Yeah, I've never justified selling substances, I've justified your right to put whatever you desire into your body. This ethical concept is called bodily autonomy. Do you disagree with that? As long as it doesn't cause direct harm to anyone else, what's the problem?
Also since when are you in favor of a nanny state that tells you what you're allowed to do with your body?
Heroin, meth, fent - cool, no restrictions? I mean on intake, not selling.
There is also the not-small matter of who pays for it.
Public policy can be a bitch, but just being trans isn't justification for circumventing it.
In the case of trans people, the overhelming scientific evidence points towards the fact that transitioning increases quality of life and that's the aim of ALL medical treatments.
Are you suggesting that a potentially improved QOL should be the sole determinant for low/no-cost availability of a drug or treatment? And/or that governments should therefore not concern themselves with regulation of these things or their components? And/or that DIY drug combinations mixed up at home are a reasonable alternative to supervised medical care? That saving a buck outweighs regulatory protocol?
It's not hard to get an rx for hormones if you state you are trans. Prescribing hormones has become a lazy go-to for many physicians, and there is no insurer pushback. Currently, going on hormones to look more "female" (and in increasing cases, surgeries, too) has virtually no waiting period, no meaningful criteria. That is unique. (Women seeking hormones for menopause/post-menopause-related matters get more questions and more scrutiny and warnings, but they're not flipping out in large numbers about China's decision.) Getting drugs from China is about getting cheap drugs, or getting drugs that aren't held to the same standards as required domestically, that's all. It's just money you're talking about.
There are multiple public policy aspects to the current state of transition-related services. Increased quality of life is the aim of medical treatment, but we do not provide fully-paid coverage of everything connected to improved quality of life and better mental health. Fully insured plastic surgery would improve quality of life and mental health for many people (including many who experience significant depression, anxiety, etc. - i.e., negative psychiatric conditions - as a result of their bodies or their beliefs about their bodies), but we don't have that. Tattoos aren't covered, even though for many people, it is fulfilling and makes them happier to get them. Neither are haircare, skincare, gym memberships*, door-delivered diet meals, weight-loss surgery for non-deathfats, leg-lengthening surgery, or anything else that people want to use to feel better about themselves, be the person they believe they were meant to be, eliminate psychiatric/ mental health conditions tied to how their bodies are or are perceived to be. No, everyone else has to live with their body, or pay oop to modify. And items or services determined to be potentially dangerous are heavily regulated and gatekept. Why should trans-related goods and services be treated any differently?
*other than sometimes a $20 credit or somesuch
I used to have a dog of a breed that has been described as a small dog that thinks it's a big dog (a Shiba inu; males run 25-35 lbs or so, max). Accurate description, ime. He ran with the big dogs. He fucking out-dogged the big dogs; he alpha'ed the hell out of rhodies and Danes and mastiffs and even shepherds. He ignored (literally put his nose in the air and looked away from) anything his size or smaller. But in fact he was a small dog. If I'd put him on expensive stilts, he would still have been a small dog. He was a Shiba, and he wore it proudly. There's an allegory in there.
Lol
