Refusal of adult gender clinics to take part in study ‘shocking’ - David Bell

💯 @AlisonDonut - so instead they resort to name-calling and cancellation.

If they thought for one second that what they were doing was evidenced and helped they wouldn't have hesitated to share their findings.

It's essential that adult gender services are reviewed. I'm a parent of trans identified 21 year old. They are emotionally very immature. The idea that 18 year olds should have a service with less scrutiny than 17 year olds is unfathomable. In males discomfort with gender is most likely to occur between the ages of 17 and 25. Obviously it's important to protect children and the Cass review is a huge step forward but it's just part of a bigger picture.

Thank God. Thank God it's so clear and yes, immediate scrutiny of the adult clinics and every other charlatan in this field

The field of psychology has a ropey past whereby research has been misused with devastating impacts. Intelligence research has been used to sterilise women and to deny access to healthcare

And yet .... who is now sterilising people and denying access to comprehensive, evidence-based healthcare?

Another big lesson to learn from the Post Office scandal is that the scandal can be lying there in plain sight for many years, there can even be people shaking their heads over how bad it is, and still nothing happens. Until there's a catalysing moment and suddenly everyone is up in arms.

You only have to look at the Post Office inquiry to know that evidence from a very long time ago can still end up in the public domain.

Being cynical I wonder how many people who withheld the data are knowingly kicking the can down the road hoping they get to retire on gold plated NHS pensions before it all comes out.

They may have believed it was the right thing to do, but they must have also known it could not be shown to be the right thing to do when subject to rigorous scrutiny, otherwise they would have complied.

They were prepared to carry on with unethically with unevidenced ‘medicine’ as that fitted their ideological position.

Sorry, I think these clinicians were as captured as any other TRA.

This reason for their non-compliance speaks volumes as to their level of capture, concerns about funder motivation.

They are displaying classic TRA/ gender ideologue thought patterns and behaviour. No debate and preserve the ideology by refusing to submit it to scrutiny.

Utterly unprofessional.

The NHS have said they will review adult services

Absolutely shocking.

The NHS is an arse covering organisation. Par excellence though, so not surprising ( not just my experience, though that is definitely my experience, but there have been reports on this too).

But six of the seven adult clinics declined to support the study, with reasons for not doing so including ethical considerations and concerns about funder motivation and political interference, with fears the resulting “high-profile national report” could be misinterpreted or misrepresented.

The clinic personnel will have been lionised for non-cooperation. It would be very expensive to take legal action. QMUL spent millions contesting the request for data release in re: the controversial PACE trial.

https://me-pedia.org/wiki/PACE_trial

Recall that Helen Webberley won her appeal and was described her model of care to be “at the vanguard of this evolving approach to transgender care” and “right and fit for purpose”.

https://www.gendergp.com/dr-webberley-wins-high-court-appeal/

They know.

They don't want the general public to find out.

These ideologues will be screaming "lobotomy is valid" until their licence to mutilate vulnerable people is taken away.

Exactly.

They are politicking.

Surely if they were concerned about the reports being subject to 'political interference' or misinterpretation, they would want all their data that showed that medically transitioning helped patients with their mental health problems and really was beneficial to them.

You'd think so, if they actually believed themselves, but I'm of the opinion that they knew that it would not stand up to scrutiny.

Surely if they were concerned about the reports being subject to 'political interference' or misinterpretation, they would want all their data that showed that medically transitioning helped patients with their mental health problems and really was beneficial to them. I suspect they have nothing of the sort. I know several trans/ non binary people. All of them still have mental health conditions/neurodiversity. Transitioning has done nothing but mask medical conditions that should have been properly treated.

Adult gender treatments MUST now be scrutinised. Yes it will open up all sorts of unsavoury issues into the public eye but society and the medical arena must be cognisant of and willing to examine AGP, transmaxxing, and all the other incentives to transition besides crippling gender/body dysphoria.

But six of the seven adult clinics declined to support the study, with reasons for not doing so including ethical considerations and concerns about funder motivation and political interference, with fears the resulting “high-profile national report” could be misinterpreted or misrepresented.

Continued funding for clinically unproven treatment which had a lack of evidence base was more important than ethics. Hiding behind the phrase 'political interference' whilst refusing to cooperate and provide medical evidence is the very definition of unethical. All in all that defence is pretty weasely don't you think?

The field of psychology has a ropey past whereby research has been misused with devastating impacts. Intelligence research has been used to sterilise women and to deny access to healthcare. As a result of this initial training and ongoing regulatory bodies ensure that psychologists are hyper aware of the potential for misuse of data and research.

My take on the refusal to share data is probably linked to them truly believing this is the right thing to do. They are 💯 wedded what they believe is the right approach. I don't think anything will change that. This is why the change in approach needs a change in staff

I would be extremely interested to know which adult clinic agreed to take part. Is that published/leaked? (Disclainer, haven't read full report yet!)

I don’t understand how they can refuse to take part in a government commissioned report?

If there is no evidence base that the treatments are beneficial and improve outcomes and a clear risk of harm, and the clinics involved refuse to take part in research to develop the evidence base, then there is only one ethical way forward. These 'treatments' should not be allowed to be commissioned. Gender medicine or not, it is not ethical to expend NHS resources on 'treatments' for non life threatening conditions that are totally unproven and potentially harmful. This would not be accepted in any other branch of medicine.

If 6 out of 7 clinics for something else, eg a liver condition, refused to cooperate with a major, wide-ranging review, surely questions would be asked. The optics of this are terrible.

I suspect it’s also because a review of adult patients will find high rates of medical complications as well as ongoing mental health co-morbidities that have not improved with “affirming care”.

There is only one reason you don't want your work to be in the spotlight.

Running for cloud cover as the disinfectant of sunshine is on the horizon.