Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children after judge rejects legal challenge

30 replies

IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 18:27

A high-profile clinical trial of drugs that can delay puberty in children questioning their gender can go ahead after the High Court rejected a legal challenge by campaigners.

The Pathways trial, run by researchers at King's College London (KCL), will start recruiting more than 220 children aged between 11 and 16 years old from 1 August.

The study was commissioned to assess the benefits or risks of puberty blockers, after a landmark review into gender services found the evidence for treating young people with the drugs was "remarkably weak".

Campaigners who brought the legal action had argued the safeguards in place were inadequate and raised concerns about the long-term physical and psychological effects on young people.

The judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, refused the application for a judicial review saying that none of the claims made by the campaigners had a realistic chance of success.

He said that each patient involved in the trial will have been assessed over "many months" by specialist doctors who will have "formed the opinion that a child has a reasonable prospect of receiving a clinical benefit from the treatment".

Full article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jl4np49w1o

A young person with long hair tied in a ponytail looks of her bedroom window. They are in shadow, while the roofs of other houses are clearly visible and there are trees in the background.

Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children after judge rejects legal challenge

Campaigners brought the legal action to try and stop the trial going ahead.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0jl4np49w1o

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Lougle · 02/08/2026 19:12

MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

From reading the Protocol it's wider than this.

  1. Puberty Suppression And Transitional Healthcare with Adaptive Youth Services (PATHWAYS): PATHWAYS TRIAL

226 CYP randomised into two trial arms:

  1. Immediate gonadotropinreleasing hormone analogues (GnRHa) injections, given at 0, 6, 12, 24 months.
  2. Delayed GnRHa injections, given after 1 year of trial start

Those CYP who start in the trial have an official 'endpoint' of 24 months, but on 'compassionate grounds' may continue to be given GnRHa after that point.

  1. Meanwhile, Puberty Suppression And Transitional Healthcare with Adaptive Youth Services (PATHWAYS): PATHWAYS HORIZON INTENSIVE

300 CYP to give a 'naturalistic comparator'. Same outcome/progress measures.

But interestingly, exclusion criteria includes "Is considered clinically eligible for GnRHa and wishes to receive this intervention", so that in itself surely means that they aren't naturalistic comparators?

  1. Puberty Suppression And Transitional Healthcare with Adaptive Youth Services (PATHWAYS): PATHWAYS CONNECT

250 participants (150 from PATHWAYS TRIAL, 100 from PATHWAYS HORIZON INTENSIVE).

MRI scanning but no other details.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/assets/pathways/trial/pathways-trial-protocol.pdf

Lougle · 02/08/2026 18:45

MashaPav · 02/08/2026 18:37

Being transgender is a condition that exists. I hope that helps.

No it isn't a condition. It is a behaviour that results from a psychological discomfort with the observed sex of the individual. The condition that will be treated is gender dysphoria.

Shedmistress · 02/08/2026 18:39

MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

I believe that the number is not actually technically capped at 226.

But apart from that, yup.

MashaPav · 02/08/2026 18:37

Being transgender is a condition that exists. I hope that helps.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 02/08/2026 18:33

MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

What you have written is my understanding. And without checking earlier threads is I am sure what most posted at the time it was first announced.

OP posts:
MarieDeGournay · 02/08/2026 10:59

So... have I got this right?

226 children under the age of 16, who may or may not have a condition that may or may not exist will be experimented on for a condition that may or may not exist, which they may or may not just grow out of anyway, with treatment which may or may not have serious and permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing, in order to prove or disprove
that the treatment has or does not have serious and potentially permanent side effects on bone density, brain development, fertility and mental wellbeing in any or all of the 226 children.

Open to correction.... please tell me I've got this nightmare scenario wrong.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 01/08/2026 17:47

From X

James Esses @JamesEsses

Puberty Blockers Trial Update I’m deeply saddened to announce that the High Court has refused permission for us to proceed to a full Judicial Review hearing in our pursuit to block the deeply unethical and highly dangerous puberty blockers trial.

This judgment does not negate the serious and avoidable harm that will be caused if this trial is allowed to proceed.

Vulnerable children should never be used as guinea pigs in medical experimentation that may lead them down a path towards irreversible physiological and emotional damage, including infertility.

This trial is the antithesis of child safeguarding and I will now be consulting with my lawyers regarding the possibility of an appeal.

https://x.com/JamesEsses/status/2083177762676785195

Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children after judge rejects legal challenge
Puberty blockers trial can start recruiting children after judge rejects legal challenge
OP posts:
Original poster
IwantToRetire · 01/08/2026 17:36

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 01/08/2026 05:55

Thanks @IwantToRetire , I think my laptop is okay, I didn't know what was going on, so I just shut everything down. I've not seen this thread unroller stuff before.

So sorry, as usual I was multi tasking even though I know that I cant really do this. I stupidly accepted google's first link instead of thinking hmmmmm.............. that not the one I usually use.

But it seems that it is quite common for links like this to be used not to actually infect computers with a virus, but to then try and get you to sign up to some sort of anti virus software.

Just to be sure I did a full scan of my computer (which takes over 4 hours!) and it was okay.

So again apologies, but also know that google search results are not reliable and often results listed first are because of paid promotion.

OP posts:
Coatsoff42 · 01/08/2026 11:08

Shedmistress · 01/08/2026 10:12

Very confused.

Who is saying that 'people who don’t like anything trans are happy that gender nonconforming children won’t be reproducing'? Why would gender non conforming children not reproduce?

And which are the 'two diametrically opposed groups of people who don’t care if these children are sterilised'?

Show quote history

It’s just a feeling I was getting, I have friends all over the spectrum of opinions and there seemed to be one vibe of ‘better a trans child than a dead child’, very supportive, be kind, worry about it all later etc, and one vibe of ‘if they are so “troubled” perhaps they wouldn’t be good parents anyway so its not a problem’, more of a generally negative view of all men in dresses type stuff, fairly conservative views. (Troubled wasn’t the wording used).

Not specifically eugenics, just the two groups are usually very politically opposed, but not on this and it was unusual to see agreement for very different reasons.
I don’t agree with either viewpoint. It was just interesting to see.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 01/08/2026 10:22

Coatsoff42 · 01/08/2026 09:43

When hear coverage of this I think there is an air of eugenics about it, as in: people who don’t like anything trans are happy that gender nonconforming children won’t be reproducing. Not here obviously, but in other comments on other sites and it feels like an undertow (if thats the right word) in discussions.

I think that there are two diametrically opposed groups of people who don’t care if these children are sterilised and thats why it’s going forward.

I can't say I've noticed this myself, like all 'eugenic' ideas it won't work, you can't eradicate 'trans' by sterilising them, I'm not sure there's a particular viewpoint that thinks you could.
I do think that the concept of children having right's is unique to the Western countries and it's also very new, and some people in positions of power or judgement might not have caught up with modern times.

Shedmistress · 01/08/2026 10:12

Coatsoff42 · 01/08/2026 09:43

When hear coverage of this I think there is an air of eugenics about it, as in: people who don’t like anything trans are happy that gender nonconforming children won’t be reproducing. Not here obviously, but in other comments on other sites and it feels like an undertow (if thats the right word) in discussions.

I think that there are two diametrically opposed groups of people who don’t care if these children are sterilised and thats why it’s going forward.

Very confused.

Who is saying that 'people who don’t like anything trans are happy that gender nonconforming children won’t be reproducing'? Why would gender non conforming children not reproduce?

And which are the 'two diametrically opposed groups of people who don’t care if these children are sterilised'?

Coatsoff42 · 01/08/2026 09:43

When hear coverage of this I think there is an air of eugenics about it, as in: people who don’t like anything trans are happy that gender nonconforming children won’t be reproducing. Not here obviously, but in other comments on other sites and it feels like an undertow (if thats the right word) in discussions.

I think that there are two diametrically opposed groups of people who don’t care if these children are sterilised and thats why it’s going forward.

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 01/08/2026 05:55

Thanks @IwantToRetire , I think my laptop is okay, I didn't know what was going on, so I just shut everything down. I've not seen this thread unroller stuff before.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 22:12

WARNING! DONT CLICK ON LINK TO THREAD UNROLL

I think I didn't check and went to what the web search was thread unroll. It should be https://threadreaderapp.com/

But I was taken to twitterthread com

Will ask MNHQ to delete both posts.

Many apologies.

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

https://threadreaderapp.com

OP posts:
Original poster
IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 22:08

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 31/07/2026 20:27

Be warned my computer has gone into a meltdown since I tried clicking on the links above, I don't know whether it's just my system being hypersensitive or what.

Edited

Sorry which links are these. Are the the unroll thread links?

In which case really sorry.

Have used this app before and not had problems. Should I get mnhq to delete?

OP posts:
TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 31/07/2026 20:43

Mine is saying it's the Russians, maybe they're trying to pay me some of that money I've heard so much about. 😂

Shedmistress · 31/07/2026 20:39

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 31/07/2026 20:27

Be warned my computer has gone into a meltdown since I tried clicking on the links above, I don't know whether it's just my system being hypersensitive or what.

Edited

Same.

dinodart · 31/07/2026 20:31

how do they assess if it worked though? as they are treating the physical body for a mental illness... like the person is simply less distressed? because they are actually harming a healthy person's body right, so they can't say the person's body is more healthy afterwards...

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 31/07/2026 20:27

Be warned my computer has gone into a meltdown since I tried clicking on the links above, I don't know whether it's just my system being hypersensitive or what.

Original poster
IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 20:26

SodThisHeadache · 31/07/2026 20:20

Link to other thread here: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5558686-pathways-puberty-blocker-trial-high-court-proceedings-start-27th-july

Important to remember that a FWR thread title has an impact not just on direct users of the forum but a wider (including search engines) audience.

OP posts:
IAmNotMyJobTitle · 31/07/2026 20:25

It’s like one of those awful experiments they used to do in the 1950s.
I can’t believe that people think this is in any way acceptable.
Those poor children, who cannot consent.

IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 20:23

This reply has been withdrawn

This message has been withdrawn at the poster's request

IwantToRetire · 31/07/2026 20:20

This reply has been withdrawn

This message has been withdrawn at the poster's request

SodThisHeadache · 31/07/2026 20:19

"The drugs can pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development and voice deepening"

Really, is that the best description of what PBs do that Alison Holt could come up with?