I also found the following which is Ben Goldacre taking The Observer to task (The Observer getting medicine wrong is not new) that reminds me of your writing. No one in The Guardian UK is writing these sorts of pieces on trans healthcare coverage yet though. www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
Ben Goldacre: Whatever you think about Andrew Wakefield, the real villains of the MMR scandal are the media.
There are lots of things woven together. I see parallels with MMR & false claims about autism. Similar media frenzy but MMR worries were rare among doctors. Where that was not the case is gay rights advocacy. That also spawned religious & secular orgs both ideologically opposed. SEGM is a new NARTH.
A friend has a test to see if a politician said something empty and meaningless. Invert it and if it’s unreasonable they’ve said nothing at all eg “I’m on the side of hard working families” is meaningless because “I’m not on the side of hard working families” is unreasonable. You’ve failed the test.
Presumably they’ll be after the Scottish census too. It might be trickier (for an honest researcher) as immigration is lower. Also as trans status is found more often in young people that doesn’t fit (is 16-24 really the group least likely to understand). www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/2022-results...
Biggs is on a quest to “explain” why every time and everywhere the trans population is measured it produces broadly the same result. It’s just one he can’t bring himself to believe (and we can guess why that is). See also: scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e...
Just as the press coverage of MMR/autism is a template for understanding (& critiquing) the coverage of healthcare for trans adolescents, I think Paula Vennells is a template for understanding Dr Cass. Vennells inherited Horizon and Dr Cass a politicised review but both failed completely as leaders.
Certainly bad science reporting, that becomes a political issue for a main party, gave us the Cass review. But the outcome is another matter as the recent NSW review (Sax Institute) shows. Maybe Cass review was stacked (as Florida’s was) but it also needed an abject failure of leadership by Dr Cass.
I think there are 2 different phenomena. First there’s bad science (scandal) journalism that the UK has form for (eg MMR/autism). Second there’s asinine political neutrality which worries pointing out obv lies favours other side (eg Brexit 350m bus). Not an issue when fact check non UK politicians.
At the risk of repeating the mistake you highlight I understand GLP’s position. Winning these cases even with everything on your side seems to be impossible. That’s a cultural problem. The US didn’t need a new amendment to desegregate, it needed a culture that stopped trying to work round the 14th.
It’s like stages of loss - different people are at different stages. Problem is anti-trans activists in the UK have worked their way into positions of power & influence and there’s no effective counter. Trans healthcare is an example - anti-trans are obvs highly motivated to obtain positions there.