Puberty blockers: Can a drug trial solve one of medicine's most controversial debates?

Is this a priming nudge piece ordered by the Gov?

Whilst Debs Cohen has always been excellent on this, it's usually been within Newsnight.

I feel it's significant that she's been given / written this piece rather than any other department. I also feel based on this piece, and who they've interviewed, it leans towards the uk making firm decisions based on ethics; that a trial isn't ethical.

And as a pp says, waiting for more evidence from elsewhere- which won't be great. So an ongoing delay?

I may be reading too much into that, but these are children. The public need to be talking about it.

"Stuff" comment is ridiculous. Children in those situations are usually very likely to die from their condition within a few years or months.

Do we know who the Chief Investigator will be? Has the protocol been written and reviewed? Has it been through the ethics committee and approved by the regulators?

If none of the above has been done, it will be months before this opens with alot more hurdles ahead

I'd like to see them state that these drugs were never approved for this use and that the adult clinics refused to supply their data to Cass.

Wouldn't look out of place at Malaga Airport

I can't see this making it through ethics

Thanks for sharing OP.

Every now and again, the BBC pulls it out of the bag with a great article like this.

One thing I'd like to have seen mentioned is the recent 9 year trial puberty blocker trial in the US:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/23/science/puberty-blockers-olson-kennedy.html

Thinking about this a bit more,
given it's of international interest, could Wes Streeting put pressure on the next US government to force its publication? From a UK perspective, I would like the NHS to have access to the methodology and results of this US trial before deciding whether it's ethical to start our own**. Ideally, the Cass Review would have had access to this US trial. Had it done so, we might not be in the position where we "need" to run one here.

**I can't imagine a situation where it's deemed ethical to run a puberty blocker trial in the UK. Fertility and bone density aside (both of which are red flags anyway), the impact on the developing teenage brain is unknown and highly likely permanent in every case.

Sallie Baxendale's explanation of what we already know about brain development tells us all we need to know about whether preventing puberty completely is ethical:

How on earth could it ever be ethical to run a trial where the outcome would be highly like to be permanent brain damage?

Gordon Guyatt, a professor at McMaster University in Canada, who points out that randomised trials are done in "life-threatening stuff all the time'

We heard in the USA Supreme court last week that 'gender incongruence' isn't life threatening at all. So that's sorted then. No need for any trial. Thanks Gordon.

Gosh looking at those lovely photos of Natacha there's nothing narcissistic looking about them at all.

This Kennedy:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6145781/University-researcher-asked-Facebook-group-circulate-list-academics-disagreed-her.html

There's also good article by Lucy bannerman for the times but it's paywalled

Oops,

Otherwise it's an excellent explanation of the issues. Hard to conclude any other way CrocsNotDocs

Others

My one criticism is that Natasha Kennedy is not explained.

Their views that kids should be given them, sitting next to the rightly concerned view of the mother from Bayswater who does not, is rather grim when you know the full context.

Interesting that there's no "pro" medical view from any U.K. gp, medical practitioner or clinical group. Kennedy is the only U.K. pro voice.

WPATH are quoted but that a trial is unnecessary.

Both CAN-SG and Bayswater named. No U.K. org of any sort on the "other" side.

Puberty blockers are unethical and any trial would be unethical.

Just came to post this after spotting it just now during insomniac scrolling.

Cohen asking all the right key questions as usual. Is it right?