100
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
100 points (98.1% liked)
science
14594 readers
377 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.
2024-11-11
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The abstract literally says that. "Anesthetic sensitivity is bidirectionally modulated by testosterone."
Why is it so important that this article be about you and trans issues? You come across as quite conceited.
Trans matters are only very tangentially related here. This is about testosterone and anesthetic sensitivity. It suggests one of two things:
You said it yourself, "this is about testosterone and anesthetic sensitivity." (edit: it did before an edit) So why use sex as an abstraction over the real variable if it isn't relevent? This isn't about trans activism any more than it is about "PCOS activism". People are just pointing out that conditions such as PCOS, having XXY chromosomes, and hormone therapy treatment affect the testosterone levels (and thus anesthetic sensitivty) independent of sex. A more clear and correct statement would just talk about testosterone levels. The inference that women tend to have lower testosterone levels shouldn't be anything more than a side note; it's relevance isn't title-worthy.
I agree with the top comment highlighting PCOS and trans men and women. It's a somewhat narrow view, but a valid comment.
The thing I took issue with was the claim that the article didn't say the very thing it says in the abstract.
The paper is actually very, very good, in my opinion. It starts from the observed premise that "women are less sensitive to anesthetic than men" and then digs in to find out why, building significantly on previous research. Also, the error bars on their graphs are so tight they're sexy.
You're literally explaining why saying "people with higher levels of hormone A or B" in the title (a prominent part of a publication) instead of pseudoscientific bullshit like "the female brain" is not only accurate, but would avoid all sorts of potential confusion.
I also literally never mentioned trans people (sorry, "issues"), you're clearly just a bigot triggered by the mere suggestion of inclusivity of all people, who would reject it even at the expense of accuracy because you're just so hateful, and should feel free to go fuck yourself.
“the female brain” was from the post title, it's not what the paper says.
You said "How hard is it, especially in scientific research/publication to just say "people with higher levels of hormone A or B"? when the abstract itself said exactly that, as I quoted.
Apparently, you didn't read the article, you just came here to talk about yourself. And also to throw insults and generally be horrible.
Aw, the transphobe doesn't like being told to fuck off.. Diddums...
Rule 1, dude.