The Truth About Puberty Blockers - Gerald Posner in the WSJ

[DerekFaker]

The Truth About ‘Puberty Blockers’

The FDA hasn’t approved them for gender dysphoria, and their effects are serious and permanent.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-truth-about-puberty-blockers-overdiagnosis-gender-dysphoria-children-933cd8fb

Not a subscriber so I can't read very far, but that intro doesn’t hold back, does it?

Gerald has actually supplied an archive version himself:

https://archive.ph/VdZ8L#selection-355.0-355.392

https://twitter.com/geraldposner/status/1666617823345491972?t=Ucj6H9yTn6res5DOJMmq_A&s=19

That's a good article - great that this stuff is finally getting out there in the US.

Who guessed it would be the Wall Street Journal leading the attempt to move back to sanity and evidence-based medicine in the US? It's an excellent article.

I often wonder how future generations will look back on the things that are happening now. Perhaps they will share how we now feel about sending children up chimneys or believing you can cure TB by blood- letting.

It is all mad ... completely mad. How anyone can justify putting children on these drugs is incomprehensible.

I am not unsympatheitc to those who feel they would like to look/ dress/behave as the opposite gender ... two of my DDs did exactly that when they were small. We treated it in a matter of fact way and went with the flow. It passed. I also have a very close near- adult relative who identifies as a different gender ... I love them dearly.

I have no problem with grown adults making reasoned choices about their lives, but damaging children breaks the prime rule of medecine: first do no harm.

It seems to me that people simply want the freedom to break out from stereotypes ... my observations suggest that this is all about a way of life rather than sex. Who puts what where seems to be bottom of the list.

Let us fight to protect our children.

It's an horrific experiment, held in plain sight of us all.

I don't know of Posner but Abigail Shrier calls him "one of the most rigorous and respected investigative journalists working today". He's been looking into the subject for at least six months and there is more to come apparently.

'Gender-affirming care for children is undoubtedly a flashpoint in America’s culture wars. It is also a human experiment on children and teens, the most vulnerable patients. Ignoring the long-term dangers posed by unrestricted off-label dispensing of powerful puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, combined with the large overdiagnosis of minors as gender dysphoric, borders on child abuse.'

Good to see this stated so clearly, in the WSJ.

A really simple, clear and lucid explanation of the issues and the problems. Well done, that man.

Trisha Posner has also written about some of the issues in gender medicine - looks as if her experiences may have been one of the triggers for him to start digging: twitter.com/geraldposner/status/1654123609215102977?s=20

That's a really excellent article

Brief derail but this needs to be seen by everyone 😁 , it was below one of the above links

This is great.

It is a mess that it is now firmly a Republican vs Democrat thing in the US.

I hope he gives the nod to Helen Joyce and others who laid the path for him.

Meanwhile,in Norway:

"Norway's health chiefs are to decide whether to classify medicalised gender change for trans-identifying minors as "experimental", which would impose strict controls over access to these treatments, according to the Norwegian newspaper Verdens Gang (VG)."

https://twitter.com/Bernard_Lane/status/1666769131021168640?t=XxiROTBfqi_oDaKVv6rqxA&s=19

If someone thinks this deserves its own thread (it's a long twitter thread) feel free to make one or ask me to and I will when I have a minute.

It's so good to see the actual facts about this branch of experimental medical treatment of children finally getting an airing. For far too long the lies about "reversible, harmless and important for suicide prevention" have been pushed by self invested adults to the detriment of children and their future lives.

Seems quite a short article with extremely alarmist tone (it bothers me regardless of what side of the issue I am on). Maybe I've seen too many panic-mongering about anything pharmaceutical. Is the writer planning on any more follow up articles?

The tide seems to be turning slowly since the Swedish documentary Trans Train 4 years ago that detailed side effects of Lupron. It can make one think it's still a very vocal minority with regret, not really a pervasive problem for the most.

At least the issue is getting a spotlight...

Is the writer planning on any more follow up articles?

Apparently so.

That must be an example of a Freudian typo.

Yes, he said a long form piece will follow soon.

To me the tone seems really flat (which is a good thing), just straight reporting of the facts.

It doesn’t just “border on child abuse”; it IS child abuse.

So relieved to read this

Kellie Jay's been saying it's child abuse for ages. She has brilliant mum instincts and is usually spot on about child safeguarding, in my opinion.

Nevertheless, good to see this in the WSJ and by a respected investigative journalist.

Why the fuck are the medicines agency and medical professional regulatory bodies still allowing these awful drugs to be prescribed to kids who are already struggling with their mental health?
Clearly they will cause more, not less, suffering.

I'm afraid the argument about off-label use won't be very compelling to doctors, because of how the FDA works. (I've seen doctors respond to this argument for other drugs.)

The FDA only evaluates a drug for a given purpose when a company submits an application to do so, along with the proper data and so on. Once a drug is authorised, it is legal (in most cases) to use it for anything. (This doesn't mean a doctor can't get in trouble for not practising within the accepted standard of care if something goes wrong, or that Medicare/insurance would pay.) The manufacturer only submits it for authorisation for further uses if it would somehow benefit it to do so--usually because they want to be able to market it that way. It's legal for doctors to use a drug off label, but it is not legal to market it for unauthorized purposes. Therefore, Novo Nordisk submitted an application for semaglutide as Wegovy, so they could market it as a weight loss medication. But it's perfectly legal for doctors to prescribe the Ozempic version even though the intention is weight loss. Leuprolide is no longer under patent, so there's no incentive to submit it for new authorisation. A company would be undertaking the financial burden of approval with no guarantee that they would get the profit afterwards.

Many commonly used drugs never received formal FDA approval for those uses, even if there is clinical data supporting their use, because it is expensive to do. So Lupron is also commonly used for IVF, but it does not have FDA approval for that indication. It is also used in the treatment of precocious puberty.