Jameela Jamil just tweeted this....

[GizmoBasil]

She's mainly being pulled apart in the comments due to, you know, lying.

No doubt in my mind that she's getting puberty blockers and the contraceptive pill mixed up.

Such a shame as I have been following her since my early 20's and found her feminism very accessible back then.

Am I being unreasonable to say she's talking nonsense??

Except thats not true as evidenced prior in the thread

Which part? Clinics don’t follow the Dutch protocol. When I say all, 47 out of 48 of the Tavistock study continued PB. Another study had it at 98%. So you can be pedantic about the word “all” but it pretty much is.

I also think she is a grifter. There is money and status to be derived from supporting this ideology, and she is not the only one who has recognised that.

@Mugginyouleftrightandcentre

She is notorious for, ahem, 'inconsistencies' about her past, so I would imagine this is another one of those times where she has got herself a little bit mixed up.

I was also at an all girls school in the 90s and can confirm that puberty blockers for heavy periods was not A Thing.

Someone who was at school with her popped up in the comments, saying that she's basically talking bollocks (but more politely)

Hopefully that gravy train will come off the rails in the not too distant future.

Indeed, and as a further to the feminist angle to this, because Lupron started off as a treatment for prostate cancer, the only full research into side effects have been done on men who take the drug. The side effects on women and children are still to be studied.

Yes Molten exactly!!

Almost as if this board is about centering females, isn’t it?

And providing evidence to support assertions? That keeps getting ignored too.

Really! Whoodathunkit!

She is one of those people you head tilt at and go "ah bless" .

Isn't she always stressing the dangers of things like diet pills, unattainable beauty standards, against cosmetic surgery, etc?

But she's telling her followers that puberty blockers (a prostate cancer drug) for children are fine?!

@Mrsjayy

She is one of those people you head tilt at and go "ah bless" .

The most dangerous sort then , really.

Children should be encouraged to love their own bodies and that there is no right way to be a boy or a girl.

What they are being told is horrific on every level.

should have said no right or wrong way but I'm sure you get the gist.

As well as the contraceptive pill its possible that girls with heavy periods could have been prescribed Mefenamic acid.

www.nhs.uk/conditions/heavy-periods/treatment/

@ASugarr

The initial medication though is reversible. Yes the side effects make a difference however all medication does that.

The impact on bone density, height, brain development, sexual function, fertility etc are not 'side effects' of puberty blockers - they are what the drugs are designed to do. These are things that develop as part of puberty so if you block puberty then you are intentionally blocking these too.

Hi, can someone link the the thread itself?

🦡🌈🤍

If it gets her lots of lovely delicious cookies what does it matter?

She's on the right side of history and when the law suits and class actions start to pile up, she can just re write it. 💁

So you can be pedantic about the word “all” but it pretty much is.

I've never heard from a detransitioner who had been on puberty blockers and stopped before cross-sex hormones.

There are lots on YouTube and other places now, but all either desisted before any treatment, or detransitioned after being on testosterone for a while.

The pattern is they either back out before the first step of physical treatment, or they at least as go as far as testosterone, then stop when that's not working and there's no further step.

(I bet if there was a further step after testosterone, most would go onto that. It makes psychological sense - you try everything that's offered to you before you rethink).

Has anyone ever heard from a puberty-blocked non-cross-sex-hormones detransitioner in any media? I've only seen them as very small stats in Tavistock responses.

@transbadger

Hi, can someone link the the thread itself?

🦡🌈🤍

Here you go, 🦡

mobile.twitter.com/jameelajamil/status/1382077389925199872

Anything that interferes with development will do that. That is why they are taken very carefully and very few young people (at least in the UK) is allowed them unless necessary. Contraception can cause the same effects and are given out regularly. Additionally mental health medication is too. And those are given at an event younger age. I do agree, more research is necessary however it is very unlikely these issues arise.

You can see that so many people have taken it as fact and are going to spread it.

I was a teenager on the nineties and no one was on puberty blockers. The contraceptive pill for heavy periods -yes, I was on Dianette for bad acne myself, but me and my friends all went through puberty unscathed.

@GizmoBasil

She's mainly being pulled apart in the comments due to, you know, lying.

No doubt in my mind that she's getting puberty blockers and the contraceptive pill mixed up.

Such a shame as I have been following her since my early 20's and found her feminism very accessible back then.

Am I being unreasonable to say she's talking nonsense??

JJ is dangerously stupid, and the epitome of Dunning–Kruger effect.

She’s also been found to be a compulsive liar, especially as regards her early years, so I doubt she’s getting anything ‘mixed up’; rather, she has yet again rewritten a past ‘reality’ that never existed.

She’s also a thin shamer. If you’re smaller than she is then she will attack your body whilst claiming that she loves all women’s bodies.

‘I’ve got quite an old-fashioned figure. Back in the Sixties, girls had boobs, a tummy and wide hips, and bigger thighs as well. I think that’s sexy – to me, that’s what a woman looks like.‘

Even quotes like this are offensive - that’s what a woman looks like. Women come in all shapes and sizes, even if they have smaller chests and bottoms, but thanks Jameela.

@ASugarr

https://gids.nhs.uk/puberty-and-physical-intervention

The blocker is a physically reversible intervention: if the young person stops taking the blocker their body will continue to develop as it was previously. However, we don’t know the full psychological effects of the blocker or whether it alters the course of adolescent brain development

They are physically reversible in that you can stop taking them, unlike irreversible interventions such as a mastectomy, however as the NHS have stated, the psychological effects, and the effects on the developing brain are not known. In other words, in a female periods that stop due to PBS will most likely return when the PBS are stopped, but the unintended side effect PBS have on other areas of development isn’t certain. Compare it to taking the contraceptive pill. It will disrupt the ability to get pregnant, stop taking it and the ability to get pregnant returns. So, it’s effects on pregnancy are reversible. However, a side effect of taking it is an increased risk of certain cancers. Stopping taking it doesn’t take that risk away, the damage has already been done.

As you’re so good at citing NHS documents, here’s one from the BMJ that tells us the]at PBS do not alleviate negative thoughts in children with gender dysphoria.
www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n356

Thanks @YouNoob

And well done to everyone staying above the nonsense this morning.

I'm making berry buns for breakfast this morning but might check back in here and there.

🦡🌈🤍

That is why they are taken very carefully and very few young people (at least in the UK) is allowed them unless necessary.

Why would it be 'necessary'?

Contraception can cause the same effects and are given out regularly.

The same effects? Do you have some evidence of this?