No dude, that's what I'm trying to tell you- that's called a meta study, which throws out the bad studies and keeps the more credible and combines them to get the general picture. That is NOT one study. You are wrong about long term satisfaction, and you don't know anyone from these communities, so you have no reference for how it generally is. I know people that have and have come across many on clinical environments that I've worked.
Several studies have investigated long-term satisfaction among individuals who have undergone gender-affirming surgeries, with follow-up periods extending beyond one year:
- Systematic Review of Regret Rates: A comprehensive review analyzed 27 studies encompassing 7,928 transgender patients who underwent various gender-affirming surgeries. The findings indicated a pooled regret rate of 1% (95% CI <1%–2%). The review highlighted that advancements in surgical techniques and improved patient selection criteria have contributed to these low regret rates. americanjournalofsurgery.com+2pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov+2jamanetwork.com+2
Nowhere in your linked metastudy did they say they took out "bad studies."
In fact YOUR LINK, specifically says they included ALL the studies. AND they specifically said the
majority of the studies were poor to fair.
"This tool ranks each article as “good,” “fair,” or “poor,” and with this, we categorized each article into “low risk,” “moderate risk,” or “high risk” of bias, respectively."
"Quality Assessment
Based on the NIH quality assessment tool,
the majority of article ranged between “poor” and “fair” categories.<a href="
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8099405/#R24">24</a> (
See Supplemental Digital Content 2, which displays the score of each reviewed study.
http://links.lww.com/PRSGO/B599.)"
- Long-Term Satisfaction Post-Mastectomy: A cross-sectional study surveyed 139 individuals who had undergone gender-affirming mastectomy between 1990 and 2020, with a median follow-up of 3.6 years. Participants reported high satisfaction levels, with a median satisfaction score of 5 on a 5-point scale, and minimal regret, with a median decisional regret score of 0 on a 100-point scale. jamanetwork.com
This is only talking specifically about mastectomies. That is not relevant because we have to include hormones and genital surgery.
- 40-Year Follow-Up Study: A study published in 2022 examined long-term outcomes of individuals who underwent gender-affirming surgery over a 40-year period. The research demonstrated sustained high patient satisfaction, improved gender dysphoria, and reduced mental health comorbidities persisting decades after surgery, with no reported patient regret. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
This is for adults. Irrelevant.
These studies collectively suggest that individuals who undergo gender-affirming surgeries generally maintain high levels of satisfaction and low regret rates in the long term, extending well beyond one-year post-surgery.
AGAIN, the problem with most of these studies is that the FOLLOW UP is TOO SHORT and they're talking about adults.
We have to isolate any "regret studies" to when they
TRANS KIDS and take out any adult studies.
In short, we need LONG TERM STUDIES on when they trans kids. No one has a problem with adults transitioning. They're adults, they can do whatever they want.
If you want to discuss kids having trans surgeries, I would love to discuss that with you. That has ZERO to do with consenting adults having surgeries though.
No one has a problem with adults transitioning.
Low Regret rates for adults is completely irrelevant to the debate we're having in society - which is about KIDS doing this shit.
Gender-affirming surgeries among minors in the United States are exceedingly rare. A study analyzing data from 2016 to 2019 found that only 405 individuals aged 12 to 18 underwent such procedures, representing a small fraction of all gender-affirming surgeries performed during that period.
jamanetwork.com
1. It doesn't matter if it's rare or not. It's still wrong. And if it is so rare, why do you care if it's banned?
2. We're not only talking about surgery. We're also talking about giving cross sex hormones which obviously leads to a whole bunch of physical changes such as infertility, loss of sexual function and all the other permanent changes.
Further research indicates that the majority of these surgeries among minors are chest-related procedures. A study reviewing a national pediatric surgical database identified 108 transgender minors who underwent gender-affirming surgeries between 2018 and 2021, accounting for approximately 0.04% of all transgender youth nationwide. Notably, about 95% of these surgeries were chest surgeries, and only 10 patients were under the age of 16.
jamanetwork.comhrc.org
These findings underscore the infrequency of gender-affirming surgeries among minors in the U.S., with such procedures being performed sparingly and primarily involving older adolescents undergoing chest surgeries.
Irrelevant. Because again we're not only talking about surgery. We're talking about hormones and surgeries. The vast majority of the time, they go hand in hand.
Barely any JUST do surgery and not take hormones.
That isn't actually a real thing that happens in real life. Maybe some bizarre and tragic isolated incidents.
Denying trans youth access to life-saving treatment is absolutely reprehensible.
You just said they're not transing kids in real life and in the next sentence defend transing kids as life saving.