Kind of impressive in a way how determined he seems to be to sink his own case, council is trying to give him a way to seem justified but it looks like he actually wants a guilty verdict.

See the second reply then, if you don't have a confirmed alteration of the androgen signalling pathway (usually an error in the androgen receptor gene) then it's not yet AIS.

The more useful answer though to what you're asking is "after you've done tests to confirm the presence of the misformed signalling pathway". Symptoms don't make the condition, they just point towards whether further tests or not would be useful.

It only becomes a condition/diagnosis when it starts being a problem for you or for society. If you're happy as you are and it's not causing any issues, then no need to stick it in a treatment box.

The doses are likely fine for both of you (get blood tests done to confirm), however the person taking EV might need to dose more frequently (twice a week at half the current dose) to keep the peak/trough difference reasonable.

Also, remember doses should be given in mg, not ml. Injection solutions can be produced in a wide range of concentrations (5 mg/ml to 50 mg/ml isn't unusual, and you occasionally see stuff outside that range), so a volume measurement doesn't actually say much about the actual dose.

Even with longer duration esters, sometimes people do need to inject more frequently, but this isn't really somewhere where assumptions can be made, blood tests are needed to confirm everything.

Not automatically. Any bill that the HoL amends ends up going back to HoC for another round of review, at which point the amendment is likely to be stripped out or altered (HoC very rarely accepts HoL amendments without a lot of backroom discussion).

Gary is interesting because he is very much a supporter of the old GIC model, but recognises that what's happening now is just an attack on providing trans healthcare all together, so there's aligned goals for the moment.