Off-Topic "Scientific" Studies regarding Transpeople

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
The National Academics of Science has released a 200 page manual on how to collect stats on LGBT people. Colin Wright brought this up and noted how there were very few actual scientists involved in this document; after skimming through the chapters, you will find more sociologists than developmental biologists. The book can be found in its entirety here.

The chapter on sexual orientation generally outlines how the rates of true homosexuals have not grown over the years, barring bisexuals which have seen a marked uptick. But throughout that chapter, there is no mention of the word 'homosexual'. It is only 'same gender attraction' based on 'gender identity' and not sexual orientation, which they find 'too clinical'.

Here an excerpt from Chapter 10, dealing with sex in general:

Measures of sex can include self-reported items that reference a person’s sex as it was assigned on their original birth certificate or as it is currently represented on their legal documents. These classifications in government records are only rough categorical proxies for more detailed and often continuous measures of sex traits, including aspects of anatomy (such as internal organs or external genitalia), physiology (such as hormone milieu), or genetics (such as chromosomes). Studies of sex traits show that human variation is not fully captured by a male–female binary distinction (Montañez, 2017). However, until recently, these were the only designations offered on most U.S. identity documents, including passports and driver’s licenses (see Chapter 3).

Because of their ubiquity in many data systems, binary sex categories have often been used in general survey research and in administrative and health contexts to describe and explain differences that may have roots in biology, social norms, or some combination of the two.1 Direct measures of sex traits better represent specific biological mechanisms that can produce observed sex differences, but such measures are not commonly used, even in health research and clinical settings (see Chapter 3). We consider sex trait measures further in Chapter 7, in the context of promising approaches to enumerate intersex populations. In keeping with the panel’s recommendation to collect gender by default (see Chapter 2) that emphasizes the importance of measuring gender, we limit our review of sex measures to the role
a measure of sex assigned at birth can play as part of a broader strategy of improved gender measurement and the enumeration of both cisgender and transgender people.
Already they are going with the 'sex assigned at birth' thing, and have moved entirely on from sex to gender, despite writing many chapters on how the two are not the same. Looking through the reference list, nearly all of the sources are either data sets from the Williams Institute, intersectional feminist theory (I am not making this up, see the list here) and virtually nothing grounded in actual science.
As noted in Part I, the absence of construct validity in most measures of sex and gender also contributes to using inconsistent terminology to describe binary distinctions between females and males (sex terms) or men and women (gender terms), in both research reports and everyday speech. Many of the measures we review in this chapter use a combination of sex and gender terminology in their question wording and answer options that continues to conflate the two constructs. For example, the sex terms of female and male frequently appear as responses to questions about both sex assigned at birth and gender identity. The practice of using sex terms in gender identity questions makes it challenging to maintain consistent terminology in our discussion; it also raises concerns about construct validity for these items. Given our focus in this chapter on improving gender measurement to include transgender and cisgender people, when not discussing a specific measure that uses sex terms, we use the gender terms, men and women, especially when discussing the conceptual underpinnings of different measures and the interpretation of resulting data.
This leads to bold claims such as this:
Although sex assigned at birth is an imperfect proxy for anatomical, genetic, and physiological sex traits, it has utility in health contexts—including survey research, clinical trials, public health surveillance, and medical settings—for purposes ranging from clinical decision support to exploring the role of sex traits in health status and the etiology of disease. In addition, asking for the sex assigned to someone at birth, instead of just a person’s “sex,” avoids problems inherent in assuming that sex is an absolute and static representation of sex traits by grounding the question in the experience of having been labeled with a sex, rather than identifying with it. As such, a two-step measure that includes sex assigned at birth is being collected for the National Institutes of Health’s major precision medicine research initiative, the All of Us program,3 as well as on national and local case report forms for surveillance of conditions such as HIV/AIDS4 and COVID-19.5 A two-step measure has also been incorporated in clinical data systems such as the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ electronic medical record (EMR)6 and is reflected in standards for EMR terminology codified by the U.S. Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology.7
The National Academy of Sciences believes sex is an 'imperfect proxy'. Once again, these are not actual scientists writing this shit. There is a reference to Harvard's intersectional feminist GenderSci lab, but there's a very interesting point to be found regarding research on mice:
Q: Does sex contextualism apply to my research question?

Any time you study a variable that you think might be related to sex (hormone levels, reproductive strategies, etcetera), you have an opportunity to employ sex contextualism. Sex contextualism can inform your experimental design as well as your interpretation of your results.



Q: How can I avoid essentializing binary sex in my hypothesis?

Consider why you think sex could be an explanatory variable for the effect you’re studying. Try to isolate what sex-related variables you imagine impacting your variable of interest. Be sure to consider and measure variation in those traits not only between sexes, but also within them.



Q: How should I talk about sex and sex-related variables?

The terms “male” and “female” are totally compatible with a sex contextualist approach. We recommend that you specify and justify how you use “male” and “female” in your study to avoid overly broad claims. For example, newborn male mice, gonadectomized male mice, or wild male rats might all have different reactions to the same treatment, so specifying the exact study population is vital for precisely communicating your result.
Look at that. It's difficult to ascertain the 'sex binary' in humans, but there's no question about it in mice. Who would've thought?

NAS going with the tumblr dictate:
The two-step measurement approach also was designed to reflect the broadest definition of the transgender population, which categorizes as “transgender” any person whose gender identity is different from their sex assigned at birth, regardless of whether they identify with the word “transgender.” This definition is often called “transgender experience” (e.g., Puckett et al., 2020) or “transgender history” (as in the Scottish census question, described below). Not everyone with transgender experience or history expressly identifies as “transgender”: they may identify simply as men or women, or they may describe their gender identity using terms outside of the man/woman binary, such as genderqueer, genderfluid, gender-nonconforming, nonbinary, agender, bigender, or Two-Spirit.
There is much talk about survey options and which one is best, because those who might identify as trans may not SAY they are trans:
the one-step approach also does not work well in some survey modes: Using a single item on an online general population survey—with or without providing respondents with a definition of transgender—results in a much higher estimate of people who identify as transgender than is found in other surveys with interviewer-assisted modes (Saperstein and Westbrook, 2021). The “Do you consider yourself transgender?” question also had low test-retest reliability relative to subsequent responses for the same individuals on both a two-step measure and another similar one-step transgender identity question (Saperstein and Westbrook, 2021). Together, these findings suggest a higher rate of “false positives” for this question format in an online self-completion context.
On the intersex chapter, they offer a stat for how many there are:

A 2020 survey conducted by the Center for American Progress (2021) included an intersex status question that simplified the first GenIUSS question listed above: “Have you ever been diagnosed by a medical doctor with an intersex condition?” The initial sample of self-identified LGBT adults was selected from a national, probability panel of U.S. households held by AmeriSpeak and was supplemented with respondents from a nonprobability opt-in online panel of respondents. Of 1,528 participants, 4.9 percent answered that they had been diagnosed with an intersex condition. The nonresponse rate was 0.9 percent. This sample was somewhat more diverse than the previous studies with respect to both race and ethnicity (59% White, 12% Black, 18% Hispanic, and 4% Asian) and education (34% with a bachelor’s or higher degree). The result of the 4.9 percent figure is far higher than usual estimates of intersex prevalence, but it was not possible to determine whether this was due to the overrepresentation of LGBT respondents or misreporting because there was no follow-up question to assess specific intersex variations or the rate of false positives.
So despite being diagnosed by a doctor, they did not follow up to confirm that their DSD was confirmed by a doctor. The reference list is the most scientific regarding DSDs, but with everything else, it's intersectional, 'they hate me because I'm black' bullshit. This is the manual used to collect data, and they used the same shit you see in CRT books.
 
dementia.JPG
At this point all I can say is "lmao". My empathy for these people has been stretched to the breaking point.

 
View attachment 5389624
At this point all I can say is "lmao". My empathy for these people has been stretched to the breaking point.

People with Alzheimers and Dementia forget their fetishes.
Color me shocked.
If anything shows this shit is a fucking LARP it's this. Once they become forgetful enough they forget they're supposed to be posing as the opposite sex, and when you have a hard time remembering your own name, I guess all your deviant fetishes sort of lose their importance to you.

The idea of a demented troon, who has likely made the lives of anyone he came into contact with that won't play along with his perversion, hell for years at that point, that's gotten off on forcing their fetish on people, and subjecting unwilling strangers to their gross behavior, experiencing what I can only call Karma by discovering they've been castrated and turned their bodies into a freakshow, possibly multiple time a day, is absolutely hilarious.
 
Dutch investigative journalism program Zembla did a piece on The Dutch Protocol, very worth a watch. Zembla airs on the public national television so it's a big deal.
The only one of the proponents willing to speak with them is a woman who looks like a severely depressed lesbian. Scientists both Dutch and foreign are demolishing the Amsterdam Gender Clinic. Note that some Dutch methodologists chose not to speak out because they felt unsafe - one was literally threatened by his employer and that is repeated on camera.

They have a fucking rainbow unicorn in the waiting room.

Link to Zembla website.

Bitchute link.
 
I searched for “study” and “case study” in the GRS/SRS thread trying to collect as many studies as possible. Sorry if some of these are repeated or already in this thread, a lot of the studies sound similar and I chose to err on the side of including them. I might make another post organizing these and other studies with direct links (and pdfs or links to archives, everyone please remember to archive stuff), but for now I put little descriptions of what each thing is.

Survey of vaginoplasty surgeons about doing the surgery on minors.

Neovagina (to clarify, I do not consider these abominations to be vaginas, but this is the clearest term) complications in patients that went to a Canadian post-op care clinic.
The pdf is in the attachments, it's the one starting with "Neurourology".
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/nau.25132?saml_referrer

Neovagina complication meta-analysis that only counts a small subset of the actual complications.
Speaking of suffering, I also noticed this meta-analysis in the citations:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ca.23001 (pdf in attached files)

Paper on recent increase in Trans surgeries, includes data about minors but also intentionally obfuscates it
Here’s a new paper on the frequency "gender-affirming surgery" in the US, which Ben Ryan did a thread about yesterday.

@benryanwriter, tweet 1694363996613161247 (archive)

National Estimates of Gender-Affirming Surgery in the US | Obstetrics and Gynecology | JAMA Network Open (archive)

Survey that found a 0% regret rate for “top surgery” (and the authors had 40% of patients they reached out to ignore them but don’t worry I’m sure that didn’t affect the results at all).
Speaking of ethically concerning studies. Here's a new one that being shared by a transwoman.
link | archive | article | archive
It reports a flawless study of a 100% satisfaction rate and zero detransitioners in a study of top surgery patients.

Long-term post-transition Swedish study and Amsterdam suicide rate study.
The Dhjene et al. study from 2011 shows a significantly increased risk of suicide after reassignment compared to the gen pop, which suggest that at best transitioning isn't effective at removing risk and at worst it may increase it. It's corroborated by Wiepjes et al. from 2020.

Neovagina MRIs. They show where the cavity is relative to organs and stuff.
found an awesome study of mri imaging of neovaginas. some nsfw pictures in the link.

Experimental vaginoplasty method that uses buccal mucosa grafts (from the lining of the mouth) so that the “vaginal canal” will feel more like real vagina. There’s also an explanation of how the authors think penises and vaginas are mostly the same tissues so surely it’s possible to make a real vagina out of a penis.
Appropiate time to reply cause I just saw it's already happening! (article is from 2020)

Autologous Buccal Micro-Mucosa Free Graft combined with Posterior Scrotal Flap Transfer for Vaginoplasty in Male-To-Female Transsexuals: A Pilot Study
(+ sci-hub full article, including pics and detailed info)

Attempts to use tissue expanders in phalloplasty (they went poorly).
I was looking up state-of-art methods on phalloplasty (as one does...) and I came across this particular publication. I remembered someone asking if it's possible to simply get tissue expanders for RFFF to avoid the gnarly arm, some dozen pages ago. I don't remember if it was answered in the end, but here it is anyway if people are curious:

TLDR: No. Well, kinda. They just keep fucking it up.

Extremely disgusting studies about colon neovaginas having issues specific to colon tissue.
WARNING: The pages linked to in this post show internal images of neovaginas without any kind of warning! This post has the images in individual spoilers but the studies do not.

I found this interesting case study about a complication of colon vaginoplasty:
Refractory diversion neovaginitis in a sigmoid-colon-derived neovagina: clinical and histopathological considerations
Archive

25-person fertility study claiming testosterone use has no impact on the fetuses of TIFs.
Boston IVF did a study. 8 years, only around 25 patients. Based on that study there were no instances of birth defects resulting from testosterone use.

TIM “breastfeeding” case report. They really want male breastfeeding to work.
Paper cites a case study of a single trans woman who breastfed:

Doctor responds to above breastfeeding study, explaining that it’s wrong to endanger an infant for the sexual emotional gratification of an adult man.
There is a fantastic blog post by a skeptical doctor analyzing this study. It's well worth the read. https://lascapigliata.com/2018/03/26/analysis-of-study-of-induced-lactation-in-trans-identified-man/

Case study where the dilator went through a neovagina into the patient’s abdominal cavity, followed by paper about vaginoplasty and phalloplasty complications.
Coming here with some more findings from medical articles!
Horrifying neovagina information, the interesting-seeming Mt. Sinai link is apparently broken (but not archived smh) so I’ll look into it later.
I haven't heard of them healing completely shut, like a nullo, but at a certain point enough depth is lost that it becomes a 1-2" deep divot equivalent to minimal- or zero-depth SRS. It's a relatively common complication; this recent study looking at Mt. Sinai patients over the past 5 years had 15% returning for a revision to "fix" it. Safe to assume the actual number of people affected but not seeking additional surgery is higher still.

Rarely, the walls can fuse together and close off a hollow area of skin. I don't know what would happen there with penile inversions, but if the sigmoid colon surgery blocks off it will painfully fill the cavity with intestinal mucous. And sometimes those pus pockets can burst internally. Other ways to blow out the walls of a neovagina include fucking a hole into it, and routine douching.

Study of neovagina fistula rates.
I was interested to learn that fistula following SRS is as high as 17% -
Study is from 2020 AND European, so make of that what you will.
(https://europepmc.org/article/med/33139068).

A couple phalloplasty complication studies.
Man I can't find the study, but one analysis of FtM neopenis surgeries found a hilarious 200% complication rate. This one shows a 32% rate of "urethral complications" and a 3-7% total failure (loss of neophallus). This one admits that 51% of them can experience stricture even with highly skilled surgeons.

More phallo complications.
I had a very quick look around for canned stats on complications with phalloplasty with urethral lengthening and found one study (not a review) suggesting a rate of over 30% in both RFF (arm) and ALT (thigh) phalloplasty (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, archive.ph).

Even more phallo complications, though this time it’s being done on actual men.
So out of sheer curiosity I found pics of phallo on actual men for reconstructive purposes from them either being dicklets or having dick cancer or something.

So this was a case study on doing it on youths who either were born dickless or lost it:

"The overall complication rate was about 47%. All of the complications were late and required surgical revision. The results were assessed regarding overall functionality (voiding, erection/erogenous areas, masturbation/sexual intercourse) and aesthetic outcome using subjective and objective parameters. Psychological evaluation for both patient and parents was performed in 4 cases." Here

Journal article scrutinizing the “evidence” for the Dutch Protocol, which pioneered the use of puberty blockers in trans-identified children/adolescents. The entire practice of giving gender dysphoric kids these drugs is based on the success of this experiment, which in reality was a garbage study with meaningless or even outright negative results.
Fascinating article about the origins of the Dutch Protocol: The Dutch Protocol for Juvenile Transsexuals: Origins and Evidence (archive)
Here are some excerpts that I feel fit in this thread under "associated horrors":

Trying to make Neovaginas in puberty-suppressed males.
Due to giving children the same drugs they use to chemically castrate sex offenders, young men don't "develop enough penile tissue for a vaginoplasty".
Instead, the "medical professionals" behind a "landmark study" are now resorting to using pieces of ones own colon in order to create the needed fuckhole.
It goes about as well as you imagine.

Case study where one of the puberty-suppressed males in the Dutch study died because of necrotizing cellulitis (60+% of his skin died) as a result of his colon vaginoplasty.
One of the young MtFs who took part in the original "Dutch protocol" study did die of necrotizing cellulitis though! Apparently the use of puberty blockers meant that he didn't have enough genital tissue to use for "normal" surgery, so they used part of his intestine, which led to the infection.

Hyperbaric-oxygen chambers being used to aid neovagina healing.
Re: Mark Bowers recommending oxygen therapy to savage a dead ditch. I find a paper about the use of hyperbaric oxygen in the management of post-op stinkditch infections. It is not a randomized trial or anything, just a retrospective study comparing the outcome of 33 infected ditches. The author is favorable towards it.

This study isn’t on trans people but it’s about the dangers of exogenous testosterone.
On the same topic, the evils of exogenous testosterone, a new study published in June 2023 has found a link between supplemental testosterone and atrial fibrillation, pulmonary emboli and acute kidney injury.
Cardiovascular safety of testosterone replacement therapy

Side effects of GnRH agonists (puberty blockers) on adolescent girls with endometriosis.
Some bonus on hormones: a study on gonadroprin to treat adolescent endometriosis (so correct age group):

Long-Term Effects of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonists and Add-Back in Adolescent Endometriosis

A regret/detrans rate one, I’m pretty sure it’s been referenced already, at least indirectly.
I believe the most recent study touted widely by the media and twitter TRAs as showing an extremely low regret rate for SRS surgery operationalized its "regret" figures by only counting patients who returned to the original care team asking for a reversal.


The propaganda: https://www.gendergp.com/new-study-...of-gender-affirming-surgery-are-non-existent/

No matter how bad you think it is, it's worse.

Case study where a TIF had a stroke from testosterone use and got locked-in syndrome.
Has this been posted here before? Not surgery but terrible results from unethical medical care:

This 23-year-old woman, who is now conscious but completely paralyzed except for vertical eye movements, must be extremely happy that she was able to have her gender affirmed using safe and effective treatments.

Puberty blockers lowering IQ in kids with precocious puberty (presumably this effect is worse when the kids are fully skipping puberty instead of just delaying it to a more developmentally appropriate age).
Blockers have already been shown to lower IQ
That longitudinal study was on children on blockers to treat precocious puberty. Off-label use on confused teenagers might do even more damage, who knows. You're a bigot if you try to study it.

A study that claimed to show that medical transition improves medical health but actually didn’t show that.
Here is the article quoted above, and here is the academic criticism itself.

Gross colon neovagina case report.
I found a horrific case study paper that has endoscopic images of a sigmoid colon rotpocket : Link | Archive
Have seen similar papers posted here but not this particular one, though I haven't waded through the entire thread.

EPATH (European part of WPATH) conference summaries.
I thought folks might be interested in the paper published by the Biannual Dr. Mengele Friendship Society that performs these butcheries.


Plenty of interesting papers inside, from the latest penile flap research at Yokohama University, to case stories involving anal fistulas and colostomy bags.
Personally I found a study done about 150 German troons rather interesting.

Edit: I almost missed this one because it sounded similar to the other perforated amhole.

A few posts that aren’t studies but are relevant to this thread:
Psychology/ Medical Research Information on Issues of Studying Troon SRS for anyone who is interested

A tool for examining research quality.
So there is a free program called G-Power which you can put in a study's methods and it will tell you its actually effective size. It was required when I ran research to find the minimum number of participants to have an effect size to make the research worthwhile.

Australian news article about trans surgery regret. Talks a bit about how, even 14 years ago, the regret rates pushed by trans “researchers” aren’t reliable. Out of the ~600 patients this clinic has done surgery on, 8 people, surely a small fraction of actual regret cases, contacted the reporters.
Interesting article from 14 years ago. It seems there was an Aussie Tavistock equivalent that was investigated, and found wanting.
The tranny classics are here, some nice suicide baiting at the end, but it's mainly about regrets from surgery.

I think the only studies in this post that had control groups are ones that weren’t about trans people lmao. It’s like they’re allergic to the basic principles of experimental design.

Research tip: If you want to find more studies, pick one you find interesting and look at the authors’ other work, the citations used in the paper, and maybe other papers that have cited them. All of these wretched excuses for researchers deserve scorn and shame.
 
Last edited:
Very nice effort! The Mt. Sinai study with the broken link should probably be referring to this: Vaginal Stenosis of the Neovagina in Transfeminine Patients after Gender-affirming Vaginoplasty Surgery (sheepishly now also archived here).

Worth noting that the actual complication rate necessitating revision was 26%, and 30% of those needed a second revision/third surgery. The 15% concerns only stenosis (ie rot-pocket closure). Also while re-reading the study, I appreciated this from the conclusions:

Patients with neovaginal stenosis were more likely to have experienced difficulty with postoperative dilation than to have traditional risk factors known to affect wound healing.

I.e. maybe we can't blame the surgery itself, most of these issues were from poor patient follow-through.
 
When you google for 'trans surgery regret rate', the top result (for me at least) is a CNN article about the stunningly low regret rate of 1% of gender-affirming surgeries.
Because they don't count the other 41% who already checked out.
There are more pooners than trannies now?
According to this definition a transperson who realized what they had done to their body and then committed suicide without starting to detransition would not show up as regret case.
See? told ya...
Never mind the fact that the authors of course portray the results of their own clinic and thus have both an ideological as well as a financial agenda.
Its always about the money, even rabid fanatics have a price, always follow the money.
 
BMJ Article about modern day eunuchs.
Notable in that it correctly identifies transwomen as a type of eunuch.

Lolcow crossover: Richard J. Wassersug is an administrator on fetish site The Eunuch Archive. Several academics involved with the site want to make "eunuch" a gender identity recognized as equal to transgender.

Also this is loosely a "BMJ article" but it's not reporting a scientific study, submissions in this section are more like an opinion piece in a newspaper.
 
I posted this in the Title IX demolition thread, and since it directly relates to troons it needed to be posted here. It was published in July of 2023, so it is very recent. It's done by Ada Cheung, at the University of Melbourne and resident troon Kirsti Miller. It states there are no biological differences between transwomen and women. The paper is open access, and available here.

This is a classic case of a paper stating one thing, with its own evidence saying another. Here is its evidence synthesis:
Evidence Synthesis
Existing literature comprises cross-sectional or small uncontrolled longitudinal studies of short duration. In nonathletic trans men starting testosterone therapy, within 1 year, muscle mass and strength increased and, by 3 years, physical performance (push-ups, sit-ups, run time) improved to the level of cisgender men. In nonathletic trans women, feminizing hormone therapy increased fat mass by approximately 30% and decreased muscle mass by approximately 5% after 12 months, and steadily declined beyond 3 years. While absolute lean mass remains higher in trans women, relative percentage lean mass and fat mass (and muscle strength corrected for lean mass), hemoglobin, and VO2 peak corrected for weight was no different to cisgender women. After 2 years of GAHT, no advantage was observed for physical performance measured by running time or in trans women. By 4 years, there was no advantage in sit-ups. While push-up performance declined in trans women, a statistical advantage remained relative to cisgender women.
It admits there are sex differences in sport, yet casually mentions that in swimming, there isn't much of a difference:
Cisgender males have a performance advantage over cisgender females in multiple sports (14). Unequivocally, competitive sporting records for sports that are determined by maximal skeletal muscle or cardiac muscle performance demonstrate male advantage after the age of puberty (15). The difference between male and female performance differs depending on the sport. The lowest differences are seen in rowing, swimming, and running (11-13%), but the greatest differences are seen in movements utilizing the upper body (16). For instance, there is a 20% male advantage for the fastest tennis serve and >50% difference in speed for baseball pitching (16). This is largely the result of pubertal testosterone concentrations in the male range of 7.7 to 29.4 nmol/L relative to 0.06 to 1.68 nmol/L in females. This results in taller height, higher hemoglobin, larger bones, lower body fat, and higher muscle mass and strength in postpubertal males (14, 17).
...do they not think upper body strength is used in rowing? Lia Thomas was on hormones for 3 years, and he still had a massive advantage over his female competitors.

Medically necessary GAHT is safe and effective at reducing gender incongruence or dysphoria, and can significantly improve psychological well-being and quality of life (26-28). Masculinizing hormone therapy with testosterone for trans men and nonbinary people recorded female at birth will commonly achieve serum testosterone concentrations in the male reference range (14, 26, 29, 30). This induces lowered voice, body and facial hair growth, menstrual cessation, as well as changes in body composition (increase in muscle mass and reduction in fat mass) (26, 29, 30). Common risks include acne, unmasking polycythemia (particularly in the setting of other conditions such as sleep apnea), infertility, androgenic alopecia, hypertension, reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and an increased risk of myocardial infarction relative to cisgender women (26, 31).
What is interesting is that this claim - that trans men will get T levels in the male range - is not supported by this study's own evidence. Trans men are not winning gold or smashing records in men's sports, despite having 'equal' T levels.
Feminizing hormone therapy for trans women and nonbinary individuals recorded male at birth will typically achieve serum estradiol (100-200 pg/mL or 367-734 pmol/L) and testosterone concentrations (<2 nmol/L or <58 ng/dL or <2 nmol/L) in the female range (26, 29). Estradiol therapy is often paired with antiandrogen agents such as cyproterone acetate, spironolactone, bicalutamide, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues for people with testes. Depending on the mechanism of action, peripheral androgen receptor antagonists such as spironolactone or bicalutamide may not lower testosterone concentrations but will block the action of testosterone at the receptor level (32, 33). Feminizing hormone therapy induces gynoid fat redistribution and breast growth, softens skin, and reduces muscle mass, body and facial hair growth, and libido (26, 29, 30). Voice pitch and skeletal size do not change (26, 29, 30). Adverse effects include an increased risk of venous thromboembolism, infertility, weight gain, and hypertriglyceridemia as well as elevated risk of myocardial infarction and stroke relative to cisgender women and men in the setting of additional risk factors (26, 30, 31, 34).
Surprised they even mentioned the risks. So much for it being 'safe and effective'.

Now, despite the paper saying transmen had the same T levels as real men, do they have the same advantages?
For trans men, longitudinal studies examining lean mass using DXA have consistently shown a 10% increase over the first 12 months associated with a 10% decrease in fat mass (41-45). Muscle area (as opposed to mass) measured in a single-slice magnetic resonance imaging cross-section of the thigh found that muscle area increased in trans men by 19% over 3 years but most change had plateaued by 1 year (46). After a median of 44 months of GAHT, a cross-sectional analysis of 43 trans men showed that lean mass was 7.8 kg higher than cisgender women but fat mass was not statistically significantly different (47). Trans men had fat mass 29% with lean mass 68.3%, which was statistically significantly different to cisgender men (fat mass 19.7%, lean mass 77%, P < .001) (47).

The paper admits transwomen are taller than natal women:
Conversely, for trans women, longitudinal cohort studies show that reductions in absolute lean mass are modest, approximately 3% to 5% in the first 12 months (43, 45, 48-52). A longitudinal study in 179 trans women over the first 12 months of GAHT showed a decrease of total lean mass by 3% from baseline but fat mass increased by 28% (45). A 2-year study assessing relative lean mass percentage in trans women found reductions from 77.5% at baseline to 72.5% at 1 year and 71.7% at 2 years, whereas relative fat mass increased from 19% at baseline to 24.2% at 1 year and 25.6% at 2 years (51). A 3-year study assessing cross-sectional thigh muscle area in 19 trans women showed a decrease of 9% from baseline at 1 year and 12% from baseline at 3 years, although the loss between 1 to 3 years was statistically not significant (46). Muscle area in trans women remained statistically significantly greater than that measured in untreated trans men (used as the female comparison group), though with an almost complete overlap between the 2 groups. The authors noted that trans women were on average 10.7 cm taller than untreated trans men and in a linear regression model, height was a strong predictor of muscle area, even after correction for the effect of sex (46).
So, transwomen are taller, have greater muscle mass, and only experience a 12% reduction, just what the Air Force study showed. But they're totally weaker and have no advantages ever.
While longitudinal studies have followed trans women for relatively short durations, there have been 2 cross-sectional studies in nonathletic trans women that have aimed to describe the longer-term effects of GAHTs. After a mean 8 years of feminizing hormone therapy, 23 trans women were found to have 32% higher fat mass, 17% lower lean mass, 25% lower grip strength, 33% lower biceps peak torque, and 25% lower quadriceps peak torque relative to cisgender men (53). There was no cisgender female control group. Similarly, in another recent study designed to match participants for the same birth-recorded sex, 41 trans women (median 39 months GAHT) had a statistically significant 6.9 kg lower lean mass and 9.8 kg higher fat mass relative to cisgender men measured by DXA (47). Overall body composition in trans women (fat mass 32.3%, lean mass 65.0%) was similar to cisgender women (fat mass 32.8%, lean mass 64.5%, P > .05) (47), consistent with Alvares et al's cross-sectional analysis showing that fat mass percentage in trans women (median GAHT duration 14 years) was not statistically different to cisgender women (29.5% vs 32.9%, P > .05) (54). Lean mass corrected for height was also not statistically different between trans women and cisgender women (54). While the raw lean mass in trans women was higher than cisgender women, trans women were on average taller and as such, to compare body composition changes between groups, the percentage fat and lean mass may be a more appropriate comparison.
They only thing they have in common is fat mass, but they're still pushing it.

On grip strength:
In trans men, a prospective controlled analysis found that 23 trans men had a mean 18% increase in hand grip strength over 12 months relative to 23 cisgender women (41). A larger longitudinal analysis of 278 trans men showed an increase in grip strength of 6.1 kg (18% from baseline) over 12 months (65). Interestingly, in trans men, the increase in grip strength was associated with an increase in lean body mass (per kg increase in grip strength: +0.010 kg, 95% CI +0.003; +0.017), while this was not statistically significant in trans women (per kg increase in grip strength: +0.004 kg, 95% CI −0.000; +0.009) (65). A cross-sectional study comparing hand grip in 19 trans men (mean 29 kg, 2 years after GAHT) with 19 cisgender men (mean 40 kg) showed that strength was considerably lower in the trans men (66). In a group of 12 trans men followed over the first 12 months of GAHT, knee flexion and extension strength increased, but, even when adjusted for height, remained lower than cisgender men (67).
What? I thought their T levels made them equal to men? What's going on?

In trans women, several uncontrolled longitudinal studies (42, 43, 51, 53, 54, 65, 67) and cross-sectional studies have made comparisons with cisgender men (53, 54). All assessed hand grip strength, except for 2 small studies that assessed knee extension/flexion (53, 67). Hand grip changes in trans women have shown variable results, with some studies demonstrating significant reductions of −4 to −7% over 12 months (51, 65) and smaller studies showing no significant change (42, 43). Mean hand grip strength if corrected for total lean mass has been shown to be no different in trans women compared with cisgender women, but was significantly lower than cisgender men (54).
> Only have a decrease in 7%
> Equal to women
Ho hum.
In terms of lower-body strength, a cross-sectional analysis of 23 trans women (mean 8 years GAHT) showed knee extension was 25% lower than cisgender men (53). In contrast, a small longitudinal cohort study of 11 trans women over the first 12 months of GAHT found no statistically significant change in knee flexion/extension strength in trans women (67). While the study was small and the comparison group were not concurrently assessed, the findings suggest that 12 months of GAHT is insufficient to change knee flexion/extension strength to the level of cisgender women.
Lmao weak knees.

Their conclusion:
Overall, handgrip strength is limited as a proxy for overall strength. In trans men, absolute and relative muscle mass and strength increases with GAHT and are higher than cisgender women but remain lower than cisgender men. Trans women after GAHT have higher absolute muscle mass, but their relative muscle and fat mass percentages and muscle strength corrected for lean mass are no different to cisgender women.
Transmen can't win against men, yet transwomen are exactly the same as women despite only losing a bit of muscle strength and being taller than the average woman.

On Bone Mineral Density. Rather based despite what TRAs say.
Bone microarchitecture measured by high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography may overcome limitations of DXA and has been shown to improve fracture risk prediction (83, 84). A recent cross-sectional analysis involving 41 trans men and 40 trans women compared with cisgender comparison groups of the same birth-recorded sex found that trans women had compromised bone microarchitecture. There was lower total volumetric BMD (vBMD) with lower cortical and trabecular vBMD and higher cortical porosity relative to cisgender men (85). Prospective studies are required to confirm these findings, as previous research has shown that trans women have low areal BMD compared with cisgender men even before starting any hormonal therapy (86). Conversely, bone microarchitecture in trans men was preserved with higher total vBMD relative to cisgender women (85) but lower than that of cisgender men (66). These vBMD data are consistent with fracture data from a population-based study showing a higher percentage of fractures in trans women relative to cisgender men, but fracture risk in trans men was no different to cisgender women (87).
Estrogen is supposed to make them uwu females, gives them fractures instead.

On red blood cell counts:
Hemoglobin concentrations in men are higher than that for women in the general population (88). Increases in hemoglobin may contribute to enhanced performance of elite endurance athletes (89, 90). Interestingly, gene polymorphisms that regulate hemoglobin are more prevalent in endurance male cyclists (90). Androgens induce erythrocytosis via upregulating erythropoietin and downregulating ferritin and hepcidin concentrations (91), and it is not surprising that GAHT has marked and consistent effects on hemoglobin and hematocrit concentrations (92). In those on established GAHT, hemoglobin, hematocrit, and red blood cell count increases to the male reference range in trans men (48, 49, 93, 94) and correspondingly decreases to the female reference range in trans women (49, 94-96) within 3 months (97). Such changes in erythrocytosis are likely to impact endurance (running times are discussed under “Physical Performance Changes With Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy”).

Despite this, transmen continue to fall behind real men, and transwomen - as the paper later admits - fall between males and females.

On VO2 uptake:
There has been only 1 cross-sectional study, assessing VO2 peak in 15 trans women compared with 13 cisgender men and 14 cisgender women, and findings are summarized in Table 2 (54). While the trans women included had received GAHT for a mean of 14 years, the serum testosterone concentrations were widely distributed with mean 3.2 nmol/L (range 0.4-22.1) relative to cisgender women (Table 2). Trans women were taller than cisgender women and absolute values suggest that trans women appear to have muscle mass, strength, and VO2 peak in between that of cisgender women and cisgender men. However, when VO2 peak is corrected for weight or lean mass, there are no statistical differences between trans women and cisgender women, but are significantly lower than cisgender men (54).
They have to keep putting them in the female level just to make them equal, even when the previous sentence said otherwise. It's their male bodies, retard. The chart also shows their testosterone still being higher than women, at 3.8 nmol/L compared to the female 0.7. They are right between the male and female values, while being closer to the male ones.

On estrogen potentially impairing them:

Interestingly, Alvares et al noted that trans women had a lower VO2 peak/lean mass index, and lower mean strength/lean mass index than both cisgender groups, suggesting that trans women produce less force per gram of muscle (54). Possible cellular dysfunction in the muscle of trans women following GAHT has been postulated (54). This notion is supported by animal models of androgen receptor knockout mice, which show impaired skeletal muscle function with reduced fast-twitch muscle mass and force production in male mice but not female mice (114). Gene expression in the muscle of these male mice suggested reduced polyamine biosynthetic enzymes and impaired myoblast differentiation.
There are no differences, but estrogen still wants to nuke your male body anyways.

Expiratory volume was also lower in trans women than in cisgender men, but there was no statistically significant difference compared with cisgender women (54). The authors hypothesized that there may be an effect of estradiol acting as a potential bronchoconstrictor or respiratory muscle weakness (115, 116).
Still trying to kill them.

Although no direct studies have assessed cardiac size or function in trans people, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) concentrations are an indirect reflection of cardiac mass in healthy individuals (117-119). This likely explains the higher hs-cTn male reference range relative to females. A cross-sectional study assessing hs-cTn in trans people on GAHT for >12 months found that median concentrations of hs-cTn in trans men were similar to cisgender men, and trans women were similar to cisgender women (120). These findings are concordant with animal models demonstrating androgen deprivation in male mice induces metabolic remodeling of the heart with reduced cardiac mass and impaired cardiac output during stress (121).
I wonder how they got to that conclusion despite admitting they never assessed cardiac size.

On performance differences:

More recent data from Chiccarelli et al have expanded the analysis with a larger cohort of 146 trans men and 228 trans women compared with cisgender mean aggregate scores in 2022 for Air Force members with an aim to guide fitness targets for their trans service members undergoing GAHT (124). There were 346 who dropped out from analysis, with only 28 trans individuals (15 trans women) completing follow-up to 4 years of GAHT (124). Dropouts are extremely important to consider in skewing results, given that those who remain in the military likely display a higher level of physical fitness or have better access to health care than those who leave.
This was the same study, mind you, that this paper acknowledged where transwomen still have greater thigh muscle strength and still ran faster than females. Same one.

Trans men service members prior to testosterone therapy performed 43% fewer push-ups and ran 1.5 miles 15% slower than cisgender men in the initial Roberts et al study (123). After commencing GAHT, there was progressive increase in push-ups and sit-ups performed and improvement in running times, and by 2 years, trans men were no different to cisgender men (123). In Chiccarelli's expanded analysis, while sit-ups achieved the level of cisgender men within 1 year, push-ups and run times took 3 years to reach that of cisgender men (124). By 4 years, trans men appeared to exceed the average performance of cisgender men (124).
This despite them not having the same grip strength, VO2 levels, or larger hearts. This same study also showed that hand grip strength decreased for transmen after a few years.

Trans women prior to feminizing hormone therapy performed 31% more push-ups, 15% more sit-ups in 1 minute, and ran 1.5 miles 21% faster than cisgender women in Roberts et al's study (123). It should be noted that height and size were not matched between trans women and cisgender women (Fig. 1). After 2 years of taking feminizing hormones, the push-ups and sit-ups performed in 1 minute significantly reduced and were no different to cisgender women (123). In Chiccarelli's analysis, the number of push-ups and sit-ups performed steadily declined over 4 years; however, although sit-ups were not statistically different to cisgender women at the 4 year time-point, push-ups performed remained statistically higher than cisgender women (albeit that 208 of 223 trans women dropped out over 4 years) (124). Run times slowed in both studies; however, statistical results were discrepant; Roberts et al found that trans women remained statistically faster than cisgender women at 2 years, but the larger Chiccarelli et al study found that run times among trans women were no different from cisgender women by 2 years of GAHT (123, 124).
Anything to make them equal.
Overall, trans men have improvements in physical performance after 1 to 2 years of testosterone therapy. In trans women, declines were seen in areas of physical performance but the discrepancy between statistical significance in Roberts et al and Chiccarelli et al may reflect a residual advantage in some parameters over cisgender women, or a type 1 error with survivorship bias influencing results given dropouts over time. Fitness test results must be interpreted in light of limitations. Tests have a minimum standard to pass, and, as such, are effort dependent and do not quantify maximal performance. Failure to pass a fitness test typically affects job prospects and requires service members to attend additional physical training sessions until they can meet the fitness requirements or leave military service. As such, there is survivorship bias across time with those remaining in the study likely maintaining higher fitness levels. Moreover, test results are uncontrolled for lifestyle variables; the type and intensity of training of service members vary by occupation. Further prospective studies in trans people are needed.
I'll be bringing up this Air Force paper again, because the summary is a doozy.

Physical performance is dependent upon many factors that vary greatly depending on the needs of individual sports. There are no published research studies on the effect of GAHT on coordination, flexibility, cardiac size, lung function, maximal power output (Wmax), anaerobic capacity, lactate threshold, exercise economy, efficiency, or factors such as Wmax/body weight ratio that are an important marker of ability in competitive cyclists.
>There are no published studies on these variables
> Still argues that transwomen are equal to women

This despite them saying in the paper cardiac troponin was the same.
Existing studies in nonathletic trans men have shown that increases in muscle mass and strength occur with testosterone therapy, and physical performance appears to be no different to cisgender men by 1 to 3 years after GAHT.
That's not what their own evidence said. Earlier in the paper, it states muscle mass plateaus over a year, and grip strength decreases in comparison to men. Despite transmen having the same T levels, they still cannot reach men on their level. How strange.

Studies in nonathletic trans women after GAHT demonstrates no change in height, but have shown decreases in hemoglobin, bone density compromise, and decrease in muscle mass and strength, which continue to decline beyond 2 years. While absolute muscle mass is higher, their relative muscle and fat mass percentages and muscle strength corrected for lean mass are no different to cisgender women. Cross-sectional studies of trans women on GAHT for over 4 years show that relative percentages of muscle mass and fat mass as well as fitness as measured by VO2 peak corrected for lean mass are no different to cisgender women and lower than that of cisgender men. Steady decrements are seen in physical performance of nonathletic trans women in the military, with no significant difference with cisgender women for running times by 2 years and sit-ups by 4 years after GAHT. An advantage in push-ups or upper body strength over cisgender women may remain at 4 years.
One AGAIN, the Air Force paper Cheung is referring to showed transwomen had 12% more muscle mass and still ran faster than their female counterparts. They still performed more pushups, which this paper acknowledges. Hand grip strength ONLY decreases by 7%, and allow me to reference this little tidbit from earlier in the paper:

A 3-year study assessing cross-sectional thigh muscle area in 19 trans women showed a decrease of 9% from baseline at 1 year and 12% from baseline at 3 years, although the loss between 1 to 3 years was statistically not significant (46). Muscle area in trans women remained statistically significantly greater than that measured in untreated trans men (used as the female comparison group), though with an almost complete overlap between the 2 groups. The authors noted that trans women were on average 10.7 cm taller than untreated trans men and in a linear regression model, height was a strong predictor of muscle area, even after correction for the effect of sex

Transwomen are women, yet they're still bigger, only have a decrease of 12% in their abilities, and still have more muscle because they are 10 cm taller than pooners. You gotta love studies like these. Once again, Lia Thomas was on hormones since 2019. He was still bigger, taller, and quicker than the other female swimmers - which this paper insists there are no sex differences. The main author, Ada Cheung, was called out by Emma Hilton for openly denying sex differences in sport. (See related argument here). And here.
dgad414f1.jpg
 
Let's look at some history. These papers may not represent the current state of scientific thought or transphobe wrongthink.

Non-transsexuals seeking sex reassignment (gender trenders) were known as early as 1979. Therapists were advised to say no, not put up with the person's bullshit, and help them with their real problems--after which they would usually stop identifying as transsexual.
A request for sex reassignment by a non-transsexual frequently leads to a serious confrontation between the patient and therapist. Therapists should explore and resolve the specific issues that have lead to such requests. As those issues are resolved, the non-transsexual usually drops his/her demands for sex reassignment.
Gene G. Abel (1979) What to do when non transsexuals seek sex reassignment surgery, Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 5:4, 374-376, DOI: 10.1080/00926237908407082

(Cf. Thomas Harris's 1988 novel The Silence of the Lambs, in which a non-transsexual is denied sex reassignment and, rather than working through his issues, invents skinwalking.)

In the same volume, it is noted self-identified transsexuals tend to use therapy to pursue their predetermined end point of sex reassignment. It is the therapist's responsibility to push past this and discover the true source of the patient's distress. A woman seeking sex reassignment had severe homophobia, and after that issue was explored, accepted lesbianism as a lifestyle.
Patients who believe themselves to be transsexual seek only confirmation of their diagnosis so that they may proceed with their pre-chosen course of management: hormones and surgery. Their syntonic emotional set generates resistance to any other therapeutic direction. Despite this attitude, it is the therapist's responsibility to assess each case individually and to decide, with the patient, on realistic goals even if they be different from the original one. This case emphasizes this need since a probing history revealed underlying conflict and anxiety related to severe homophobia. With revelation of the homophobia, various behavioral techniques could be used therapeutically. These resulted in acceptance of lesbianism as a life style. Careful assessment of patients with self-diagnoses of transsexualism can sometimes uncover a different etiology to which appropriate therapy can be applied.
Thelma F. Shtasel (1979) Behavioral treatment of transsexualism: A case report, Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 5:4, 362-367, DOI: 10.1080/00926237908407080

Skoptic syndrome (nullification) treated successfully with lithium carbonate and psychotherapy.
This paper discusses the successful use of lithium carbonate combined with psychotherapy in two cases of skoptic syndrome, an unusual form of intense obsession and annoyance with body image, especially with primary and secondary sex characteristics. These cases broaden our understanding of sexually obsessive and compulsive drives and demonstrate an efficacious treatment approach.
Coleman, E., Cesnik, J. (1990) Skoptic Syndrome: The Treatment of an Obsessional Gender Dysphoria with Lithium Carbonate and Psychotherapy, American Journal of Psychotherapy, 44:2, 204-2017, https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.1990.44.2.204

Conversion therapy works.
To our knowledge this case represents the first successful change of gender identity in a diagnosed transsexual. After initial attempts to change patterns of sexual arousal and suppress central transsexual fantasies failed, components of female role behavior in a 17year-old male transsexual were defined, measured, and modified piece by piece.

Male and female components of sitting, standing, and walking were identified and changed from feminine to masculine. Next, masculine social behavior and vocal characteristics were instigated; following this, male sexual fantasies were initiated and strengthened. At this point attempts to change patterns of sexual arousal from homosexual to heterosexual, which had failed earlier, were successful. In many instances the procedures were experimentally demonstrated to be responsible for changes. These data indicate that gender role may not be as inflexible as assumed.
Barlow DH, Reynolds EJ, Agras WS. Gender Identity Change in a Transsexual. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1973;28(4):569–576. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1973.01750340089014

Sex change "male menopause:"
This paper reports on an unusually interesting group of patients who were seen in the Gender Identity Clinic, Clarke Institute of Psychiatry, during the first two years that it was clinically active. (September 1975 to August 31, 1977). The sample consists of 21 male patients, between the ages of 40 and 65, who diagnostically have been transvestites most of their lives. They present with the request for surgical sex reassignment. This request for surgery comes at a period of “middle-age crisis” in their lives.

A comparison is made between these older male patients and 27 younger male patients seen in the Clinic who also requested surgery. The findings show that the older group tend to be younger at their age of initial cross-dressing, are more socially introverted than the younger transsexuals, and show greater scholastic ability. The most important finding is the predominantly strong heterosexual orientation in these older men when compared with younger gender disordered males. In certain respects these “older” men are rather typical of normal, heterosexual males.

The authors speculate on the findings and suggest that this older male group who request surgical sex reassignment in their middle years, use the desire to “become a woman” as a defence mechanism against an underlying depression. Essentially they are going through the climacteric or “the male menopause”, and should be treated by individual and/or marital therapy (providing the spouse is still living with her husband) together with antidepressant medication, if necessary.
Steiner BW, Satterberg JA, Muir CF. Flight into Femininity: The Male Menopause?*. Canadian Psychiatric Association Journal. 1978;23(6):405-410. doi:10.1177/070674377802300609

A lesbian develops a crush on her therapist and, when the therapist becomes pregnant, decides she wants to be a father:
Individuals who wish sexual reassignment can be classified according to clinical entities. It is essential to recognize which clinical entities promote gender dysphoria. A complication arising in the intensive psychotherapy of women unhappy with there biologic sex is presented. A 32-year-old homosexual women entered treatment with a female therapist for depression. Despite occasional fantasies of impregnating her therapist, the patient at first demonstrated no gender dysphoria. When her therapist actually did become pregnant, however, the patient began consciously to wish that she herself were male and stigmatized her homosexuality. During a two-week separation in treatment, the patient actively sought sexual reassignment. The role of eroticized transference is discussed to explain the emergence of gender dysphoria.
Thomas N. Wise MD & Jane Lucas RN (1981) Pseudotranssexualism:, Journal of Homosexuality, 6:3, 61-66, DOI: 10.1300/J082v06n03_05

Schizophrenic man with delusions of transsexuality is misdiagnosed (i.e. the psychologists believed his delusion) and put on hormones for years. After suffering a complete break from reality he gets the correct diagnosis, goes on antipsychotics and off hormones, and realizes he was never trans.
In the Netherlands it has recently become possible for transsexual patients to receive hormonal treatment from the onset of puberty. Until the age of 16, pubertal development can be prevented with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists. From 16 years of age onwards, gender adjustment can be initiated by administration of hormones of the opposite sex. Surgical treatment can be offered once the patient reaches 18 years of age. Although such treatment will only be initiated with reticence and after a long phase of intense diagnostic screening, the question arises whether a clear differentiation can be made between pure gender identity disorders and secondary transsexual feelings that are part of an ongoing psychopathological development, such as schizophrenia. The potential diagnostic confusion is illustrated by a case history of a male schizophrenic patient. This patient had been treated hormonally for transsexualism for years before acute psychotic decompensation occurred. Neuroleptic treatment of the psychosis rapidly reduced the psychotic symptoms. In retrospect, the patient regards his transsexual period as a 'mistake'. Delusions about one's physical appearance and the urge to drastically change the way one looks appear to be relatively common in patients suffering from schizophrenia.
Campo JM, Nijman H, Evers C, Merckelbach HL, Decker I. Genderidentiteitsstoornissen als bijverschijnsel van psychose, in het bijzonder schizofrenie [Gender identity disorders as a symptom of psychosis, schizophrenia in particular]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2001 Sep 29;145(39):1876-80. Dutch. PMID: 11605311.

But I couldn't find the one I was looking for. Somewhere there's a paper that describes a male who identified as a transsexual, but after the researchers put him on antipsychotics and a prostitute he decided he would remain a male. It's not at all significant (n=1), but it does suggest a treatment for the incel to troon pipeline.
 
While absolute muscle mass is higher, their relative muscle and fat mass percentages and muscle strength corrected for lean mass are no different to cisgender women.
Muscle strength: lean mass ratio = transwomen is on par with genuine women.
Muscle lean mass = transwomen is on average larger than genuine women.
The natural conclusion is that transwomen have higher muscle strength than genuine women. Why is it so hard to understand?
 
Muscle strength: lean mass ratio = transwomen is on par with genuine women.
Muscle lean mass = transwomen is on average larger than genuine women.
The natural conclusion is that transwomen have higher muscle strength than genuine women. Why is it so hard to understand?
The best part is that Alvarez study referenced in the hand grip strength part doesn't even agree with Cheung. It clearly states TW are between natal men and women, not at the "female level." This is something Emma Hilton noticed, too.

Edit: here was Cheung's original tweet. archive.
Screenshot_20240110-181140_(1).png
 
Last edited:
From Ada Cheung:
Note that being #trans is not a choice, and whilst complex, gender is influenced in part by innate factors such as genes 🧬.
If it's something that's actually a genetic abnormality and is not based upon a person's choice, that's intersex, not "transgender". To suggest that a trans individual's genes will always be a prerequisite in being "trans" is a view known as transmedicalism, which makes Prof. Ada Cheung gatekeeping "truscum" and a terrible ally in the trans community's eyes, if I'm not mistaken.

I don't think anyone's really advocating for intersex people to remain in between sexes and being denied an opportunity at a normal (well, normalish) life. The problem is the coattail riders, the people who have convinced themselves they are (or should have been) the opposite sex despite having no genetic or sexual abnormalities (and the activists' work to keep the barriers as low as possible, as proof-free as possible, to as young of an age as possible). If someone under 18's getting the chop/stitch, I want to know that they actually had an abnormality to fix and that it wasn't simply the modern environment convincing a healthy kid to ruin their life; I want to know that the system has barriers that cannot be circumvented without physical evidence.
 
Why is there this seemingly sudden push to ignore reality and pretend that sex "gender" is a "spectrum", "can be freely chosen", and "doesn't have to match one's body"*?

* So there's BS like "people who give birth" instead of "women", and idiotic difficulty in defining "woman" in the first place.
 
In this study of troons, the frequency of personality disorders was 81.4%. The most frequent personality disorder was narcissistic personality disorder (57.1%).

View attachment 5683159

Good study, tho people might dismiss it because it was done in Iran, a country where transgenderism is essentially a weapon used against gay people.

The results don't really surprise me, however, there really isn't any way western researchers wouldn't get the same result, unless they fudged the data.

However, with gay people specifically (not troons)...
 
Back