Here is the More or Less thread from today
https://x.com/bbcmoreorless/status/1782370155613372761?s=46&t=HTxp6zC_d4GZ2FFv4a-YeQ
Did @TheCassReview - the review of NHS gender identity services for under-18s in England - throw out 98% of the available research?
That claim was spreading online before the report was even published.
It is “completely incorrect” says @Hilary_Cass
A More or Less thread.🧵
Cass commissioned @UniOfYork to produce systematic reviews to analyse the available research on puberty blockers and hormone treatment.
adc.bmj.com/content/early/…
adc.bmj.com/content/early/…
Taken together, they looked at 103 scientific papers. They found only two - or around 2% - were high quality. But they also included the moderate research in their conclusions.
3/8
Around 40% - 43 papers - was considered of low quality, and so was not used to form the systematic reviews' conclusions.
4/8
Dr Cass told us she was “angry” that misinformation was spreading about the review.
"Adults who deliberately spread misinformation about this topic are putting young people at risk, and in my view that is unforgivable."
5/8
Cass: "We're certainly not saying that no-one is going to benefit from these treatments, and I myself have spoken to young people who definitely do appear to have benefited."
6/8
Cass: "But what we need to understand is what's happening to the majority of people who've been through these treatments, and we just don't have that data.”
7/8
Cass: "I certainly wouldn't want to embark on a treatment where somebody couldn't tell me with any accuracy what percentage chance there was of it being successful, and what the possibilities were of harms or side effects."
8/8
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0hry4wj