Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Puberty suppressing drugs do not alleviate gender dysphoria - published review

5 replies

TERFMcDuck · 24/07/2018 15:50

NC'd as I usually lurk here and don't post - I don't want to risk my job (academic).

Puberty suppressing drugs do not alleviate gender dysphoria, according to a new systematic review published in the journal Pediatrics. They were associated with improvement across multiple measures of psychological functioning but not gender dysphoria itself.

Digest link
Article link
Sci-hub link for those who don't want to use their institutional login to access the article.

I'm sorry if this has been posted already and I've missed it but I think it's an important piece of work Smile.

OP posts:
TERFMcDuck · 24/07/2018 15:51

And here is the full text from the digest for those who don't want to click through:

'Clinicians treating teenagers with gender dysphoria, the teens themselves, and their parents, are faced with a dilemma – puberty suppressing drugs and hormonal treatments will likely make it easier for the adolescent to gender transition in due course, and the earlier that process begins, the more effective it is likely to be. However, intervening earlier comes with a greater risk that the teen may later de-transition (that is, change their mind about wanting to transition to the other gender), leaving them with potentially irreversible bodily changes caused by the hormonal treatment.

According to a systematic review published recently in the journal Pediatrics, adding to this clinical dilemma is a dearth of quality data on the physical and psychosocial effects of hormonal treatments on gender dysphoric teenagers and young adults. The limited evidence that is available provides only “qualified support” for these treatments, the review concludes, and while puberty suppressors have some benefits, they do not actually alleviate gender dysphoria.

The new findings – based on an exhaustive search of any and all relevant studies published between 1946 and 2017 – are published at a time when the medical and allied professions have shifted toward an increasingly “affirmative” approach toward gender dysphoria, one that at the extreme involves encouraging the process of transition at the very first signs of the condition.

The British Psychological Society’s own guidelines from 2012 propose offering “a series of [five] staged treatments”, to give time for the young person to consider their options, beginning with psychological exploration and escalating, if the dysphoria persists, to the use of puberty suppressing hormones and culminating in surgery.

The guidelines of the Endocrine Society (an International body based in Washington DC) are more affirmative: “We suggest that clinicians begin pubertal hormone suppression after girls and boys [diagnosed with gender dysphoria] first exhibit physical changes of puberty”.

However, the new review reveals how this advice is based on extremely limited evidence. When it comes to teens and young adults aged under 25, we simply do not yet know much about the psychosocial effects of pubertal suppressors (including gonadotropin-releasing analogs which suppress the development of secondary sexual characteristics) and hormonal treatments (both gender-affirming hormones and cross-hormonal treatments, such as anti-androgens, which counter the effects of testosterone, and progestins, which suppress the menses).

Denise Chew at the University of Melbourne and her colleagues identified only thirteen relevant studies, and most of these involved small samples, only two featured a control group, and none involved blinding or randomisation (the gold standard approach for medical trials).

The limited evidence available suggests that these interventions are “relatively safe” in terms of their physical side-effects, although there is no long-term data (including potential adverse effects on fertility). Where short-term side-effects occur, these can include, among others, hot flushes, fatigue, weight gain and, most concerning, changes to bone mass density.

Puberty suppressors appear to be effective at having their intended physical effect – that is, preventing pubertal changes associated with the person’s sex assigned at birth. They also have emotional and behavioural benefits, such as reducing depression. Crucially, however, they do not alleviate gender dysphoria (one study even found a trend in the opposite direction and increased negative body image). The researchers said this is “probably not surprising” given that puberty suppressing drugs “cannot be expected to lessen the dislike of existing physical sex characteristics associated with an individual’s birth-assigned sex nor satisfy their desire for the physical sex characteristics of their preferred gender”.

Meanwhile, gender affirming treatments and cross-hormonal treatments are successful, to a degree, in achieving the intended physical changes in line with the desired gender. However, these often do not match the hopes of the person with gender dysphoria – for instance, oestrogen led to a degree of breast growth that most of those treated found unsatisfactory. There are some cognitive effects to consider – for instance, after taking puberty suppressing drugs, teenagers born male but seeking to transition to female, subsequently showed poorer performance on tests of executive functioning and mental rotation. Perhaps most concerning – especially given the psychological vulnerability of many teens with gender dysphoria – there is simply no data on the psychosocial effects of these treatments.

This lack of data is in the context of a growing concern among some psychologists that the affirmative approach may have gone too far. For example, psychologist Dianne Berg, Co-Director of the National Center for Gender Spectrum Health in the US (which advocates an affirmative approach), told The Atlantic recently “Under the motivation to be supportive and to be affirming and to be nonstigmatizing, I think the pendulum has swung so far that now we’re maybe not looking as critically at the issues as we should be.”

One critical issue that has yet to be addressed by research at all, is what the effects are of hormonal treatments on teens who later de-transition. As of now, Chew and her team say there are “no known studies to date in which researchers have reported the rates and circumstances under which transgender youth cease their hormonal therapy in an unplanned manner or the risk of subsequent regret.” While the researchers say their review provides “qualified support” for the use of puberty suppressors and hormonal treatments, they conclude that more better quality and long-term research is essential, including data on the psychological effects of these interventions.'

OP posts:
TERFMcDuck · 24/07/2018 15:53

(Sorry for triple-posting!)

And a link to the reddit thread discussing the article

OP posts:
Ereshkigal · 24/07/2018 15:54

Thanks so much for this OP! I have skimmed the article but will read all the other stuff later. Bookmarked thread.

aaarrrggghhhh · 24/07/2018 18:55

Not challenging - genuine question - do you really think stating this could risk your job and in what ways? If you don't mind saying - if you do please ignore...

Ereshkigal · 24/07/2018 19:12

From the Reddit thread (this "the "cis" people should be the collateral damage as trans will benefit" logic is quite typical among transactivists)

Theoretically, there might be some issues with bone growth and stuff, but kids aren’t usually put on blockers long enough for it to become a major issue. It’s not like they’re kept on blockers into their twenties, they’d typically either start hormones or quit blockers around 16. There are late bloomers who get a sudden growth spurt at that age, it’s not unheard of without blockers, so I don’t think artificially inducing it with blockers would be that big a deal.
I also think you’re looking at this issue with the perspective that cis is the default, which blinds you to the other half of the equation. Yes, if the kid turns out to not really be trans (although if they got to the point of blockers, they most likely are), you’d be delaying the hormones they need to develop properly.
But let’s look at the alternative. What if the kid is trans (extremely likely if they’re asking for blockers) and you don’t put them on blockers? Puberty will have lasting damage on that kid. Not only will it cause them significant distress, but getting rid of the secondary sex characteristics they’ll develop can be expensive, painful, complicated and in some cases impossible. That kid will have to go through a ton of procedures that would have otherwise been unnecessary in order to correct the damages of puberty, and in the worst cases they may never pass as their real gender. Going through the wrong puberty is traumatic and potentially crippling for trans kids.
Everyone always worries so much about the risks of letting kids transition because they might turn out to be cis. No one ever thinks that forcing a trans kid to go through the wrong puberty happens much, much more frequently and has the exact same consequences. That’s why blockers are the best solution we have at the moment.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page