> Anybody pushing ROGD, or supporting other people who push ROGD, is anti-science and anti-fact.
This is an interesting case [2]. The concept of ROGD was introduced in an article in a scientific journal [1], by an assistant professor in Brown University. Then there was a strong reaction from people from outside the scientific community (blogosphere, activists). Later, there's been scientific debate back and forth [2]. But it is interesting, if people from outside the scientific community can win the public debate and get to decide what is science and what is not.
There have also been strong reactions against ROGD within the scientific community [1]. Like much science, the study has its own share of methodological flaws and biases that should make anyone sensible person the results of the study with skepticism
This is an interesting case [2]. The concept of ROGD was introduced in an article in a scientific journal [1], by an assistant professor in Brown University. Then there was a strong reaction from people from outside the scientific community (blogosphere, activists). Later, there's been scientific debate back and forth [2]. But it is interesting, if people from outside the scientific community can win the public debate and get to decide what is science and what is not.
[1] https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid-onset_gender_dysphoria_c...