To nominate the principle authors of the CASS review for this..

[NameChangeCass]

“Advocates of evidence based medicine have criticised the adoption of interventions evaluated by using only observational data. We think that everyone might benefit if the most radical protagonists of evidence based medicine organised and participated in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the parachute.”

https://www.bmj.com/content/327/7429/1459.short?fbclid=IwAR0hTt57o-yFS61aJE-IGCpKSPaDs--rdrPlbiby_wBCF1czpAWDaCcAEcM_aem_ATiWMtvZxiSzw8pj9CX271gyDByuMHTOKwQskBcCXx9aZOj1IPusHJ_z79olcRiFlhE

Even just using the word bullying it's clearly untrue.

Unless your position is that the word "bullying" is too mild to describe the way trans activists behave.

I know. This is disgraceful

*Every single one of the GICS should be made to reapply for their NHS England contract and to prove their worth with long term, follow up data.
*

😱 wow you are really coming for trans people eh? You want health services removed for adults as well?

If they are behaving this unethically when it comes to children's services, why do you think they'd be any different for adults?

OP, why are you happy for the standards for healthcare for a vulnerable group of children to be so low? Why are you so afraid of tracking the outcomes?

’Reapply’ does not mean ‘Remove’.
NHS contracts aren’t permanent. If a provider fucks up, a new provider is found.

And no, I’m not suggesting anyone ‘come for’ trans people. It’s DOCTORS and PSYCHOLOGISTS and other HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS who practice in dangerous, unethical manner that I want holding to account.

You don’t blame a patient for having a shit doctor.

the standards are much lower if we take the attitude that - rather than provide care on the basis of the best available evidence - we remove .all care until we have enough long term data from control trials. Imagine if we applied this standard to other areas of healthcare - services for kids with eating disorders, mental health services more broadly, etc etc- we’d be left with very little left.
Curiously Cass recommends scaling up mental health services for gender dysphoric children, but there are no long term control trials demonstrating the benefits of these! (in fact the evidence suggests that psychological interventions can be distressing and harmful, particularly where they involve gatekeeping, or are experienced as forms of conversion therapy). I cannot see how the hypocrisy here is being missed.

Why are you so afraid of tracking the outcomes
I am not at all afraid of this, I’m in favour of it absolutely. ( Based on my own knowledge and research, I have zero doubts that it would demonstrate that for the overwhelming majority of patients, access to cross sex hormones - especially without having to go through endogenous puberty- improves long term outcomes for trans people across a range of wellbeing measures ).

But we need to sort out 1) what outcomes we are tracking and why and 2) through what type of methodologies this can be done both practically and ethically in this area of medicine.

the standards are much lower , if we take the attitude that - rather than provide care on the basis of the best available evidence - we remove .all care until we have enough long term data from control trials. Imagine if we applied this standard to other areas of healthcare - services for kids with eating disorders, mental health services more broadly, etc etc- we’d be left with very little left.

No. Other areas of healthcare have gone through appropriate trials before being rolled out as standard. This was not the case for gender questioning children.

Trans activists need to stop telling children they are at a high risk for suicide, and that telling them they are not trans is actually abusive conversion therapy. It interferes with mental health treatments.
Clinicians need to stop offering 'treatments' that cause sterility and loss of sexual function as adults.
The number of children presenting at clinics who have autism or a family history of sexual abuse need investigating.

None of this is hypocritical.

Why do you assume that withdrawal of contested treatments/suspected harmful treatments/interventions without proven success doesn’t happen elsewhere in the NHS?

Are you from the UK? If so you must realise that Cass’ recommendations are based on what happens elsewhere? Eg kids have to be signed up to trials to access unlicensed cancer drugs.

No. Try again.

From 2018:

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/29/nhs-wields-the-axe-on-17-unnecessary-procedures

That’s simply not true. There are vast areas of healthcare where we do not have control trials demonstrating long term outcomes. Especially in paediatric medicine.
pertinent examples - Mental health services for gender dysphoric kids; puberty blockers for children experiencing precocious puberty. Should we remove these services too?

Shall we remove all access to abortions until we have long term control trial data that proves they improve physical or mental wellbeing for women?

Is that a threat?

What?

‘Do as we demand or we’ll get your abortion access taken away’?

Are you trying to embarrass yourself, or do you just find it easier to throw vulnerable children and young people under a bus than to question yourself?

If you're in favour of tracking outcomes and have "zero doubts" that the data would prove you and other trans activists right, why do you think the GICs have refused to disclose the data they have?

Obviously this doesn’t warrant a response.

I think we all know the answer to that. Even the OP.

Should be right up your alley, then.

I don’t know , but I have read some commentary that they were concerned about patient confidentiality and the basis on which they should share data without patient consent.
it may also be - as I suspect - that their data is a complete mess.
I suppose we shall see.

We are talking about roughly 9,000 patients. Where's the confidentiality issue if the data is anonymised?

But, sufficient to say , I am not in the business of advocating for the removal of vital health services, especially those which pertain to bodily autonomy.

As I said above I don’t know the reason they refused.
I have read some commentary that suggest clinics were worried about the ethics of sharing medical data without patient consent (a legitimate concern).
However, I personally suspect it’s more because the data - where they have it- is a complete mess.