This is the American Physicatric association, they are the most reputable source on this matter and they explicitly say, Gender Disphoria is NOT a mental disorder

I don’t care what you think, unless you find another reputable source from doctors showing transgenderism is a mental disorder, you can’t claim that, we can only believe the reputable source, and that’s the dozens of fucking doctors who are part of the APA and agree that transgerism is not a mental illness

So I would like an actual argument or source

@Deleted User

Are you a doctor

No, but I’m relying on actual medical experts on transgenderism

How is the APA, an organization of the best phychiatrics in the nation “liberal biased retarda”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/world-health-organization-removes-gender-dysphoria-from-list-of-mental-illnesses/

Or how the literal fucing World Health Organization agrees it’s not mental illbess

To say this only perpetuates needless discrimination and violence against Trans people

That’s a really specific scenario

And most ids will have their sex not gender

So no DNA evidence would be thrown out like that

And you’re ignoring the massive amount of violence against trans people

@personbelowmetriplegay Why do you think there is so much trans suicide

Maybe itms because they live in a fucking country where there is disproportionate violence against them and they face people like you all the time who think they are inferior

@Deleted User I agree they want people to accept them for who they are

@Deleted User What do you mean

@ashnaa Well that’s what this thinking leads to. They think that all transgender people are mentally ill and he just fucking said they are disgusting excuses for human beings

@Deleted User If they didn’t accept themselves they wouldn’t have transitioned

@Deleted User Yeah, but @personbelowmetriplegay did

@personbelowmetriplegay So then how do you respond to the WHO, which is objectively the most well respected medical institution of the world categorizating gender disphoria NOT as a mental illness

@Deleted User How can we have a debate on this if we don’t pay attention to the facts

@personbelowmetriplegay I don’t care about the politics of doctors, the truth is, their are thousands of doctors from all across the world on the WHO, they aren’t and mathematicians can’t all be liberals. They made the decision to recaergorize gender disphoria out of the medical truth that gender disphoria isn’t a medical disorder. I haven’t seen you guys bring up any facts here so unless you two are doctors with decades of experiences you can shut the fuck up

“When we look at the transgender brain, we see that the brain resembles the gender that the person identifies as,”

@personbelowmetriplegay There are so many people in the WHO from all across the world it’s fucking absurd to claim they are all very liberal

@ashnaa Wait how is gender disphoria mental illness

But that’s different than a mental illness

mental illness means a defect

There is nothing wrong with having a female or male brain

Their are many male people who have female brains or vis versa those studies are just based off of generalizations

To claim that they are mentally ill because their brain is closer to the gender they identify with is fucking ludicrous l

And since you are not a doctor, I would like to see a quote from that article where a doctor explicitly says gender disphoria is a mentall disorder

@Deleted User It is

@Deleted User Why do people associate short hair, blue, and certain fashion styles with males

@Deleted User Wow, what an argument

Could you respond to my question

@Deleted User

@Deleted User Why do people associate short hair, blue, and certain fashion styles with males

@Deleted User You may not be, but perpetuating this myth by saying they are fundamentally different from everyone and they all have a severe mental illness leads to needless violence and discrimination

Maybe, but while the WHO is very influential, until national and local governments join, I doubt there will be significant progress

@personbelowmetriplegay Could I have some stats for that

https://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/toolkit_transviolence.pdf

They are more likely to experience violence

?

So how do you guys feel about Medicare for All

Ok I agree it’s a great idea but this idea that the US needs to be monoethnic for it to be implemented is really fucking stupid. Medicare for all or healthcare in general has no relation to race whatsoever. You aren’t more likely to get cancer if you are Latino or black. While some people might be disproportionately less healthy, this is do to income disparities more then anything else. And race is only a measure of the amount of melanin in the body and nothing more, nothing is inherently different between people of different races. Why would it be harder to implement if less of the US was White or if more of it was black? Not to mention that similar single-payer systems have been set up in the diverse nations of Canada, the UK, New Zealand and many others. And many of these nations, are less homogeneous than the US and there systems are still quite successfully.

@pompompiggy

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ According to a study from the Yale Lancet, Medicare for all would save the US $450 billion dollars annually. So which system, our current one, or Medicare for all is too costly

How

We can debate here

So could you please describe how the study from Yale is bad

@JesusHand Through greater efficiency, net healthcare spending is dramatically reduced

Which one

You have to realize that everyone would be covered. And considering around 44% of the US is either uninsured or underinsured and people wouldn’t be afriad of costs to get healthcare, demand for healthcare would increase significantly. This isn’t a bad thing, public health would drastically improve. But even with thag study, per capita spending would decrease and drug prices would decrease. Just looking at total spending can be a bit misleading. Not to mention there are other studies that find decrease spending

How is that a problem if per capita spending decreases

And there are other studies which show that total cosrs would actyally decrease

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/484301-22-studies-agree-medicare-for-all-saves-money%3famp

Yes, so expensive

If you look it generally and not just ine study you see it’s a decrease not an increase

And not to mention, according to Harvard Medical School, Medicare for all would save 45,000 lives annually

And could you be specific. I sent you a meta-analysis of 22 fucking studies and you just say “well it’s too generous”

Yes and they found uninsured americans died at disproportionately higher rates

And other studies show how people who are uninsured have consistently worse health outcomes

And with a medicare for all system, no one would be uninsured and this needless death would end

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/484301-22-studies-agree-medicare-for-all-saves-money%3famp

Okay even the urban institute agrees, being uninsured leads to 18,000 deaths annually

Also how do you explain the 45,000 extra deaths among uninsured Americans

You are being so vague, what to do mean by generous assumptions

And how do you know that all fucking 22 of these studies are generous however you want to define that

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Then could you please explain why the dramatically disproportionate death among uninsured Americans was not due to insurance coverage in any eay

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Also even the RAND study that you tout as proving the unreasonable cost of Medicare for all showed that drug costs would go down 11%

And other studies show bigger drops in prices

You keep saying unrealistic assumptions to try to disregard literally dozens of studies but can you elaborate on this in any way, like what is unrealistic and what is realisitc

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Though that study doesn’t explicitly state causation, if your brain is larger than an ant you can figure out their lack of medical coverage leads to disproportionately worse outcomes and higher death rates. Even if we disregard that study, the Urban institute has shown through casual analysis that 18,000 uninsured people die annually through lack of healthcare, you cannot deny that

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Regardless of whether one number may be slightly inaccurate, the majority of the studies agree that Medicare for all would reduce admin costs

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Regardless you can’t deny the Urban institute study

And don’t just say “generous assumptions” be specific

Death
risk appears to be 25 percent or higher for people with certain chronic conditions, which led to the IOM esti- mate of some 18,000 extra deaths per year.

That’s from the Urban institute

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ The UK excellent healthcare and half the costs

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Wdym, by medicare for all I mean a single payer healthcare system such as is propsed by Bernie Sanders. It’d move the US to a system similar to the UK

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ What is your system

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ No the US actuall consums less healthcare it’s that it is much more expensive per capita

https://international.commonwealthfund.org/stats/annual_physician_visits/

That’s misleading, he doesn’t want to eliminate copays, just reduced them

And on the point of Admin costs the US spends around twice as much as Canada

Every nation that has implemented any version of single payer has dramatically lower admin costs. If we adopt the system then there will be a drop in admin costs

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Why

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Not any gov intervention?

Sorry I think you misunderstood, why can’t the US get under 6% when so many other single payer nations have

The UK for example is at 2%

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ to your point about gov intervention, then why are costs so much lower in countries that have single payer healthcare systems

The US which has objectivly some of the least interventionist policies in the world also has some of the highest prices

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Really? the US is pretty much the only country in the developed world that doesn’t at least offer a public option

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ I agree there are different systems but each one is dramatically cheaper on a per capita basis

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ And how is it unreasonable to assume thag if current medicare admin spending is 2.2% if it’s expanded to the general population it’ll stay 2.2%

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ No, I already mentioned how the US actually doesn’t have significantly more health problems so that’s not the cause of it, and even if you consider incomes the US still comes out far ahead. The US only has a marginally higher income yet per capita healthcare spending is double

*compared to the UK

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ Nope, with the study I sent earlier, the US actually has lower physcian visits