this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2025
509 points (95.7% liked)

Progressive Politics

3446 readers
238 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

...I could have told you that ๐Ÿคท

Source: https://x.com/BriannaWu/status/1984574165643403370

Not my usual kind of source (Xitter), but I want any centrists out there who ask trans people to "just get along" / compromise with actual hate groups that want them eradicated to know that it doesn't work.

There is no such thing as a reasonable bigot, by definition.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 22 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I'm going to push back on OTC HRT because of the health risks. Supraphysiologic estrogen and testosterone can both have lethal side effects, so correct dosing and monitoring for health complications are essential components of trans healthcare.

[โ€“] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Both are already OTC in most of the world, specifically most developing countries.

More importantly, you are applying an insane and bad-faith standard when assessing medication. ANY medication can have lethal side effects. Down a bottle full of Tylenol and you'll condemn yourself to a slow agonizing death of liver failure. Yet you can buy that shit at gas stations.

You answered the wrong question. You asked, "can HRT be dangerous?" Any rational person trying to form an unbiased opinion about it would ask, "is HRT of comparable risk to existing OTC medications?"

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

In countries besides America, Tylenol comes in blister packs of maybe 20 total pills per package in a lower dose than the American variation. The drug and marketing regulations here are not a good example and I think a lot of medications that are currently OTC need to be much more closely regulated or have things like the inconvenient packaging and MUCH better warnings on them for patient safety.

That being said, poorly managed (or un-managed) HRT has more potential for significant harm than most OTC medications. There are many complications that can come from exogenous hormone treatment for both trans and cis patients, and the risks need to be adequately assessed and managed. Estrogen significantly increases the risk of blood clots and strokes, and Testosterone drastically increases the risk of heart attack and organ failure if not dosed appropriately.

In no way do I intend to restrict trans healthcare, but most medications on the market in America need to be much more closely regulated than they are now because of the risks of harms that can vastly outweigh the benefits, especially when not dosed or monitored accurately.

[โ€“] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You're spreading anti trans FUD. The risks are extremely modest. The risks you cite, like heart attack risk on T, are just from moving an FTM person from a female to make heart attack profile. Men have a greater risk of heart attack than women do. Having a male hormone profile gives you male health risks. But people like you like to spread fear by citing this as an effect of HRT.

You're portraying hrt as this crazy substance, but we're talking bioidentical hormones here. They are the same exact molecules that are produced naturally.

You are shamelessly spreading anti trans propaganda. Or take estrogen for example. Trans women raise their E levels to the 100-300 range, the normal female E range. Yet cis women, when pregnant, experience E levels 10-20 times those levels. The human body can handle very high levels of estrogen quite well. You can take 10x the recommended E dose and still be extremely unlikely to have any adverse effects from it.

Show me one single person that has died from the misuse of modern bioidentical hormones. Find me one. Because hrt is absolutely far safer than almost every otc medication out there. You can literally take 10x the recommended doses. That's how safe it is. It's safe because we're talking the exact same molecules that are made by the body.

There's a reason diy is so common among the trans community. Even most doctors are comically ignorant and repeat long disproven myths like the ones you repeat here.

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

HRT is extremely safe when dosed appropriately. As I said in another comment, I'm less worried about trans folks getting the HRT wrong than cis people taking a bunch of extra hormones because some influencer convinced them that more estrogen or more testosterone will fix all their health problems. Making something OTC makes it available to everyone, not just the people that need it. Trans people need HRT, cis people very rarely do.

[โ€“] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

And yet, other countries where HRT is OTC don't have an epidemic of cis kids dead from taking T and E. Your concern is purely hypothetical. Meanwhile we have real world data showing the risks of OTC HRT are minimal. And even cis people taking it have very low risks, comparable to other otc medications.

Social media leads people to do all sorts of stupid things. We don't ban bleach because someone might try and drink it to cure covid.

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 0 points 13 hours ago

It isn't the cis kids I worry about. It's the menopausal woman in the emergency department with a DVT and PE from the estrogen she got online on the advice of her chiropractor. It's the man in his 50's that thought testosterone would fix his lost libido and fatigue that now has to get coronary artery stents because he got his dosing recommendations from body building influencers.

It's the real patients I have seen and treated that concern me when these hormones aren't even that freely available. It's not a hypothetical for me, it's real people that have suffered real harm even if they didn't die from it.

[โ€“] bss03@infosec.pub 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You can get lethal effects from nicotine, alcohol, bleach, ammonia, and many, many combinations of chemicals that are available with, at most, age verification.

I'm all for people educating themselves as much as they want, from whatever sources they trust, but bodily autonomy DEMANDS someone be able to direct their own medication, including gender affirming medication. Doctor-as-gatekeeper is, IMO, not as good a model as Doctor-as-confidant-and-educator.

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

As a soon-to-be physician that has sought training in trans healthcare, I do not see my role as gatekeeper, but the role of educator includes teaching about and monitoring for the risks and complications that can come from HRT. Estrogen and Testosterone are both powerful and potentially dangerous hormones and I do not want to see my trans patients dying from strokes or heart attacks that could have been prevented with more careful dosing of their HRT.

[โ€“] bss03@infosec.pub 0 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

No one imagines they are the bad guy. But, if a patient asks for a drug and you deny it to them, you are being a gatekeeper. I imagine you are only doing this for "good reasons", but you are still violating their bodily autonomy.

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

To be clear: I am not saying this about HRT specifically because, most of the time, HRT is safe when dosed appropriately.

That being said, if I think a medication is going to be dangerous, harmful, or lethal to a patient and I prescribe it anyways, I am legally and morally liable for any harm that comes to them from that medication. I have had conversations with patients about weight loss drugs that they really want, but that would be extremely dangerous based on other comorbid conditions like heart problems or pancreas issues. If a patient asks me for something that I think is unsafe, I engage them in a discussion about why they want that medication, the risks and benefits of it, and possible alternatives that could be safer. If a patient is dead-set on getting a medication that is very likely to harm them, I'm not going to write that prescription because if the worst happened, their blood is on my hands.

It is very uncommon that physicians refuse to prescribe something that a patient is asking for specifically. The much more common situation ends up being that the physician can write the prescription, but insurance won't pay for it. There are obviously some physicians out there that refuse to prescribe things like birth control based on their personal beliefs, but they are obligated to refer that patient to a provider that will give them the prescription.

[โ€“] bss03@infosec.pub 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

If a patient is dead-set on getting a medication that is very likely to harm them, Iโ€™m not going to write that prescription

Then, you don't value bodily autonomy as much as I do, and will deny it to some of your patients, gatekeeping -- no matter what you "think" you are doing.

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Does my ethical autonomy count for nothing? Am I really obligated under your worldview to harm my patients by acquiescing to their demands carte blanche?

Even as a medical student, I have had patients die in my care from things I couldn't do anything about. I had no way to save them because the medicine to fix the problem simply does not exist. As an ER tech, I have had multiple times where the physician running the code called the time of death while I was the one doing compressions on the patient. Most of those were children. I am already haunted by the patients I have lost through no malpractice, negligence, incompetence, or malice of my own. I refuse to intentionally add to my nightmares by doing something that I truly believe would harm my patient, even if it is what they are asking for.

[โ€“] bss03@infosec.pub 1 points 7 hours ago

In my worldview, the drugs would not have a gatekeeper. They would in available OTC. You should not have your "ethical autonomy" compromised at all. (And yes, it does count for nothing compared to bodily autonomy.)

If your reason (for not providing the drugs) was only protecting yourself or others from State-backed violence, it could be justified. But, you claimed you would do it because you know better how to manage a patient's body than themselves.

[โ€“] BabyVi@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

DIY saved my life. I purchased bloodtests and monitored my own treatment. But it would have been a lot safer had I not needed to order estrogen online from a foreign supplier.

[โ€“] medgremlin@midwest.social 1 points 15 hours ago

I am very glad that you were able to get your own care and didn't have any bad outcomes. On the other hand, I've had cis-female patients go to naturopaths or chiropractors to get estrogen and/or testosterone pellets for peri-menopause symptoms and they had no idea what the risks were. In the emergency department, I've had cis-female patients on estrogen replacement therapy that was not well managed show up with DVTs. Cis-male patients on supraphysiologic testosterone are at risk for several different kinds of organ failure along with a drastically increased risk of heart attacks.

I don't think that trans patients are terribly likely to harm themselves with DIY HRT, but having hormones available OTC is going to lead to a lot of cis people getting sick or getting killed by taking extra hormones to try to fix their problems because scammers and quacks have convinced them that hormones will magically fix all of their problems.