Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Puberty Blockers. How exactly did we get here?

101 replies

AlisonDonut · 18/04/2024 12:32

I thought I'd write this as I see so many questions about why they are so contraversial and there is so much info being thrown about that it can be overwhelming.

So a brief history and how they were taken on by the Gender Clinics.

The main crux of the issue is that they are GnRH analogues. GnRH- which are gonadotropin-releasing hormones are released by the pituatory glands and GnRH analogues stop this process from happening. They control and regulate the development of the sex hormones in both males and females.

So they were used decades ago to 'treat' homosexuals when homosexuality was illegal. If a homosexual was arrested for having gay sex for example, the option was to go to jail or agree to take this drug. One key person who this happened to was Alan Turing, who later committed suicide. They have been used as well to 'treat' paedophiles.

They are also used to treat 'precocious puberty' in very young children, and are used for a very short time due to the known affects of the drug. It is also used for endometriosis.

Sidebar: the FDA in the USA reports 25,000 adverse effects, and it is linked to at least 1,500 deaths. And that is for use 'on book' ie being used for the things is it regulated to be used for.

So back in 2003, when the main cohort of people wanting to 'transition' was males, somewhere in a clinic in Amsterdam, it was suggested that these GnRH analogue drugs could be used in males who were being treated for 'gender dysphoria' because the drugs would suppress the physical development of the voice, the growth of a beard, the jawline and height and what grown up men who had 'transitioned' wanted to look at was allowing other men to pass as women more easily when they grew up.

They tried this drug on Patient Zero, and drug seemed to work.

Sidebar: a 22 year follow up study on Patient Zero reports that he hadn't managed to sustain any long term relationship, was ashamed of his genitals, but was assessed as a positive outcome because he had a job. It was reported that 'the concept of regret in transition isn't the most helpful framework'.

In 2004 meanwhile, at the GIDS in the Tavistock in London, Sue Evans reported that this was now being prescribed and there was no evidence as to the success of these drugs and a 16 year old boy had been referred for these drugs after 4 sessions. She blew the whistle but it was completely ignored.

Sidebar: it is impossible to do a blind or double blind study on puberty blockers as if a placebo is given, puberty will continue to develop so it becomes obvious very quickly.

It appears that across the board, the drugs were being used, off book ie they have never been approved for use to block puberty as a treatment for 'gender dysphoria' and the use ramped up over the years. The useage was also expanded to girls.

In 2011, the clinic in the Netherlands did a follow up of 70 people who had been prescribed these drugs as teenagers. They seemed to have done two surveys on them. The Utrecht Gender Dysphoria scale was used, which was initially done in their actual sex and the follow up which they used the opposite sex scale to measure the success, [the survery switcheroo]. They also used another 'Body Image Scale] which was also swapped out for the opposite sex scale. It is unclear how long any of these people had been on the Puberty Blockers, and unclear if they ever asked about any other side effects of the drugs.

Out of the people that responded, 15 dropped out [didn't respond]. They said they wanted to see who had gone on to full surgery but in other reports I found that these HAD gone on to full surgery, so who knows. They found that issues had been had by the other 55, of which some didn't fulfil the surgery requirements because they now were obese, or had diabetes, some refused to complete the survey and others couldn't be operated on due to 'short penis length'. It is unclear how many of the original 70 proceeded to surgery or whether it was 'successful' or not. It is unclear how much input the Dutch Clinic had with anything after the puberty blockers. It in unclear if there were any actual girls in this cohort.

Sidebar: if you start searching for treatment of homosexuals using Lupron the internet takes you down a road, and the end of which is that 'Lupron is no longer available'. However there are many names for the same drugs now. If you start searching for treatment of precocious puberty or endometriosis you get a swathe of reports on the damage and side effects and catastrophic issues from people whose lives have been destroyed by this drug, even after just a few weeks treatment. If you however search for puberty blockers, there is just the 'safe, effective, reversible' information from a huge range of clinics and what I would consider reputable medical insititutions.

The reason that the Cass report took 4 years is the impossibility of actually finding out anything concrete from any studies, it is like trying to nail oily spaghetti to a jelly wall using prawn crackers. The internet resists any cross referencing from one 'treatment' and named drug across different treatment protocols and links between one report saying the drug has massive catastrophic side effects and it should be a last and final treatment to another saying it is completely safe and reversible.

I've synthesised a fair amount of this information from the interview between Stella O'Mally and Sasha Ayed and the two medics who developed the Dutch Protocol, and using their actual words.

Michael Biggs did a deep dive into this protocol here which establishes that the use was documented as a standard treatment in 2001 by the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association which later became WPATH. Two years before the Dutch Clinicians said that the drug regime began being used.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
17
AlisonDonut · 20/04/2024 14:38

Ok from my readings over the last 24 hours.

Getting different things from different places.

PRE 1998.

The Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association which later became WPATH had produced the Standards of Care Versions 1 [1979], 2 [1980], 3 [1985], 4 [1990] and 5 [1998]. Version 5 in 1998 said that under 18s must not be treated.

John Money had worked with Bruce Reimer [born 1965] and who had a botched circumcision [1966] and whose parents went to Money [1967] and he advised bringing David up as a girl alongside his twin brother. He continued to see the twins, whilst also abusing them and forcing them to preform sex acts on each other, sometimes Money was the only observer and sometimes as many as 6 colleagues watching. David himself later reported that he did not ID as a girl and basically had Gender Dysphoria and age 13 didn't want to see Money again [1978]. In 1980 he was told the truth, in 1987 he had his breasts removed and a reconstructed penis. He got married, and it seems it wasn't successful. In 1997 he was horrified that his story was being touted as a success and broke his silence, he tried to comit suicide and in 2004 he tried again and was successful.

In Utrecht, Peggy Cohen-Kettenis was the founder of the Utrecht Children's Clinic [founded 1987]. She had presented to the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association which later became WPATH in the 80s. She referred patients aged 16-17 to Amsterdam for cross sex hormones [1994]. Males were given Antiandrogen cyprotertone acetate and females were given progestin and then testosterone. One patient then had a mastectomy, hysterectomy, oophorectomy. She got these treatments because she liked football, didn't date in school and her parents found her wearing a tight shirt to hide her breasts. Other patients were given the same drugs and when compared to former patients it is reported that the FORMER PATIENTS reported 'better psychological functioning' and 'more easily pass in the desired gender role' so actually the drugs gave worse outcomes for these patients than those that transitioned after puberty and as older patients.

Anyway, that was the line pre 1998.

In all 3 timelines, this could have been stopped in 1998 if they reflected on the situation at that point.

The Biggs deep dive really is worth some time to get your head around. Even when London couldn't replicate the Amsterdam results they just carried on.

Given the London clinic’s failure to find favorable results after puberty suppression, it has no incentive to follow up the 43 subjects who transitioned to cross-sex hormones and potential surgery. It loses track of all its patients after the age of 18, blaming “the frequent change in nominal and legal identity, including NHS number in those referred on to adult services”

OP posts:
RethinkingLife · 20/04/2024 16:33

AlisonDonut · 20/04/2024 12:59

Absolutely.

Any more old studies or papers would be more than welcome. Especially if any study or report prior 2001 that introduces the concept in some way is found.

Is Whittle and Stryker's Reader (2006) too recent to have covered any of the material you're looking for? (No idea if any explore the history of WPATH unfortunately.)

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780203955055/transgender-studies-reader-susan-stryker-stephen-whittle

The Transgender Studies Reader

The Transgender Studies Reader | Susan Stryker, Stephen Whittle | Tayl

Transgender studies is the latest area of academic inquiry to grow out of the exciting nexus of queer theory, feminist studies, and the history of sexuality.

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780203955055/transgender-studies-reader-susan-stryker-stephen-whittle

RethinkingLife · 20/04/2024 16:41

Failing the Stryker and Whittle Reader, does anyone have institutional access to this? (I don't.)

Standards of care: The hormonal and surgical sex reassignment of gender dysphoric persons. Arch Sex Behav14, 79–90 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01541354

The noise to signal would be a deterrent but a glance through the 'Cited by' by scrolling down on this link might give an idea of whether there's any mention of the 1985 Standard of Care.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3977585/

Standards of care: The hormonal and surgical sex reassignment of gender dysphoric persons - Archives of Sexual Behavior

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01541354

AlisonDonut · 20/04/2024 16:44

RethinkingLife · 20/04/2024 16:33

Is Whittle and Stryker's Reader (2006) too recent to have covered any of the material you're looking for? (No idea if any explore the history of WPATH unfortunately.)

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780203955055/transgender-studies-reader-susan-stryker-stephen-whittle

I'll have a look tomorrow. I can't take any more today! It is like swimming backwards through treacle in the snow.

OP posts:
AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 09:36

NotBadConsidering · 18/04/2024 23:57

A regular poster claims to have received puberty blockers via GIDS supervised by Russell Viner in 1997.

Just reading this article by Jo Bartosch where she says that

'It was shortly after Carmichael’s appointment in 2011 that GIDS began its first trial of puberty blockers. Before the research had even concluded, these drugs, which have also been used to chemically castrate sex offenders, were made more widely available to children. In 2014, the minimum prescription age was dropped from 16 to 11. Some private clinics even started prescribing them to children as young as nine.'

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/04/21/the-long-hard-road-to-cass/

The embedded link leads to Janice Turner's article states this.

https://segm.org/GIDS-puberty-blockers-minors-the-times-special-report

Susie Green had to go to Boston USA not Lincolnshire to get them for her son, so I am little bit amazed that someone claims to have had them via GIDS in 1997 which would have been cited as a success somewhere in some report?

OP posts:
Ofcourseshecan · 21/04/2024 10:06

Thank you, OP and all who have added other valuable information. Also thank you Mumsnet for providing this space where important facts can be dug out and brought into the light.

It’s what journalists should be doing — exposing harms that the perpetrators want to keep hidden. And thank god some news sources are now doing this. But so much is still covered up.

Threads like this are valuable in bringing scattered bits of evidence together, where they often throw light on each other. Patterns and timelines start to become visible. Excellent work, everyone.

AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 10:18

I am genuinely really interested in the real Patient Zero and the rationale they used to give what they knew at the time were really destructive drugs to teenagers.

My current thought is the Patient Zero in the Dutch Protocol was a manufactured Patient Zero chosen to justify the drugs they had been using on people and by that time they were already in regular use. And they switched the 'satisfaction' surveys as a way of manufacturing the 'evidence base'.

Talking of Patient FG, the Biggs deep dive states 'It later transpired that FG was sexually attracted to women. FG’s father, an Italian with traditional views on gender, disapproved of his daughter’s masculinity, and serious conflict ensued'

Is there or was there ever any reason for these drugs for females, other than Gay Conversion Therapy, from day 1? And for males, for them to pass?

OP posts:
JanesLittleGirl · 21/04/2024 12:06

@AlisonDonut I am also quite doubtful about who the actual Patient Zero is.

From
The Tavistock’s Experiment with Puberty Blockers
Michael Biggs
Department of Sociology and St Cross College, University of Oxford
(version 1.0.1, 29 July 2019):

In 1994 a 16-year-old girl who wished to be a boy, known to us as B, entered the Amsterdam Gender Clinic. She was unique for having her sexual development halted at the age of 13, after an adventurous paediatric endocrinologist gave her a Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone agonist (GnRHa).

So Biggs' Patient Zero wasn't treated with GnRHa until 1991.

AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 12:27

So B was given them in 1991, with no rationale and only after 3 years did she enter the Gender Clinics, so the puberty blocker might have CAUSED the gender issues.

Interesting. I wonder who that 'adventurous' person was?

OP posts:
AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 12:53

In 1994 a 16-year-old girl who wished to be a boy, known to us as B, entered the Amsterdam Gender Clinic. She was unique for having her sexual development halted at the age of 13, after an adventurous paediatric endocrinologist gave her a Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone agonist (GnRHa). Originally developed to treat prostate cancer, these drugs are also used to delay puberty when it develops abnormally early: in girls younger than 8, and boys younger than 9. The endocrinologist’s innovation was to use the drug to stop normal puberty altogether, in order to prevent the development of unwanted secondary sexual
characteristics—with the aim of administering cross-sex hormones in later adolescence.
Dutch clinicians used B’s case to create a new protocol for transgendering children, which enabled physical intervention at an age far below the normal age of consent (Cohen-Kettenis and Goozen 1998).

The particular drug used in Britain, as in the Netherlands, is triptorelin, which is licensed to treat advanced prostate cancer and sexual deviance in men; endometriosis and uterine fibroids in women (for no longer than six months); and precocious puberty in children (Electronic Medicines Compendium 2019). Using GnRHa to treat gender dysphoria is “a momentous step in the dark”, for it is “presumptuous to extrapolate observations from an intervention that suppresses pathologically premature puberty to one that suppresses normal puberty” (Richards et al. 2018).

Yes, even in that report nothing more than passing is the rationale.

Thank you @JanesLittleGirl that is a bloody marvellous paper.

OP posts:
AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 13:31

They knew it was bad, they hid results, they cherry picked other results, they were declined the study at one ethics committee and then they got it approved at age 12 and above at a different ethics committee and then proceeded to ignore the age 12 limit and go lower. They didn't tell the patients or their families the risks and didn't measure the risks. They also only asked patients to complete surveys to age 16 so they planned not to track them from the start.

There is not one shred of evidence from what I can see that any of this ever helped anyone and they deliberately didn't ask.

This is all mind blowing, even though I've been following it for years.

OP posts:
Zebracat · 21/04/2024 15:05

@AlisonDonut thank youso much for putting this together. It is frightening. I had just assumed that paediatric care was evidence based.

AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 16:49

No. These have never been approved for use to treat 'gender dysphoria' as far as I can see. They have been used off label for over 30 years it would seem.

OP posts:
RethinkingLife · 21/04/2024 17:01

Zebracat · 21/04/2024 15:05

@AlisonDonut thank youso much for putting this together. It is frightening. I had just assumed that paediatric care was evidence based.

I quoted this elsewhere about the previously common but now utterly remarkable belief that babies didn't need anaesthesia because they didn't feel pain.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5057880-how-long-will-it-take-before-we-see-this-type-of-reporting-in-relation-to-puberty-blockers?reply=134650203

For a surprising amount of time, belief in common narratives about 'blameworthy lifestyles' also prevented clinicians from recognising HIV+ status in newborns, infants, and children:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5057880-how-long-will-it-take-before-we-see-this-type-of-reporting-in-relation-to-puberty-blockers?reply=134650935

Sometimes, people can't see the evidence for their own previously unexamined assumptions.
https://www.newsweek.com/when-doctors-start-using-anesthesia-babies-medics-thought-they-couldnt-feel-pain-1625350

Newborn Baby

Doctors Started Anesthetizing Babies More Recently Than You Might Think

Until relatively recently most children as old as 15 months would not be given pain relief during surgery in hospitals across the U.S.

https://www.newsweek.com/when-doctors-start-using-anesthesia-babies-medics-thought-they-couldnt-feel-pain-1625350

AlisonDonut · 21/04/2024 18:27

It is all so heartbreaking.

OP posts:
AlisonDonut · 03/05/2024 09:53

Just coming back to this, after looking at the latest Gender GP situation.

In the Webberley versus GMC 2023 judgement regarding Webberley not informing a child of the fertility risks prior to prescribing puberty blockers.

Case No: CO/2811/2022

124.
The risks to Patient C’s fertility did not flow from the puberty blockers: their effects were fully reversible. They flowed from the gender-affirming hormone treatment, informed consent for which would require a separate exercise at the relevant time...

This was given by Dr Alanna Kierans, a psychologist.

I'd be interested to know how a psychologist would know that 'puberty blockers' are fully reversible.

34.
The GMC relied on evidence from a paediatric endocrinologist, Dr Daniel Klink, a specialist clinical psychologist, Dr Alanna Kierans, and a former GP and clinical lead, Dr John Dean.

35.
Dr Klink’s report dated 19th March 2021 was somewhat brief:
“[Patient C] had the closest thing towards a MDT approach because there was an evaluation of a psychologist. This procedure was rather limited and from the documented communication one can draw the conclusion that the fertility issue was not adequately addressed. Assessment and decision to start treatment was not integrated within a MDT therefore according to guidelines this patient should not started endocrine treatment.”

I find it interesting that in the trial, they asked an endocrinologist about the psychology side, and the psychologist about the endocrine effects.

166.
The Tribunal is fully aware that Patient C was being prescribed GnRHa -regarded as completely reversible -by Dr Webberley. It noted that the Endocrine Society Guideline recommends:
“We recommend that all transsexual individuals be informed and counseled regarding options for fertility prior to initiation of puberty suppression in adolescents and prior to treatment with sex hormones of the desired sex in both adolescents and adults.”

In this instance, the teen WASN'T transsexual and they stopped the blockers in January the next year.

The final line is interesting...
168. There is no corresponding recommendation in respect of GnRHa prescriptions. In these circumstances, the Tribunal does not consider that it is appropriate to find impairment of fitness to practise on public interest grounds alone.

So the one person that knew about Puberty Blockers said that endrocine treatment should not have been started was completely ignored and HW was allowed to carry on, after an appeal which she won.

Whilst this was all going on, in January 2023, Gender GP prescribed cross sex hormones [Testosterone] to a teen who had been sectioned, had annorexia and autism, had parents who had split and who she prescribed a huge dose of male sex hormones to, that put her in a situation that might have killed her.

I think the GMC need to take action immediately and suspend her and have a proper investigation into all her patients and prescribing practices.

OP posts:
Zebracat · 03/05/2024 14:41

I absolutely agree. It’s a disgrace.

AlisonDonut · 08/05/2024 09:10

WPATH SOC5 Consultants:

Dallas Denny MA,
Domineco DiCeglie MD,
Wolf Eicher MD,
Jamison Green,
Richard Green MD,
Louis Gooren MD,
Donald Laub MD,
Anne Lawrence MD,
Walter Meyer III MD, C.
Christine Wheeler Ph.D

In 1995, this article in the Journal [link breaks - on the wayback machine, International Journal of Transgenderism, Volume 2, Number 2, April - June 1998]

Which states that

Broadly, physical interventions fall into three groups which can be thought of as stages:
(a) Interventions which are wholly reversible - these include hypothalamic blockers which result in suppression of oestrogen or testosterone production. They can suppress some aspects of secondary sexual characteristics.
(b) Interventions which are partially reversible - these include hormonal interventions which masculinise or feminise the Sody. Reversal may involve surgical intervention.
(c) Interventions w.hich are irreversible - these are the surgical procedures.

and

A large element of management is promoting the young person's tolerance of uncertainty and resisting pressures for quick solutions.
Surgical intervention cannot be justified until adulthood.

So in 1998 they had already fixed the notion that 'puberty blockers' are wholly reversible.

Still trying to work out which study references that puberty could be restarted or changed to the other puberty after taking these drugs.

Surely if this had been discovered, there would have been a Nobel Prize in the offing?

OP posts:
AlisonDonut · 08/05/2024 09:14

Screenshot of the link that broke.

Puberty Blockers. How exactly did we get here?
OP posts:
Cailin66 · 08/05/2024 10:10

RedToothBrush · 19/04/2024 09:17

I feel like autistic children and children in care are easy targets at this point.

This is exactly what happened in Ireland in the care homes. In the 60's and 70's that we know of. It was generally British Pharmaceutical company like GlaxoSmithKline. Just google Ireland care homes children medical experiments.

Cailin66 · 08/05/2024 10:14

TheDogThatBarked · 19/04/2024 09:25

I'm not an expert about DES but I understand there was also a degree of deliberate concealment of the risks even after they became apparent.

Speaking of deliberate concealment of the risks ...... for the Covid vaccines we weren't allowed to voice a word of objection to that mass public experiment, not even for our children who actually did not need the vaccine. I remember with a work colleague I was offered Pfeizer and she was Astro Zenica, so she cancelled her appoinment in order to get the Pfeizer, you could do that where I worked but you could not say that was the reason, we both new there was issues with the AZ. And in the last week we now see that was true. I had an extremely sore arm for ages, breakthru bleeding and my sibling's arm is still not right years down the line.

Datun · 08/05/2024 10:49

Placemarking.

Unbelievable thread.

ScoldsBridal · 08/05/2024 11:53

I wish I could get hold of a copy of the C4 documentary I watched in 1996. It followed people going to Amsterdam to transition and I remember watching with fascination.

I started a thread about it on here 5 years ago (different username) and it’s got some info about who made it. I never got to watch it again but wonder if anyone else has/can manage to find a copy? It would be fascinating to watch now nearly 30 years later. Watching it from the perspective of being a parent of teenagers navigating this current landscape will certainly be different, and I imagine quite chilling.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3729462-1996-C4-doc-on-transgender-kids-and-puberty-blockers?reply=91167378

1996 C4 doc on transgender kids and puberty blockers | Mumsnet

I remember watching a documentary about gender reassignment treatment in young people in Holland a very long time ago. A young woman was having a phal...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3729462-1996-C4-doc-on-transgender-kids-and-puberty-blockers?reply=91167378

hamstersarse · 08/05/2024 12:25

This is all very interesting and horrifying at the same time. For me when I think about how we got here, there are a few things that really spring out for me.

Firstly, the climate in which this happened. We had been experimenting with synthetic hormones for a few decades by the time the Dutch protocol came about via the pill and HRT. I personally think even these treatments have outcomes that haven't really been discussed /examined in any great detail, especially the pill. I have seen recent research showing that the pill really does change female behaviours (how attracted they are to males, fertility etc) and does have some health impacts, despite it being marketed as essentially risk free. But this climate where synthetic hormones were completely normalised paved the way for this type of treatment.

Secondly, just the general climate of 'goodness' and the old chestnut of virtue signaling / narcissism that has increased over the previous decade (maybe social media, lack of community, who knows) but the trailblazers for this treatment (such as Susie from Mermaids) are without doubt narcissists looking for public praise for their virtue. Just the current climate in general enables these narcissists to operate via social media and under the guise of progressive politics and 'yay we are super progressive people helping a minority be their authentic selves'

Finally, for me the other vital thing in the climate is the absolute blind trust in the medical establishment, used to be known as white coat syndrome, but seems to be at an extraordinary level right now. There is total blind trust in 'science' yet dig into any topic you choose, not just this one, and you will find a science that has sadly been corrupted by money and power dynamics - research and the way in which research is funded and conducted is generally pretty horrifying, yet Science has the best marketing campaign of all time. Again, this climate of blind trust in medicine has propelled puberty blockers forward to the state we are in now.

It's all rather depressing.