He gets some statistics wrong such as a 40% suicide rate.

It's suicide "ideation" and it's from sources, charities trying to pull on your heart strings to get you to open your open up your purse for them. In fact it goes through multiple sources with conflicting interests.

For example the group that finds trans people to survey and the groups that then write up and published the result are different but both have their interests served by presenting it as a sob story.

The study is flawed on many levels. It's a self survey where the applicants know it's in their interests to lie. A rate as low as 40% (rounded) is actually quite remarkable.

Other biased surveys are able to extract rates as high as 70% to 90% because of the inherent bias and often that it serves the interests of the person being surveyed, the person running the survey and the person publishing the survey to answer that way.

Those surveys with high results saw results go up again and again after trans people saw that it worked in their favour from the first widely published result.

What's interesting with the first publication is not only that it doesn't consider whether those high rates of suicide ideation support it's policies, that it doesn't consider the specifics or that it doesn't consider overlap with other circumstances fully.

Most people have at some point in their lives rogue thoughts that can be terrible and suicide ideation though they are spontaneous and involuntary so they don't think of it like that.

For example some people at some point of their lives standing by a bridge will have a spontaneous imagination of jumping of it. Many people have this thought when standing on the platform waiting for the train even though they have no desire to jump.

This might not necessarily be suicide ideation but it technically qualifies. Such unwanted thoughts or imaginings are often instead a response to the danger such as what not to do and don't necessarily indicate any indication toward suicide. It's a way to try to fathom the danger.

When I was studying the science of the NPC meme, I can't remember where it came from but somewhere people were talking about other studies about things such as inner dialogue, imagination, etc and other scientific studies or measurements of that.

In examining that there was a mention of around 40% of people surveyed, normal people, having involuntary thoughts that could be classed as suicide ideation such as the bridge example. These are often classed under intrusive thoughts.

I thought the study was bad before but after hearing of that other study which was psychology and not meant to be associated at all I choked on my orange juice.

There are so few trans people and the suicide rate is still very low even for them that it can't be measured very well. It nearly always falls within the margin of error the sample sizes are so small unless social "scientists" cheat with things such as intersectionality and torture the data to inflate the rate.

The whole claim that they must receive treatment otherwise death is a coin's flip (self inflicted death meaning they are one and the same threat) is bogus and Ben has done a lot of damage to repeat that erroneous claim that's often used to excuse the inexcusable such as sex change operations (which are just plastic surgery) being classed as "life saving operations" the same way as real life saving heart surgery would be classified at the tax payer's expense.

He gets some statistics wrong such as a 40% suicide rate.

It's suicide "ideation" and it's from sources, charities trying to pull on your heart strings to get you to open your open up your purse for them. In fact it goes through multiple sources with conflicting interests.

For example the group that finds trans people to survey and the groups that then write up and published the result are different but both have their interests served by presenting it as a sob story.

The study is flawed on many levels. It's a self survey where the applicants know it's in their interests to lie. A rate as low as 40% (rounded) is actually quite remarkable.

Other biased surveys are able to extract rates as high as 70% to 90% because of the inherent bias and often that it serves the interests of the person being surveyed, the person running the survey and the person publishing the survey to answer that way.

Those surveys with high results saw results go up again and again after trans people saw that it worked in their favour from the first widely published result.

What's interesting with the first publication is not only that it doesn't consider whether those high rates of suicide ideation support it's policies, that it doesn't consider the specifics or that it doesn't consider overlap with other circumstances fully.

Most people have at some point in their lives rogue thoughts that can be terrible and suicide ideation though they are spontaneous and involuntary so they don't think of it like that.

For example some people at some point of their lives standing by a bridge will have a spontaneous imagination of jumping of it. Many people have this thought when standing on the platform waiting for the train even though they have no desire to jump.

This might not necessarily be suicide ideation but it technically qualifies. Such unwanted thoughts or imaginings are often instead a response to the danger such as what not to do and don't necessarily indicate any indication toward suicide. It's a way to try to fathom the danger.

When I was studying the science of the NPC meme, I can't remember where it came from but somewhere people were talking about other studies about things such as inner dialogue, imagination, etc and other scientific studies or measurements of that.

In examining that there was a mention of around 40% of people surveyed, normal people, having involuntary thoughts that could be classed as suicide ideation such as the bridge example.

I thought the study was bad before but after hearing of that other study which was psychology and not meant to be associated at all I choked on my orange juice.

There are so few trans people and the suicide rate is still very low even for them that it can't be measured very well. It nearly always falls within the margin of error the sample sizes are so small unless social "scientists" cheat with things such as intersectionality and torture the data to inflate the rate.

The whole claim that they must receive treatment otherwise death is a coin's flip (self inflicted death meaning they are one and the same threat) is bogus and Ben has done a lot of damage to repeat that erroneous claim that's often used to excuse the inexcusable such as sex change operations (which are just plastic surgery) being classed as "life saving operations" the same way as real life saving heart surgery would be classified at the tax payer's expense.

He gets some statistics wrong such as a 40% suicide rate.

It's suicide "ideation" and it's from sources, charities trying to pull on your heart strings to get you to open your open up your purse for them. In fact it goes through multiple sources with conflicting interests.

For example the group that finds trans people to survey and the groups that then write up and published the result are different but both have their interests served by presenting it as a sob story.

The study is flawed on many levels. It's a self survey where the applicants know it's in their interests to lie. A rate as low as 40% (rounded) is actually quite remarkable.

Other biased surveys are able to extract rates as high as 70% to 90% because of the inherent bias and often that it serves the interests of the person being surveyed, the person running the survey and the person publishing the survey to answer that way.

Those surveys with high results saw results go up again and again after trans people saw that it worked in their favour from the first widely published result.

What's interesting with the first publication is not only that it doesn't consider whether those high rates of suicide ideation support it's policies, that it doesn't consider the specifics or that it doesn't consider overlap with other circumstances fully.

Most people have at some point in their lives rogue thoughts that can be terrible and suicide ideation though they are spontaneous and involuntary so they don't think of it like that.

For example some people at some point of their lives standing by a bridge will have a spontaneous imagination of jumping of it. Many people have this thought when standing on the platform waiting for the train even though they have no desire to jump.

This might not necessarily be suicide ideation but it technically qualifies. Such unwanted thoughts or imaginings are often instead a response to the danger such as what not to do and don't necessarily indicate any indication toward suicide. It's a way to try to fathom the danger.

When I was studying the science of the NPC meme, I can't remember where it came from but somewhere people were talking about other studies about things such as inner dialogue, imagination, etc and other scientific studies or measurements of that.

In examining that there was a mention of around 40% of people surveyed, normal people, having involuntary thoughts that could be classed as suicide ideation such as the bridge example.

I thought the study was bad before but after hearing of that other study which was psychology and not meant to be associated at all I choked on my orange juice.

There are so few trans people and the suicide rate is still very low even for them that it can't be measured very well. It nearly always falls within the margin of error the sample sizes are so small unless social "scientists" cheat with things such as intersectionality and torture the data to inflate the rate.

The whole claim that they must receive treatment otherwise death is a coin's flip (self inflicted death meaning they are one and the same threat) is bogus and Ben has done a lot of damage to repeat that erroneous claim that's often used to excuse the inexcusable such as sex change operations (which are just plastic surgery) being classed as "life saving medical treatment" at the tax payer's expense.

He gets some statistics wrong such as a 40% suicide rate.

It's suicide "ideation" and it's from sources, charities trying to pull on your heart strings to get you to open your open up your purse for them. In fact it goes through multiple sources with conflicting interests.

For example the group that finds trans people to survey and the groups that then write up and published the result are different but both have their interests served by presenting it as a sob story.

The study is flawed on many levels. It's a self survey where the applicants know it's in their interests to lie. A rate as low as 40% (rounded) is actually quite remarkable.

Other biased surveys are able to extract rates as high as 70% to 90% because of the inherent bias and often that it serves the interests of the person being surveyed, the person running the survey and the person publishing the survey to answer that way.

Those surveys with high results saw results go up again and again after trans people saw that it worked in their favour from the first widely published result.

What's interesting with the first publication is not only that it doesn't consider whether those high rates of suicide ideation support it's policies, that it doesn't consider the specifics or that it doesn't consider overlap with other circumstances fully.

Most people have at some point in their lives rogue thoughts that can be terrible and suicide ideation though they are spontaneous and involuntary so they don't think of it like that.

For example some people at some point of their lives standing by a bridge will have a spontaneous imagination of jumping of it. This might not necessarily be suicide ideation but it technically qualifies. Such unwanted thoughts or imaginings are often instead a response to the danger such as what not to do and don't necessarily indicate any indication toward suicide.

When I was studying the science into the NPC meme, I can't remember where it came from but somewhere people were talking about other studies about things such as inner dialogue, imagination, etc and other scientific studies or measurements of that.

In examining that there was a mention of around 40% of people surveyed, normal people, having involuntary thoughts that could be classed as suicide ideation such as the bridge example.

I thought the study was bad before but after hearing of that other study which was psychology and not meant to be associated at all I choked on my orange juice.

There are so few trans people and the suicide rate is still very low even for them that it can't be measured very well. It nearly always falls within the margin of error the sample sizes are so small unless social "scientists" cheat with things such as intersectionality and torture the data to inflate the rate.

The whole claim that they must receive treatment otherwise death is a coin's flip (self inflicted death meaning they are one and the same threat) is bogus and Ben has done a lot of damage to repeat that erroneous claim that's often used to excuse the inexcusable such as sex change operations (which are just plastic surgery) being classed as "life saving medical treatment" at the tax payer's extent.

He gets some statistics wrong such as a 40% suicide rate.

It's suicide "ideation" and it's from sources, charities trying to pull on your heart strings to get you to open your open up your purse for them. In fact it goes through multiple sources with conflicting interests.

For example the group that finds trans people to survey and the groups that then write up and published the result are different but both have their interests served by presenting it as a sob story.

The study is flawed on many levels. It's a self survey where the applicants know it's in their interests to lie. A rate as low as 40% (rounded) is actually quite remarkable.

Other biased surveys are able to extract rates as high as 70% to 90% because of the inherent bias and often that it serves the interests of the person being surveyed, the person running the survey and the person publishing the survey to answer that way.

Those surveys with high results saw results go up again and again after trans people saw that it worked in their favour from the first widely published result.

What's interesting with the first publication is not only that it doesn't consider whether those high rates of suicide ideation support it's policies, that it doesn't consider the specifics or that it doesn't consider overlap with other circumstances fully.

Most people have at some point in their lives rogue thoughts that can be terrible and suicide ideation though they are spontaneous and involuntary so they don't think of it like that.

For example some people at some point of their lives standing by a bridge will have a spontaneous imagination of jumping of it. This might not necessarily be suicide ideation but it technically qualifies. Such unwanted thoughts or imaginings are often instead a response to the danger such as what not to do and don't necessarily indicate any indication toward suicide.

When I was studying the science into the NPC meme, I can't remember where it came from but somewhere people were talking about other studies about things such as inner dialogue, imagination, etc and other scientific studies or measurements of that.

In examining that there was a mention of around 40% of people surveyed, normal people, having involuntary thoughts that could be classed as suicide ideation such as the bridge example.

I thought the study was bad before but after hearing of that other study which was psychology and not meant to be associated at all I choked on my orange juice.

There are so few trans people and the suicide rate is still very low even for them that it can't be measured very well. It nearly always falls within the margin of error the sample sizes are so small unless social "scientists" cheat with things such as intersectionality and torture the data to inflate the rate.