Causal Spin From Observational Studies

Updated: 2025.10.07 14D ago 3 sources
University PR and media touted a clinic cohort study as proof that puberty blockers/hormones cut teen depression and suicidality over time. The critique shows the study’s own time‑series data and modeling don’t demonstrate those reductions, conflating association with improvement. — It highlights how institutional communications can misstate evidence in politicized medicine, skewing policy, journalism, and public understanding.

Sources

Researchers Found Puberty Blockers And Hormones Didn’t Improve Trans Kids’ Mental Health At Their Clinic. Then They Published A Study Claiming The Opposite. (Updated)
2025.10.07 100% relevant
UW press release quotes ('dramatically reduces depression,' 'caused rates…to plummet') about Tordoff et al. (2022) versus the study’s non‑causal observational design and survey waves.
Psychosocial Functioning in Transgender Youth after 2 Years of Hormones - PubMed
2023.10.07 83% relevant
This NEJM 2023 observational cohort study (Chen et al.) is frequently cited to claim hormones reduce depression/suicidality in transgender youth; it exemplifies the broader issue that media and institutional PR often present associative findings as causal, a point raised in the 'Causal Spin' idea.
Mental Health Outcomes in Transgender and Nonbinary Youths Receiving Gender-Affirming Care - PubMed
2022.10.07 90% relevant
This PubMed record is the Tordoff et al. Seattle Children’s prospective cohort often promoted as showing reduced depression/suicidality after PB/GAH; it underlies the critique that media and institutional PR presented causal claims from an observational design and that later notes (e.g., data‑table errors) complicate straightforward inferences.
← Back to All Ideas