Endocrinologists warn against hormone treatment for childhood gender dysphoria (letter to be published in JCEM)

[GrinitchSpinach]

Up to now, trans activists have been extremely successful in intimidating endocrinologists who find the lack of concern about the effects of puberty blockers and crossover hormones disturbing.

They are amazed at how quickly their freedom to speak up on this issue has been quelled. One of my endocrinologist friends has told me quite frankly that he would be in danger of losing his hospital appointment if he advised parents of a trans-presenting child to seek a period of therapeutic assessment before moving on to puberty blockers.

The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism (JCEM) is an organ of the Endocrine Society. And it is the Endocrine Society which has published clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of gender dysphoria for both adults and children, first in 2009 and then in revised form in 2017. These guidelines—very trans affirmative—were written in conjunction with the World Professional Organization for Transgender Health (WPATH) which is regarded by objective endocrinologists as a radical political group at its core, but which has infiltrated an otherwise responsible, science-based medical organization.

A group of concerned endocrinologists, under the leadership of California-based Dr Michael Laidlaw, an endocrinologist trained in the study of hormones and glands, who treats diseases caused by hormone imbalances in patients, has written a letter of dissent to the editor of the JCEM, which has been accepted and will be published later this month.

www.thepostmillennial.com/endocrinologists-warn-against-hormone-treatment-for-childhood-gender-dysphoria/

About time.

Good. Finally.

I know Laidlaw has been speaking up about this for a while. Whether anyone listens is another thing.

The way that lobbying has ovveridden evidence based medicine here is terrifying.

I want to post the link to the TW who speaks about the damage their body has endured from the hormones but can't remember the link

It's fine if an adult wishes to change their body in this way (but perhaps also should be better informed longer term) but definitely not children.

And cue the lobbyists bombarding JCEM with complaints. Probably before it's even been published.

It's fine if an adult wishes to change their body in this way (but perhaps also should be better informed longer term) but definitely not children.

I'm not so sure it's ethical for doctors to do this to adult patients, either, actually. It depends on whether the harms done by these drastic and risky interventions are balanced by a more drastically reduced rate of suicide and other severe mental health outcomes.

I'm not persuaded that the evidence shows this so far, but it is certainly worth researching. But lobbyists are arguing for affirmation-only care, which would make it unethical to design a randomized controlled study, no?

These guidelines—very trans affirmative—were written in conjunction with the World Professional Organization for Transgender Health (WPATH)

It's ludicrous that the endocrinologists are being dictated to WPATH.

Take a look at some of the WPATH 'experts' that are currently busy writing new guidelines. You'll find some rather strange characters with some strange qualifications and also SG! Does she really have the expertise to dictate to endocrinologists?

WPATH is quite weird, isn't it?

There is no MD on the Ethics committee. The MDs on the Child and Adolescent committee are psychiatrists. No endocrinologists or other fields represented. Also weird: Laura Edwards-Leeper, chair of the Child and Adolescent committee, is listed by WPATH as an MD, but her own site mentions PhD only. She works as a psychologist and helped Norman Spack to found the pediatric gender clinic at Boston Children's Hospital...

previous discussion of Norman Spack:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3469374-Dr-Norman-Spack-evangelist-in-chief-for-early-medical-intervention

twitter.com/Transgendertrd/status/1086609718435565569?s=20
See also ^

Lobbying groups like this should have no power over medical organisations - they can be consulted for a patient group opinion but the standard of care needs to be set from evidence based data.

I find it extremely worrying that these groups have had so much influence. They’ve got the DSM and the ICD definitions of gender dysphoria changed and they’re well on the way to changing the entire standard of care around this issue.

It’s hugely worrying - where’s the research? Where’s the carefully considered data?

I can’t think of any other area where this has happened.

GrinitchSpinach, I agree actually and clearly from recent documentaries (eg Stella's one on Trans children) many 'adults' don't know what they're signing themselves up to.

The way that lobbying has ovveridden evidence based medicine here is terrifying

This. They haven't just overridden it, they've reframed it as hate speech. It's astonishing

Sorry; realized I didn't attach the relevant screenshots re: WPATH committees:

"We advocate for the latest international guidelines"

Guidelines set by who? A panel of neutral international medical experts? Or a group of TRAs from different countries?

🤔

Guidelines set by who?

The new guidelines are being written by 'experts' who are working collaboratively.

These are the experts responsible for steering best practice (globally) for your GNC child e.g. one who "frantically pulls the fancy barrettes out of her hair or a boy toddler who wraps his blanket around his head to create long, flowing hair" (quote from DE)

Amy Tishelman - Lead
Dianne Berg
Diane Ehrensaft
Laura Edwards-Leeper
Aron Janssen
Jiska Ristori
Thomas Steensma
John Strang
Susie Green

So, a panel of experts with no actual experts on it, and Mermaids saying they don't prescribe, and then referring back to the "guidelines" that Susie Green helped produce.

What a lovely collection of fetishists, fantasists, and scammers the TRA movement is.

To be fair other than the two with extreme views on that list, the rest appear a little more rational but I think only one is medically trained i.e a psychiatrist rather than a psychologist.

How can a panel devoid of medics, endocrinologists, and with no peer review or consultation set such guidelines correctly?

The answer is they can’t. I’ve been involved with similar guideline setting and it’s an endless round of opinion seeking, discussion, reviews of the current best data, and consensus.

This is lobbying. It has no basis in evidence based medicine