is not science but likely transphobic propaganda.
And on the other side of the equation you have to consider that gender incongruence causes severe suicidal ideation in a lot of transgender people.
So, if it was your loved one struggling for decades with suicidal ideation and attempts, would you want them denied life-saving medication because it might increase the risk of cancer? Because that's what your argument boils down too. Denying adults life-saving medicine because it's plausible that it could increase the risk of cancer.
And just to nail my point home, here's an article on how common medications used to treat depression increase the risk of cancer. Should we stop prescribing those too?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10259481/
i did not say adults i was clearly meaning kids in sorry but givng kids cancer causing drugs is messed up if your a adult you have a fullly developed brain and cam make the decision appropriately
Source