this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
426 points (97.3% liked)

Progressive Politics

2711 readers
355 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This post reads as 'You have been deemed guilty of aiding the undesirables. You will be punished."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified among adults and minors, 1591 of 2664 (59.7%) and 82 of 85 (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively. Of the 636 breast reductions among cisgender male and TGD adults, 507 (80%) were performed on cisgender males. Of the 151 breast reductions among cisgender male minors and TGD minors, 146 (97%) were performed on cisgender male minors (Figure 2).

It doesn't seem to break it down quite how I'd like, but the 97% and matching 3% are specifically about breast reductions.

The things I don't understand are the 85 and 151. What are the differences between those numbers? They both seem to refer to total procedures on minors.

[–] JustinTheGM@ttrpg.network 2 points 3 days ago

Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified among adults and minors, 1591 of 2664 (59.7%) and 82 of 85 (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively.

This first part parses to me as "Of gender-affirming surgical procedures identified, 1591 of 2664 adult surgeries (59.7%) and 82 of 85 minor child surgeries (96.4%) were chest-related procedures, respectively." However, the next sentence doesn't seem to line up with that notion...

Of the 636 breast reductions among men, 507 (80%) were performed on cisgender men. Of the 151 breast reductions among boys, 146 (97%) were performed on cisgender boys (Figure 2).

To make this section easier to read, I replaced some words and phrases while hopefully keeping the meaning intact.

I kind of feel like this quote is referencing two different data sets, and is missing a segue. The numbers don't seem to line up with each other any way I poke at them.

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I think the 85 must be a reduced fraction, but that feels weird to do in a scientific paper.