Puberty blockers effects on bone density

I had missed the 4 year old story

When my daughter was around three or four she asked me when she was going to grow a willy like her brother.

I said you can't. That was the end of that.

Given today's awful story about the 4 year old "trans" child:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4236668-britain-s-youngest-trans-child

I thought it worth bumping this one to highlight the experimental nature of the medication these children get and the emerging evidence of long term harm it is doing to their bodies.

This is astonishing

Do we think we’ll get ploppers on this thread telling us what bigots we all are?

Transgender ideology has led to this, to medical treatments that harm children, where rather than face that, the culprits move the goal posts instead.

Truly, once you’ve got someone to pretend to themselves that humans can change sex, you can get them to do anything

It does not take a genius to work out that pumping a body full of hormones meant for the opposite sex is going to be harmful/ have side effects. It will just depend on whether these side effects are worth it. Osteoporosis will only be one I expect, we have not even got to possible increased risk of cancers? (I am guessing here, but seems likely)

The same poster that posted the 2019 study also posted this

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23369987/

It is a paper from 2013 pointing out FTM transitioners had lower bone density to male average before they started medical intervention. Likely due to lack of exercise to build bone density.

So, this could be why the discussion around lowering the z-score range.

It does seem rather to be about lowering the bar of healthy ranges rather than addressing the future issue of low bone density for this group, doesn’t it?

I discovered in one of the studies posted recently to convince us all that there were NO issues with bone density for females transitioning that this study has a relevant section.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6709704/#S5title

Basically, this 2019 study showed that female transitioners who took PBs did not ever recover their bone density as they discuss in the section on puberty blockers.

However, Z-scores in the trans boys also showed an expected drop during GnRHa treatment. Similarly, they did not fully Bmake up their bone loss as Z-scores at age 22 were still lower than baseline (aBMD Z-score − 0.33 ± 1.12 and BMAD Z-score average − 0.033 ± 0.95), despitea small increase in absolute aBMD. One transman at age 22 had a Z-score of < −2.0.^

(Not quite what the original poster believed it would tell us, I might point out.)

Bumping even though I've nothing new to say because this is outfuckingrageous.

These children have been subjected to a horrific medical experiment and I simply cannot fathom the levels of complacency, ignorance and/or malice on the part of those cheerleading this from the sidelines.

I would like to pose a couple of questions to those supportive of this medical intervention: You say that you’re doing the best for these children. The evidence is mounting that you are not, and the harms massively outweigh the benefits. What are you going to do now? Do you have the courage to admit that you were wrong? What would convince you?

Also brain / dementia apparently, see the work of Dr Lisa Mosconi.

I do wonder about the long term effects of pbs and then lack of oestrogen in girls who transition.

One of the main reasons to take hrt in later life is bone density.

It doesn't does it? None of the treatment of 'transitioning' children meets any acceptable level of medical, scientific, psychological or ethical standards of treatment

Given the Tavistock own report stating there was no improvement in mental health.

Girls are the new majority cohort and blockers make them.shorter which is not great for passing as a boy/man.

The bone issues will make playing sports alot more difficult

And of course in males blockers make any future surgeries more complicated due to lack.of development.

You really do have to ask what's it all for...

How does this pass any kind of ethics scrutiny ?

It doesn't does it? None of the treatment of 'transitioning' children meets any acceptable level of medical, scientific, psychological or ethical standards of treatment.

My rage at what is happening to these children is immense. Their rage and despair will be off the scale when they reach adulthood and look at the consequences for their bodies - forever in need of permanent medication and treatment with so many of the adult choices about fertility, sexual partners and experiences lost to them.

Medically induced bone thinning for no other reason than adults were unable to say to "No" them - "You're an unhappy child and this is dangerous life altering medicine / procedures. Society protects children from making these decisions until you are old enough to fully consent. No."

Don't bone-shame trans kids.

Healthy at all bone densities.

(It's quite easy to speak Woke. The difficult bit is suppressing the accompanying eye-roll).

My sister runs a bone density clinic. This will have such awful effects for these children.

Reading this thread for the first time. Shocking, even when you think you're beyond being shocked by this stuff.

How does this pass any kind of ethics scrutiny?

How?

There was a long term study done in Bristol university in UK which studied the effect of late puberty on bone density. Over 6,300 people on the study. It found that there were bone density issues as adults when children started puberty later (naturally ie without blocking).

research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/publications/association-between-age-at-puberty-and-bone-accrual-from-10-to-25

The impact of delayed puberty is bad enough, without dosing children with drugs to impose it.

Mollyollydolly

Thanks for sharing.

Might be a good resource for the Break it down thread?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me?pg=27

Yes that too.,