6 Comments
⭠ Return to thread
Aug 19Edited

Thank you for your response.

I remember that in the "Dutch Protocol", the seminal study of gender care, the beginning N was 70 and the ending N was 55.

So it lost a bit over 20% of participants but I don't think the study can say why. (Actually, 1 of the 55 persons died from an infection from vaginoplasty since I believe they had been on puberty blockers and had a micro-penis so insufficient flesh to work with so rectal tissue was used, I believe.)

Expand full comment

In a retrospective study that included the cohort of the original Dutch Protocol kids, about 20% discontinued identifying as the opposite gender too.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdad062.088

Expand full comment

Thanks for this study. I just read it, with interest.

Expand full comment

You might want to read Abbruzzese et al, The Myth of reliable research in pediatric gender medicine... (2023).

There is also a paper by Biggs on the history of the Dutch protocol which talks about the younger kids a lot, too.

Expand full comment

I think the 1 who died was one of the 15 lost between going from 70 to 55. They checked the 55 1 year after surgery and that poor kid passed away soon after surgery, so...."lost to follow-up".

Expand full comment

I had read about the 70 down to 55 issue, but didn't know about the rest. Thanks!

Expand full comment