I'm currently in medical school and you might be amazed at how often Wiki is used as a source to justify an answer.

Minor correction:

Worst case is death, typically due to a massive clot lodging in your lungs (also called a saddle embolus)

Really bad case is with certain heart conditions they can bypass the lungs and cause a stroke.

Just plain damage? That's probably "bad case."

A meningioma is a tumor of the brain covering, so it isn't in the brain tissue itself (although can press on it giving you significant problems).

In medicine we don't have a formal definition of "brain tumor." Instead we divide them into CNS (Central nervous system) tumors and PNS (peripheral nervous system) tumors. It sounds like they looked at the most common CNS tumors in adults. Gliomas is a large category that includes astrocytomas, oligodendroglimoas, and ependymomas. Meningiomas are tumors of the covering around the brain.

It doesn't mention neuroal tumors, which are tumors from actual neurons. Some people (like the parent) seem to think those are real "brain tumors" while all the other glial tumors in your brain are something else. I DEFY you try and convince a patient with a glioblastoma multiforme (a really nasty form of astrocytoma) that the mass in his head is likely to kill him within the next 12 months, but it isn't a "brain tumor."

The question is "if the government does have a warrant to read your email held on a third party server, clearly the warrant has to be delivered to that third party. Does the account holder, by necessity, need to be informed by the government that their email was just read?"

So you think doctors should withhold information that is critical to the patient's understanding that if the disease gets worse the patient should come back and seek immediate treatment without delay? That would be fucked up. Perhaps you wouldn't mind sharing with the rest of us your sure fire 100% accurate fool-proof method of diagnosing bacterial meningitis.

Medicine is not an exact science and if you propose to make doctor's criminally liable when they are "proven wrong" you will put an end to the entire medical industry. That would be fucked up.

Don't get me wrong, there are bad doctors out there who are incompetent and they should be removed from the system. But faulting a doctor because they are unable to prove their diagnosis beyond ANY doubt which would expose them to reprisal if the test provided a false result would pretty much send medicine back a couple of hundred years.

The last thing the medical industry needs is more lawyers unless you want to continue to drive up the costs beyond the reach of everyone.

So by your own admission the SRY gene is working great, doing exactly what it should be doing, and while a totally different gene is damaged you are going to call that "SRY silencing?" Sorry, no.

The SRY gene isn't silenced, it is talking just fine. The androgen receptor isn't listening. They are not the same thing and can present very differently depending on the level of insensitivity. Total insensitivity will look very much like a SRY defect while partial insensitivity won't.

I'll play along. In AIS (androgen insensitivity syndrome) which occurs in 1 in 20,000 live births it is possible to have normal appearing female genitals yet have cryptic (hidden) testicles. (Reference - Before We Were Born by Moore, Persaud, 7th ed, page 184.)

Is a 46 XY person with a vagina and testicles phenotypically male or female?

The current belief and understanding about Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is that it results from the uneven sex hormone distribution or possible localized insensitivity.

The in utero developing embyo isn't a homogeneous vat of chemicals. When the gonads (either male or female) start releasing their sex hormones early in embryonic life they have to travel to the brain and take effect making that brain "male" or "female." We can see these gross (gross meaning "without a microscope") changes on brain slices take most-mortem. We can see a similar set of changes in many of the people who are homosexual.

The theory is, compared to someone without GID or who is not homosexual, your brain was not exposed to inappropriate levels of sex androgens for its "programming" (for lack of a better word) to match the body's physical characteristics. It is also possible that the sex adrogen receptors are damaged and not able to see the signally molecules that are present. It isn't a choice any more than choosing to have 4 toes.

This is all pretty mainstream stuff and it was taught to me in medical school which are not known to be the most liberal places.

The people with GID probably understand your situation better than you might think at first glance.