Netherlands Puberty Blocker Review Comes to Opposite Conclusion, Dismisses Cass Review

t’s very curious that, in this field of healthcare, specialist professional experience is somehow treated as evidence that someone’s judgement can’t be trusted. That makes little sense. In most areas of medicine, we’d expect a review to be informed by people with relevant expertise, while managing any conflicts of interest transparently.

The problem with the Cass Review was precisely that it was led by people who lacked prior specialist expertise in this area of medicine. To me, that’s a much greater concern than the fact that experts have experience treating the patients they’re discussing.

Is there much push-back in the Netherlands when it comes to trans ideology and the transitioning of children? Somehow I think it is Britain that is the leading the way on this; including being ahead of the U.S, where the resistance has been caught up in Trump's culture war - and is far less effective because of that.

Such conclusions have to be viewed within the wider context of captured organisations and professionals seeking to justify their actions - and even though they have come to a different headline conclusion, the evidence, or lack of it, is just the same as withCass's findings.

Has there been a Tavistock scenario anywhere else in recent years?

The problem with the Dutch is that they have not been vigorous with their research. https://segm.org/Dutch-studies-critically-flawed I find it difficult to show any regard for the conclusions of people who discard data that doesnt fit with the outcome they want. They say that international studies are not relevant because of different approaches and they are basing their conclusions only on Dutch studies.

The downloads, which contain the detail, are unfortunately written in Dutch so necessary to run them through google translate. I'm too busy to do that today.

Thanks for the summary! It says: "the potential effects of treatment on cognition and fertility have not yet been sufficiently studied, and data on long-term treatment outcomes are lacking. Furthermore, the number of people who regret treatment cannot be accurately determined based on the available literature, due to generally short follow-up periods and substantial loss to follow-up in studies"

This is pretty much in lube with Cass. They are also both in favour of continuing to provide puberty blockers - Cass in a clinical trial setting, the Dutch paper after extensive psychological work.

https://www.healthcouncil.nl/site/binaries/site-content/collections/documents/2026/06/30/transgender-care-for-adolescents/transgender-care-for-adolescents-summary.pdf

This is the executive summary of their report.

How many of the committee that performed the review have direct or indirect links to the prescribing of puberty blockers or hormone treatments?