this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
287 points (100.0% liked)

World News

23026 readers
15 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Actual evidence from actual scientists.

[Image description: A patient holds bottles of medications for hormone replacement therapy as part of her gender-affirming care.]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MoistKinkajou@lemmy.tf 6 points 2 years ago (7 children)

It wasn’t a blind study, as patients knew that they were either waiting for or receiving treatment

[–] darq@kbin.social 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

There is no practical way to blind HRT treatment. Even if you attempt to with a placebo, within about two weeks the patient will know what they are receiving.

Anybody demanding a double-blind study is trying to set the standard for evidence higher than is possible.

[–] Jo@readit.buzz 2 points 2 years ago

Thanks for that.

Lack of blinding is a serious issue for subjective outcomes but blinding when treatment effects are obvious to both intervention and control groups is dishonest (Pharma does it all the time to make their trials look more credible than they are).

Open label is the norm for cancer trials for exactly this reason. It is important to consider the biases that may arise, in subjective endpoints especially. But it is ludicrous to dismiss research on this basis alone. We can't randomise 12 year olds to become lifetime smokers or not, let alone use placebo controls, but we do know that smoking kills. It's just a bit more complicated to prove it when perfectly designed RCTs are not possible.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)