On BBCR4 now - GIDS whistleblower being discussed

[1984in2019]

Not sure who is on to defend the service but he is denying all the issues so far...

I was confused about one thing.

He didnt really answer about what happened with the the children's previous histories if abuse etc , didnt answer really about whether or not they tell families their kids arent trans. But then added that about "only" 50 percent end up on medical treatment.

So what happens to the other 50 percent then?

Or did I miss something? Which is more than possible

Very interesting ,Nauticant, that Paul Jenkns has an MBA. I keep trying to work out Medical B...? A....? but all I'm getting is Masters in Business Administration. Hmm. Surely not the ideal person to discuss endocrinology?

Had to turn it off as dd came in and we disagree on this

It shows how much of the TRA 'thing' is about indoctrination; if someone cannot listen to an interview watch a debate on an issue without flouncing out or closing it down.

If something cannot even be spoken about openly, there is something wrong. Where to even discuss an issue is verboten.

It stands for Medical Bad Ass. It means he trumps anyone with mere qualifications and direct experience.

Paul Jenkins says puberty blockers are fully reversible. How many of the children prescribed PB go on to further medical treatment (hormones, surgery) and how many actually do stop taking them and have no further medical treatment, so that the effects of PB can be studied? And if children go on to further medical treatment, does it mean they never experience puberty at all? That has incredibly deleterious effects on the body, including for brain development.

Exactly aless

Nearly 100 percent of kids who take "blockers" go onto cross sex hormones.

We already have 2 high profile cases where its publically stated that the lack of growth meant that surgery was more difficult or experimental.

The results must come from temporary usage of them fir reasons of precocious puberty.

So they cant even really say fir sure

Just listened on catch up. He came across very badly.

Paraphrasing one bit:
The long term effects are well known and totally reversible .... We have just been given a big grant to do the first long term study.

Also the bit about defending staff against accusations of transphobia. Surely he should have had at his fingertips a raft of examples of when he has done just that. Of course we know why he didn't, because Entwhistle is telling the truth.

When is Entwhistle being interviewed?

GIDS say that they are carrying out research into the long-tem effects of puberty blockers. But according to their response to this FOI request, it is the child's GP who administers them, and as a result they hold no records of the dates on which the child first received them.

tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/documents/1547/FOI_19-20001_Details_of_Study_on_Early_Pubertal_Suppression.pdf

We do not hold the actual date blockers started, as these are administered by the local GP. Following consent a letter is sent to the local GP who then arranges administration.

This is a study of the long-term effects of drugs in children, where the group carrying out the study is not keeping any records of the drugs which are administered to these children.

More relevant FOI requests on this page.
tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/about-us/contact-us/freedom-of-information/foi-disclosure-log/

So pleased and surprised to hear this was 'discussed' on Today. I will listen on catch up.

Can anyone link to good research on the effect of puberty on cognitive development? Does anyone work in that field?

Anyone think that the Today programme was including this is as a sop to their editor stating that they veto horrific Terfs last week?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3641071-Dave-McMullan-from-BBCR4-Id-never-put-any-trans-women-on-alongside-some-horrific-terf-name-edited-by-MNHQ?

The timing makes me raise my eyebrows.

The story was about one woman's open letter to another woman. Kirsty Entwistle to Polly Carmichael about the concerns at GIDS.

And so of course they had two males talking about it. Neither of whom seemed to know about the detail of the issues.

But that is the BBC for ya.

More from the GIDS FOI archives.

GIDS were asked for "The number of patients with gender dysphoria under 16 who have been given hormone therapy (hormone blockers) with or without parental consent"

Their response:
"We have collated data for young people under 15 years olds referred to the endocrine clinic and who have provided consent for hormone blocking treatment as part of that referral. We assume that these young people have gone on to receive hormone blocking treatment."

tavistockandportman.nhs.uk/documents/1431/FOI_18-19333_Gender_Dysphoria_Treatment_2012-18.pdf

Once again, they 'assume' these children had hormone blocking treatment, but they have no record of it. How can they be researching this if they don't actually know whether children are being treated with these drugs or not?

Very interesting ,Nauticant, that Paul Jenkns has an MBA. I keep trying to work out Medical B...? A....? but all I'm getting is Masters in Business Administration. Hmm. Surely not the ideal person to discuss endocrinology?

That’s what I didn’t understand either Ancientlights. He is the CEO of the whole service, other parts of which do have a good reputation. I saw a couple of posts suggesting he was a career NHS manager. However, for this sort of interview, a clinician would have been more suitable. The chairman of the governors resigned a few months ago and was very critical of the way GIDS was run. I wonder if this interview was the CEO’s way of trying to assert his authority. It didn’t work in the sense that he did not come across well at all but I wonder if there are more concerns in the Trust as a whole.

Can this CEO point me to the peer reviewed academic research supporting his claim that puberty blockers are reversible?

That’s what I didn’t understand either Ancientlights. He is the CEO of the whole service, other parts of which do have a good reputation

Could this be related? In the last week, GIDS have removed access to all their Who We Are pages for clinicians.

www.google.co.uk/search?q=site:gids.nhs.uk/who-we-are

Clicking through from here now gets an "access denied" message.

And so of course they had two males talking about it. Neither of whom seemed to know about the detail of the issues

Ha yes. I mean how many times have people like say dr nic been interviewed ( separately I might add as fir some reason they are soooooo dangerous with their facts and figures no one can be in the same room as them ) and presented well researched , completely verifiable information and they have been.pulled aalpart, called liars and blamed for suicides . But this, unresearched contradictory script work is allowed ...

I dont get it.

Can this CEO point me to the peer reviewed academic research supporting his claim that puberty blockers are reversible?

What you always get from GIDS and other such services is data from the use of puberty blockers to delay premature puberty, as opposed to gender dysphoria. In these cases, PBs are fully reversible because the children stop taking them while they are still in the physiological window for puberty to occur (though, even for this group, there are concerns about side effects).

PBs are reversible if you stop taking them when you are still young enough to go through puberty. The problem is that we know that almost 100% of children prescribed PBs for gender dysphoria continue past this point.

You have no hope of getting anyone in the BBC to understand this - they have virtually no journalists with a science background and do not take science seriously.

I thought Webb did a good job and I have heard him do other good interviews in this area. I agree not in depth on the science but inevitable for an interview of this kind - what matters is the interviewer challenges and pushes them to account for inconsistencies etc which he did well.
A more in depth look at this by today would be good though.

One other thing. I really dislike people who start every response with “so..” as Jenkins did. It manages to sound both patronising and evasive.

Yep, Justin Webb has done other sensible interviews on this subject and I thought he did an ok job. It would have been much better if Kirsty Entwistle had been interviewed too, obv

Clicking through from here now gets an "access denied" message.

Interesting Langcleg. Not very transparent!

PBs are reversible if you stop taking them when you are still young enough to go through puberty. The problem is that we know that almost 100% of children prescribed PBs for gender dysphoria continue past this point.

Not only that, but they then go straight onto cross-sex hormones. This is an experiment on children, which is supposedly part of some research by GIDS, but they don't seem to be doing any research, since they are not even keeping track of which children are on puberty blockers and when they started taking them.

It's a start. Justin Webb treated it more like a real interview on a complex subject than we are used to seeing. That said, he was woefully short on readily available facts like the 10% reduction in IQ, the bone density problems, etc.

Having a "horrible terf" with actual medical qualifications on would have helped with that. Are dissenting knowledgeable voices still banned then? I'm sure someone would have made themselves available even at short notice.

"Historically, our service used the terms "natal / born" or "biological" to describe the sex and gender someone was identified as at birth. However, we try where possible to avoid these terms now as some people feel that they privilege biology over their lived and felt identity".

How can the culture be one which centralises and encourages informed consent and without undue pressure, when they are too scared and its considered too sensitive to mention biological reality?

Their response:
"We have collated data for young people under 15 years olds referred to the endocrine clinic and who have provided consent for hormone blocking treatment as part of that referral. We assume that these young people have gone on to receive hormone blocking treatment."

Why the smoke and mirrors? Why did they not have data for children between 15 and 16? How does that FOI data compare to the graph they published in the BMJ?

adc.bmj.com/content/103/7/631.full?ijkey=HsMwyZDRtsKu83z&keytype=ref

That graph shows that between the years of 2010 and 2013 they had approximately 800 referrals and of these about 300 went on to be referred to a paediatric endocrinologist. Even these figures are misleading as some of these children would have been too young or too old for puberty blockers.