Talk

Advanced search

Radio 4 Women’s Hour Talking about Puberty Blockers Shortly

(64 Posts)
rogdmum Tue 30-Jun-20 10:08:21

Not sure exactly when, but this morning on Women’s Hour (10:00-11:00) the recent changes to the NHS website re puberty blockers potential risks and unknowns will be discussed.

OP’s posts: |
nauticant Tue 30-Jun-20 10:14:35

I started a duplicate thread, let's use this one instead.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000kgsj

Last month information on the NHS website about the use of puberty blockers was changed. It had previously said that the drugs used to supress hormones at the onset of puberty in children experiencing gender dysphoria were fully reversible. The NHS now offers the cautious advice that: “Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria”. NICE, the body which provides evidence-based guidance for the NHS is currently examining the latest clinical guidance on puberty blockers and cross sex hormones as part of a review of current policies. Deborah Cohen, Health Correspondent for BBC Newsnight explains what medical questions there are about the use of puberty blockers and what the current review means.

We might be feeling a bit glum at the moment but once the general public learn what puberty blockers are and what they do, and the lack of understanding of their long term effects by those prescribing them, let's see whether that discussion gets shut down by #nodebate.

Winesalot Tue 30-Jun-20 10:18:38

on now!

StealthPolarBear Tue 30-Jun-20 10:20:19

Listening now

InflagranteDelicto Tue 30-Jun-20 10:24:39

Listening...

Halfeatentoast Tue 30-Jun-20 10:25:37

Trouble is if it's on on Woman's Hour will it just be ignored/accused of just being a bunch of TERFs waffling.

rogdmum Tue 30-Jun-20 10:26:05

Sorry, Nauticant I had a skim for another thread but didn’t spot yours!

OP’s posts: |
StealthPolarBear Tue 30-Jun-20 10:26:10

"Parents and yp need to think more carefully about the longterm effects."
Young people have been failed at best, experimented on at worst.

nauticant Tue 30-Jun-20 10:27:01

A tentative but facts-based discussion without feeling the need to include misinformation or to say that feelings must come before facts. Nothing new but questions are being asked.

nauticant Tue 30-Jun-20 10:28:49

Yours was first rogdmum and I hate it when the same discussion gets split between two threads.

StealthPolarBear Tue 30-Jun-20 10:29:10

I don't think the questions are strong enough. The presentation of this as a problem of lack of follow up misses the point imo.

dianebrewster Tue 30-Jun-20 10:29:30

I think they handled that well - facts facts not arguments about "rights"

TheSingingKettle49 Tue 30-Jun-20 10:30:02

When the NHS advise against private scans in pregnancy because the effects of too much ultra sound on the baby is unknown after 50 years, and they’re very clear that there is no evidence it can cause any harm but they just can’t be sure, then why on earth was the NHS ever saying that puberty blockers were reversible and not starting from a position of we don’t know the long term effects and we don’t know if the risks out weigh the benefits?

StealthPolarBear Tue 30-Jun-20 10:30:58

Exactly. That's exactly it.

Halfeatentoast Tue 30-Jun-20 10:32:35

Implying that it's challenging to do long studies. So? Let's not bother with any long term trials of anything ever? Let's just still give out drugs willy nilly? Let's keep going even though there's no evidence to show it's ok? I know that Jane as the interviewer has to ask questios but sometimes it gets a bit daft.

NameChangeOctober Tue 30-Jun-20 10:34:16

I thought this was good. Factual and not emotional.

And I felt that the researcher from Newsnight who was being interviewed understood that the science had been completely lacking.

A small step but a positive one.

jhuizinga Tue 30-Jun-20 10:34:58

I've just listened and thought it was actually quite brave for Women's Hour given its previous spinelessnness on these issues. There was no attempt to justify the use of the blockers. The item will have made a lot more people aware.

Defenestratethecat Tue 30-Jun-20 10:35:03

I hate the way these pieces are so 'careful'. Nothing can be discussed properly for fear of bringing down the wrath of the woke and the tra.

teawamutu Tue 30-Jun-20 10:35:49

It was discussed, though. A definite step forward.

sultanasofa Tue 30-Jun-20 10:36:08

This was good. I've emailed Womans Hour to express my thanks for raising the issue and allowing Deborah Cohen to talk without interruption.

womanshour.yourviews@bbc.co.uk

StealthPolarBear Tue 30-Jun-20 10:36:36

I feel as though I've celebrated these small steps forward in the past and in actual fact nothing has changed.
Hope I'm wrong.

Halfeatentoast Tue 30-Jun-20 10:38:39

Yes I'm grateful they had the discussion. Just frustrated that it's brief and the questions seem silly. Like you say, baby steps.

NameChangeOctober Tue 30-Jun-20 10:40:41

They didn't feel the need to give an opposing view though. It was presented as a piece of factual research into the issue. Which it was.
Hurrah

truthisarevolutionaryact Tue 30-Jun-20 10:44:58

Pleased it was aired. While the snail's pace of progress towards finally protecting children from this unethical medical experimentation is infuriating, the fact that the NHS had finally been forced to have an accurate statement about the lack of knowledge about the impacts of puberty blockers is a step forward. One tiny step to loosening the stranglehold that these groups of adult born males have on the treatment of children.

Halfeatentoast Tue 30-Jun-20 10:45:39

namechange Yes, I take your point, you're right. Maybe I'm being a grump. I'll give a hurrah but reserve the right to keep it a small one grin

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »