This narrative is driven by ideology and not by evidence or science.
When politicians go after practitioners who follow the science and evidence simply because they’re ideologically opposed to what the science says, they no longer deserve the trust of their constituents.
When politicians go after practitioners who follow the science and evidence simply because they’re ideologically opposed to what the science says, they no longer deserve the trust of their constituents.
https://twitter.com/lwhb__/status/1859919344530255925
The fact that he will dismiss the vast majority of experts who have spoken about this and the research that show huge flaws in the Cass review and declare them “activists” or captured shows that evidence isn’t his priority here.
The fact that he admits that the only way politicians could get any evidence that confirmed their bias was to commission a review stacked with people who shared their biases should be enough of a clue to show that the Cass review was the result of an ideologically driven agenda.
They needed to commission a review because the vast majority of experts came to conclusions that they were ideologically opposed to so they needed to use their political power to create evidence that supported their ideological agenda. And now Cass is getting widely discredited.
But they all have to manufacture narratives that the cast majority of experts who follow the evidence to a different conclusion than they want must be captured by the “trans lobby” or big pharma. They make these a priori conclusions with no evidence. Just that it must be so.
When the Cass review itself was clearly set out to do *the exact thing* these people accuse the rest of the experts of doing- trying to bend the evidence to their ideological will.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
