To think the BMA should hang its head in shame after first decrying the Cass review and now, embarrassingly completely reverse ferreting on the entire thing. What happened to Do No Harm?

[Zahariel]

Title says it all, but activists who don't believe in evidence based medicine, but do believe in the medical mistreatment of children, had tried to force the BMA into taking an idealogical position in the treatment of gender questioning children.

This stance has badly damaged the standing and trust of medicine in this country for gender questioning children, who need proper, evidenced, holistic help.

I really feel for the children, and parents, caught up in this sorry mess. Shame on these virtue signalling activists for setting children back so far.

new statesman article: https://www.newstatesman.com/thestaggers/2024/09/the-bma-turns-away-from-rejecting-the-cass-report

Archive link to skip the paywall if you want
https://archive.ph/0eHj1

"The British Medical Association (BMA) has reversed its decision to call for a pause in implementing the recommendations of the Cass Review, the New Statesman can reveal. It follows intense criticism of the doctors’ union after this publication exposed its discussions regarding the rejection of the findings of Dr Hilary Cass’s independent review into gender identity services for children and young people."

The BMA, like a lot of UK institutions, has been taken over by activists who only care about promoting their ideology. It's a very effective tactic for them, as the general public don't realise and assume it's still the reasonable, evidence based organisation it was meant to be. See also, the NHS, BBC, civil service, Stonewall.

The whole thing is a shambles, totally agree.

It seems that too many people are confusing activists and experts. I also don't understand why trade unions are getting involved in matters like this. Surely that's not their job.

I have the impression that this may have been a wake up call to members that their professional body is bringing the medical profession into disrepute. I'd like to think that this will be remembered at the next elections for council members.

The small minority of TRAs who got themselves into a position of power within the BMA should be investigated, not least by having their hard drives looked at. There are bad apples in every organisation. This was a wake up call for all the BMA members who were too busy to realise what was going on. The BMA is not fit for purpose.

So often the people who are really good at a job want to go on doing it so the less able people end up running the union* with minimal oversight from others. They only wake up to the stuff being done in their name when it hits the headlines.

*and plenty of other organisations too

It's quite disturbing how many gender activists, even ones who have written the guidance, turn out to to be sexual abusers of one form or another.

Thanks OP.

It is very concerning that the BMA had taken this course of action.

So an “expert” in older people is going to “review” a review that took 4 years and teams of people to produce, and complete the said “review” in 3 months.

I think they actually mean someone plans to read it care fully, on the councils behalf, and tell the council what the CASS review actually says.

😂

morons.

Surely it's good that they've changed their mind?

Although I really don't know why they are doing more investigations. There have been so many already.

For a really interesting read , try "time to think" by Hannah Barnes.

Basically all the evidence is that puberty blockers are harmful, both for those who remain trans and those who don't.

Trans young people are usually either autistic, gay or lesbian, suffering abuse, or have other reasons for being unhappy, and often have been stuck straight on puberty blockers without any help for their other issues. These drugs are physically harmful and have irreversible effects.

I don't think the issues at the tavistock gender clinic were mainly due to activists (although they were subject to a lot of pressure from lobby groups and doubtless there were some ideologically driven staff there). Rather it was similar to every other NHS failure (e.g. maternity care at Shrewsbury and Telford) a combination of inadequate funding from the NHS, whistle blowers being silenced, toxic hierarchy with senior clinicians being untouchable, inexperienced junior clinicians working without oversight, a culture of covering up problems rather than bringing them out into the open.

Yes...it's a bit like someone who's attended the university of life deciding to do their own research on Google

Exactly. Face saving and arse covering.

Maybe they realised that Dr Cass’ report was not the only one that was saying the same thing about unevidenced treatments.

It did seem that they missed that the Swedish government said the same thing, the Finnish government and the Danish government. A German team found the same findings too that there was only ever weak evidence.

Plus individual medical organisations around the world have started to support that same claim. The American Plastic Surgeons organisation have agreed there is only weak evidence.

Many organisations are vulnerable to a stealth attack from within (over a wide range of issues) if they have weak governance. It's embarrassing when it undermines core values.
This particular agenda has been very successful.

So this geriatric specialist conducting the review will talk to people with 'lived experience'. So not so much of the scientific method then? I think we await the inevitable review of the review. It won't be kind.

How embarrassing for the BMA. The activist element on the committee is embarrassing enough but the fact that the others abstained from the vote out of cowardice is shameful. They could have stopped this reputational damage. They should all resign.

Thank goodness for the sane members who pushed back.

It’s a complete farce.

Body modification is never the right answer for mentally distressed children.

That this has ever been allowed to happen is a scandal.

I wonder about A. Harrop's activities within the BMA?

I'm a big fan of praising organisations/individuals for changing their mind and seeing sense rather than putting the boot in for past mistakes. The idea that making a u-turn is some sort of failing has never sat well with me. It's particularly pernicious in politics.

Indeed.

If “lived experience” suddenly matters then they should apply that to people who have no “lived experience” of being the opposite sex and appropriating other people’s.

I agree I don’t think it’s bad that sanity has prevailed and resulted in a course correction, or “U-turn”. It’s just bad that they’ve revealed how far they’ve allowed themselves to be taken over by a non-evidence-based ideology - but I also think it looks good that sanity can prevail, and it adds sunlight.

And why aren't they considering the actual lived experience of the women affected by men in their spaces? Only certain types of 'lived experiences' seem to matter here.

I think it is weasel words and I don't trust them. There have always been ill intentioned people who get themselves into positions of authority and trust. IME they don't change.

The original anti-Cass stance was from a minority of a tiny committee who should never have been allowed to vote on this topic. It was largely driven by very, very junior doctors in a meeting which didn't even have enough committee members present to have a representative vote (not quorate). Total farce and very much fault of pro-trans ideology activists