United StatesThe article discusses recent data showing an increase in the use of puberty blockers and hormone therapy among minors in Oregon, challenging previous assumptions that such treatments were extremely rare. It highlights a study analyzing insurance claims for over 868,000 Oregon adolescents, revealing that approximately 1 in 240 insured girls and 1 in 630 insured boys were using testosterone or estrogen, respectively. The study notes that these figures are specific to Oregon, which has a progressive legal and insurance environment supporting pediatric gender medicine. While the researchers acknowledge that these numbers indicate improved access, the article critiques the tendency of advocates to interpret any outcome—whether low or high—as validation of 'gender-affirming care.' It argues that this approach reflects ideological protection rather than objective medical evaluation, suggesting that the narrative shifts depending on whether the numbers seem 'small' or 'large.'
Lettura del bias (Destra): The article frames the increasing use of gender-affirming treatments as a positive development driven by reduced stigma and improved access, but criticizes the ideological framing of outcomes as proof of the success of 'gender-affirming care.' It emphasizes the shift in rhetoric from dismissing the
