My response to Science Friday: "Is it possible to not support Governor Abbott and still advocate to follow the science? In the March 4, 2022 Science Friday broadcast entitled, "Once Again, Transgender And Nonbinary Kids Are Under Attack in Texas", a guest claimed there is "robust evidence base" for medically transitioning children. Th…
My response to Science Friday: "Is it possible to not support Governor Abbott and still advocate to follow the science? In the March 4, 2022 Science Friday broadcast entitled, "Once Again, Transgender And Nonbinary Kids Are Under Attack in Texas", a guest claimed there is "robust evidence base" for medically transitioning children. That is simply not true and one would think a show with the word "science" in the title would have put in the modicum of effort needed to understand that. Sweden, France, Finland, and the UK are each taking a data-driven, science based reviewed of gender care and are releasing findings like this "“…low quality evidence that the treatments have the desired effect…” and that the treatments “…are potentially fraught with extensive and irreversible adverse consequences such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, infertility, increased cancer risk, and thrombosis.” While you may wish to dismiss the Governor as a Christian fundamentalist, transphobic, bigot, I don't think it's easy to do that for the health professionals in the four countries cited. In short, I am suggesting that the staff of NPR's Science Friday do their jobs."
It would be nice. But, the word "science" gets bandied about in a way more similar to "Scientology" than the original meaning of the word. Maybe it is like "gender" redefined as something other than "sex". Lawns are covered with "I believe" signs with a long list including "science" but science is not something a person is supposed to "believe in". That is not how the real thing works. Maybe we are confronting an unforgiving "Science Fundamentalism". Anyhow, I think the NPR listeners (of which I am no longer one) can be reached - it is just that they only hear a form of fundamentalist ideological thought marketed as "science". I think that language must be taken back before we can get anywhere.
I would love to hear whether you get any kind of response and what that is. A few years ago I wrote to state politicians and received back a phony civil rights sounding response.
My response to Science Friday: "Is it possible to not support Governor Abbott and still advocate to follow the science? In the March 4, 2022 Science Friday broadcast entitled, "Once Again, Transgender And Nonbinary Kids Are Under Attack in Texas", a guest claimed there is "robust evidence base" for medically transitioning children. That is simply not true and one would think a show with the word "science" in the title would have put in the modicum of effort needed to understand that. Sweden, France, Finland, and the UK are each taking a data-driven, science based reviewed of gender care and are releasing findings like this "“…low quality evidence that the treatments have the desired effect…” and that the treatments “…are potentially fraught with extensive and irreversible adverse consequences such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, infertility, increased cancer risk, and thrombosis.” While you may wish to dismiss the Governor as a Christian fundamentalist, transphobic, bigot, I don't think it's easy to do that for the health professionals in the four countries cited. In short, I am suggesting that the staff of NPR's Science Friday do their jobs."
I just read this article "Is transgenderism a cult?" https://ourduty.group/information/is-it-a-cult/ and a particular line made me think of posting it here:
"‘Science says…’ and then repeating cult doctrine."
It would be nice. But, the word "science" gets bandied about in a way more similar to "Scientology" than the original meaning of the word. Maybe it is like "gender" redefined as something other than "sex". Lawns are covered with "I believe" signs with a long list including "science" but science is not something a person is supposed to "believe in". That is not how the real thing works. Maybe we are confronting an unforgiving "Science Fundamentalism". Anyhow, I think the NPR listeners (of which I am no longer one) can be reached - it is just that they only hear a form of fundamentalist ideological thought marketed as "science". I think that language must be taken back before we can get anywhere.
I would love to hear whether you get any kind of response and what that is. A few years ago I wrote to state politicians and received back a phony civil rights sounding response.