To think the BMA should hang its head in shame after first decrying the Cass review and now, embarrassingly completely reverse ferreting on the entire thing. What happened to Do No Harm?

@BjornTheFellHanded possibly not atm but they have mobilised to vote not to reject Cass.

I think the activists pushing this from within need to be fired.

Are they definitely back in charge? This gender madness seems to be poisoning everywhere :(

👏

The BMA has been infiltrated, this has been a huge wake up call and the grown ups have effected change.

The BMA has made itself look stupid, which is not a good look for a union.
However, in this it has merely joined a number of other unions who have similarly taken leave of their senses (e.g. UCU).

Yes it's a bloody farce driven by activists with a very ideological based agenda.

The original anti-Cass stance was from a minority of a tiny committee who should never have been allowed to vote on this topic. It was largely driven by very, very junior doctors in a meeting which didn't even have enough committee members present to have a representative vote (not quorate). Total farce and very much fault of pro-trans ideology activists

I think it is weasel words and I don't trust them. There have always been ill intentioned people who get themselves into positions of authority and trust. IME they don't change.

And why aren't they considering the actual lived experience of the women affected by men in their spaces? Only certain types of 'lived experiences' seem to matter here.

I agree I don’t think it’s bad that sanity has prevailed and resulted in a course correction, or “U-turn”. It’s just bad that they’ve revealed how far they’ve allowed themselves to be taken over by a non-evidence-based ideology - but I also think it looks good that sanity can prevail, and it adds sunlight.

If “lived experience” suddenly matters then they should apply that to people who have no “lived experience” of being the opposite sex and appropriating other people’s.

Indeed.

I'm a big fan of praising organisations/individuals for changing their mind and seeing sense rather than putting the boot in for past mistakes. The idea that making a u-turn is some sort of failing has never sat well with me. It's particularly pernicious in politics.

I wonder about A. Harrop's activities within the BMA?

It’s a complete farce.

Body modification is never the right answer for mentally distressed children.

That this has ever been allowed to happen is a scandal.

How embarrassing for the BMA. The activist element on the committee is embarrassing enough but the fact that the others abstained from the vote out of cowardice is shameful. They could have stopped this reputational damage. They should all resign.

Thank goodness for the sane members who pushed back.

So this geriatric specialist conducting the review will talk to people with 'lived experience'. So not so much of the scientific method then? I think we await the inevitable review of the review. It won't be kind.

Many organisations are vulnerable to a stealth attack from within (over a wide range of issues) if they have weak governance. It's embarrassing when it undermines core values.
This particular agenda has been very successful.

Maybe they realised that Dr Cass’ report was not the only one that was saying the same thing about unevidenced treatments.

It did seem that they missed that the Swedish government said the same thing, the Finnish government and the Danish government. A German team found the same findings too that there was only ever weak evidence.

Plus individual medical organisations around the world have started to support that same claim. The American Plastic Surgeons organisation have agreed there is only weak evidence.

Exactly. Face saving and arse covering.

Yes...it's a bit like someone who's attended the university of life deciding to do their own research on Google

Surely it's good that they've changed their mind?

Although I really don't know why they are doing more investigations. There have been so many already.

For a really interesting read , try "time to think" by Hannah Barnes.

Basically all the evidence is that puberty blockers are harmful, both for those who remain trans and those who don't.

Trans young people are usually either autistic, gay or lesbian, suffering abuse, or have other reasons for being unhappy, and often have been stuck straight on puberty blockers without any help for their other issues. These drugs are physically harmful and have irreversible effects.

I don't think the issues at the tavistock gender clinic were mainly due to activists (although they were subject to a lot of pressure from lobby groups and doubtless there were some ideologically driven staff there). Rather it was similar to every other NHS failure (e.g. maternity care at Shrewsbury and Telford) a combination of inadequate funding from the NHS, whistle blowers being silenced, toxic hierarchy with senior clinicians being untouchable, inexperienced junior clinicians working without oversight, a culture of covering up problems rather than bringing them out into the open.

So an “expert” in older people is going to “review” a review that took 4 years and teams of people to produce, and complete the said “review” in 3 months.

I think they actually mean someone plans to read it care fully, on the councils behalf, and tell the council what the CASS review actually says.

😂

morons.

Thanks OP.

It is very concerning that the BMA had taken this course of action.