God — I’ll tread carefully here.
I did use AI to help get the data here, I just used it to make it comprehensible:
First: I’m not claiming expertise beyond my own experience.
I work in the GIS field so studying patterns and trends is part of the job. This falls squarily into the political-populace-epidemiological arena and I have a small amount of knowledge in that. Not much, just enough to get me into trouble. But here it goes.
From The Epoch Times to mainstream papers of every political stripe, they all tend to mirror the expectations and beliefs of their readerships. The internet can be used to justify almost anything, and that’s true on this topic as well.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/10/gender-medicine-built-on-shaky-foundations-cass-review-finds?Here is where AI helped a bit:
A few empirical points to keep in mind:
The clinical evidence that measures
regret after gender-affirming surgery shows very low rates. Large pooled reviews of surgical cohorts find regret prevalences on the order of about
1% (definitions and follow-up vary by study). These analyses also note serious limitations in how “regret” is measured and call for standardized, longer follow-up.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8099405/Historical clinic-level data (pre-2013 and earlier) likewise do not show a mass “regret epidemic.” For example, a comprehensive Swedish analysis of sex-reassignment cases from 1960–2010 reported a regret/reversal-application rate of about
2.2%, with a decline in regrets over time in that dataset. That pattern is not consistent with the idea of a sudden, huge wave of late regret tied to a later “fad.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24872188/Survey data that ask broader populations of trans people about
ever having detransitioned report substantially higher percentages (single-digit to low-teens ranges depending on wording and survey). Crucially, large surveys and focused studies find that
most detransitions are driven by external pressures — family pressure, community stigma, job loss, or safety concerns — rather than a simple internal conclusion that “transition wasn’t for me.” In one multi-study analysis, over 80% of respondents who had detransitioned reported at least one external driving factor.
https://ustranssurvey.org/Case counts and referrals
did rise sharply in the 2010s (especially referrals for adolescents). Increased visibility, improved access, and changes in referral pathways likely explain much of that rise; but
more referrals ≠ more regret. Major reviews (for example the UK Cass Review) have flagged the weak evidence base for some youth interventions and called for caution and better data collection — which is precisely where many clinicians and policy debates focus now.
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/evidence-gender-care-remarkably-weak-says-major-english-review-2024-04-09/The 1% thing is based almost entirely on post surgical intervention, not the ones who went through hormone replacement etc. There is also a nuance that shows that the data is still in choppy territory (incomplete and inconsistent) that does not reflect long term regretting anything. The JAMA studies aslo state this. There is a strong disconnect to the real world sitrep.
Below is that point. The data needs to be "clean" for it to be accurate.
Methodology matters — a lot. “Regret,” “detransition,” and “request for legal reversal” are distinct outcomes. Clinic records and surgical cohorts tend to report
very low post-surgical regret; community surveys capture broader social/demographic dynamics and therefore higher rates of temporary detransition. Comparing these different metrics without noting definitions and follow-up windows leads to misleading conclusions. Several critiques have also pointed out heterogeneity and measurement problems in pooled reviews.
https://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/2021/11000/letter_to_the_editor__regret_after.29.aspxMy primary point here is that the media will play to any audience it sees will pay for the content. Be wary of such in that it typically follows popular trends and tropes not tied entirely to reality. Plus the most extreme cases are typically the ones that get covered.
We do not have total actual numbers, but surgical and non surgical trans is estimated to be around 2.8 Mil. Americans from 2010 through 2025. But this number is also dirty in collection and relevance. So we don't have actual hard numbers. Just guesses. This means any 1% or other number is pure speculation alone.
Simply put, this is more propaganda than actual information.
Recent Posts
