Trump team to stop family-planning funding as it reviews whether it’s being used for DEI programs

[IwantToRetire]

The Trump administration is planning to freeze tens of millions of dollars in federal grants to organizations providing family planning and other reproductive health services, as it reviews whether the funds violate the president’s order to cease all government-backed diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work.

A Health and Human Services spokesperson told The Wall Street Journal, which reported on the plan, that the department was reviewing grants to make sure they complied with the crackdown on DEI.

The freeze to the Title X program could impact as much as $120 million worth of grants to a network of roughly 4,000 clinics providing free and discounted pregnancy testing, contraception, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and treatment, and evaluations and testing for infertility.

Planned Parenthood, whose affiliates could lose roughly $20 million if the paused grants are ultimately cut, reacted with alarm.

“The Trump-Vance-Musk administration wants to shut down Planned Parenthood health centers by any means necessary, and they’ll end people’s access to birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, and more to do it,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America CEO Alex McGill Johnson told the newspaper.

https://www.aol.co.uk/trump-team-stop-family-planning-211853228.html

Because she tells the truth about something she pioneered? You simply refuse to believe the TRUTH, even from the specialists and experts themselves. Because what matters more to you is clinging to the dogma and ideology, not trusting the science and the medical experts.

Since when has it been in dispute that puberty blockers have a negative impact on fertility?

Even Gender GP advises that blocking puberty may negatively impact fertility. Marci Bowers has discussed the lack of fertility due to blocking puberty.

https://www.gendergp.com/help-centre/fertility-considerations-for-trans-people/

When the WPATH files also show that fertility is an issue known and discussed by clinicians.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56a45d683b0be33df885def6/t/6602fa875978a01601858171/1711471262073/WPATH+Report+and+Files111.pdf

Periods aren’t the engine of female fertility.

Besides, once testosterone is ceased (plus any cross-sex hormones) menstruation commonly recommences.

As I said earlier, the production of sperm is more complicated. However, it isn’t impossible nor unknown.

Ah. “This is what TRAs do so it’s okay to do it to you, in case you are one. Soz if you aren’t and we just called you a peadophile! Here’s some helpful links for you!”

Like I said - disingenuity, lack of evidence and wishful thinking.

This is about cross sex hormones. Are you actually aware of what puberty blockers are? They aren’t oestradiol. They block sex hormones. Try again.

Are we also now required to support the irreversible nature of puberty blockers on female bone density too?

Here are some links and i probably have others.

Bone Health in the Transgender Population
Published online 2019 Jul 2.

Micol S. Rothman and Sean J. Iwamoto

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6709704/

This

Also unknown are the long-term effects of puberty blockade, the effect of changes in body composition and the optimal type, timing, dosage, and route of administration of GAHT for bone outcomes.

Conclusion
The results of the studies that reported impact on the critical outcomes of gender dysphoria and mental health (depression, anger and anxiety), and the important outcomes of body image and psychosocial impact (global and psychosocial functioning), in children and adolescents with gender dysphoria are of very low certainty using modified GRADE. They suggest little change with GnRH analogues from baseline to follow-up.

And

GnRH analogues are frequently employed to provide puberty blockade in adolescents with gender incongruence or gender dysphoria. From their use in other medical conditions such as prostate cancer, their deleterious effects on the bone are well known, although these have the potential to be reversible if treatments are stopped or add back therapies can be given

And

However, Z-scores in the trans boys also showed an expected drop during GnRHa treatment. Similarly, they did not fully make up their bone loss as Z-scores at age 22 were still lower than baseline

Meaning, the authors acknowledge little is known about the lasting effects of puberty blockers. In this study, they propose some positive effect from cross sex hormones for females but ths results show that it doesn’t really make up the loss from puberty blockers.

PLUS

Just adding this piece about bone density for young transitioners here:

https://segm.org/the_effect_of_puberty_blockers_on_the_accrual_of_bone_mass

1st May 2021

Dr Michael Biggs (an advisor to SEGM) has been calling for the release of data from the Tavistock’s experiment since 2019. A subset of the data were finally released following the judicial review into puberty suppression at the Tavistock clinic. Biggs’ reanalysis has just been published in the Journal of Paediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism. It finds that after two years on GnRHa, the Z-scores for a significant minority of the children had declined to a level that should trigger clinical concern.p

That's an absurd misrepresentation.

Making stuff up and putting it in inverted commas is not making a convincing argument.

Here is the French puberty blocker review team stating that fertility and bone density are negative impacts (as mentioned in that article about Dr Susan Bradley).

France - declares there is not enough evidence. The latest from National Academy of Medicine, France. They have issued a press release about treatment for gender disphoria in children and adolescents.

SEGM have translated it, but also linked up the original version.

segm.org/France-cautions-regarding-puberty-blockers-and-cross-sex-hormones-for-youth

Extract

Transgender identity is a feeling of identifying as a gender different from that assigned at birth, which is persistent and lasts more than 6 months. This experience can cause significant and prolonged distress, which can contribute to an increased risk of suicide [a].

No genetic predisposition has been found.

While this condition has been long recognized, a sharp increase in demand for medical interventions has been observed (1,2) first in North America, then in Northern Europe, and, more recently, in France, particularly among children and adolescents. A recent study of a number of high schools in Pittsburgh revealed a prevalence that is clearly higher than previously estimated in the United States (3): 10% of students declared themselves to be transgender or non-binary or were unsure of their gender [b]. In 2003, the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne diagnosed only one child with gender dysphoria, whereas today it treats nearly 200.

Whatever the mechanisms involved in adolescents - excessive engagement with social media, greater social acceptability, or influence by those in one’s social circle - this epidemic-like phenomenon manifests itself in the emergence of cases or even clusters of cases in the adolescents’ immediate surroundings (4). This primarily social problem is due, in part, to the questioning of an overly dichotomous view of gender identity by some young people.

The demand for medical interventions, due to the distress that this condition (which is not a mental illness per se) causes, leads to a growing supply of care in the form of consultations or care in specialized clinics. This involves many pediatric subspecialties. The psychiatric consultations are utilized first, and if the identity is authentic and the discomfort persists, endocrinology, gynecology and, ultimately, surgery become involved.

However, great medical caution must be taken in children and adolescents, given the vulnerability, particularly psychological, of this population and the many undesirable effects and even serious complications that can be caused by some of the therapies available. In this regard, it is important to recall the recent decision (May 2021) of the Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm to prohibit the use of puberty blockers.

If France allows the use of puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones with parental authorization and no age limitations, the greatest caution is needed in their use, taking into account the side-effects such as the impact on growth, bone weakening, risk of sterility, emotional and intellectual consequences and, for girls, menopause-like symptoms.

And I didn’t call you a paedophile @MessinaBloomso please stop lying about my comment. I made a general comment about language used to obfuscate harm to children. Which it is. I meant puberty blockers in my comment, which causes harm to children. You dispute this harm apparently, but you’re seemingly not even aware of the difference between those drugs and cross sex hormones, so not really any authority on the matter.

I have more links if anyone needs further evidence that puberty blockers are known (and have been extensively discussed on this board) to have negative impacts on fertility and other irreversible negative side effects.

I find it remarkable that we are at a stage of still having these discussions.

Who has called you a paedophile?

Professor Robert Winston (Lord Winston) of Imperial College London has expressed concern about medically transitioning young people without having ‘really defined what is really wrong: what is the cause for people seeking gender reassignment? Until we define the problem, I think we're going to have a very blunderbuss problem’. Professor Winston also highlights how often medical transition may not meet the expectations of patients:

‘He said 40 per cent of people who undergo vaginal reconstruction surgery experience complications as a result, and many need further surgery, and 23 per cent of people who have their breasts removed “feel uncomfortable with what they've done”. He added: “What I've been seeing in a fertility clinic are the long-term results of often very unhappy people who now feel quite badly damaged. “One has to consider when you're doing any kind of medicine where you're trying to do good not harm, and looking at the long-term effects of what you might be doing, and for me that is really a very important warning sign.” He added that the long-term effects of taking hormones “are likely to affect reproductive function”.’

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin/article/freedom-to-think-the-need-for-thorough-assessment-and-treatment-of-gender-dysphoric-children/F4B7F5CAFC0D0BE9FF3C7886BA6E904B

There has been fertility specialists from other countries who have said they are seeing increases in women who have also undergone hormone treatment for gender identity.

Is this the comment under question? I ask, because Mrs O was being threatened with reporting because she posted this quote.

"I consider the distaste for the word “children” referencing minor human beings entering adolescence, as obfuscation which enables and conceals potentially harmful practices most people would naturally have a negative view on. As indeed they do"?

This does indeed seem to be discussing the perpetuation of harmful practices (and I understood this to mean puberty blockers).

And I agree. Using obfuscating language about children, ie up to the age of 18 years old, to be incredibly harmful. Children are those up to the age of 18.

That poster has decided we are a hive mind and if one person makes a comment implying that people who use the same type of obfuscating language are doing it to prey on children, as someone did and was deleted, everyone here objecting to the obfuscating language is doing it on those same grounds, for everyone who uses it.

She called us “you people” in response to that comment as you can see if you read back, and I challenged. She’s quite happy to smear us all, and as a side benefit, whether or not that’s the intention, it distracts from her poor and incoherent argument.

Thank you for this correct interpretation @Helleofabore

I consider the distaste for the word “children” referencing minor human beings entering adolescence etc

i can see why that poster was upset if they thought it was actually aimed at them, but i had personal experience of the NHS considering my 16 year old to be an adult and able to make choices without his parents

luckily due to an incident at an nhs optometrist a few months before ds1 said we could stay and thank fuck we did!

the very minor operation of a little cut nearly turned into taking the whole thing off because he didn’t understand what one of the words the consultants used was….the consultant was walking out the door when dh and I made him come back

and I know that eresh was also referencing other greater harms but even small things can make a massive difference

eresh and others who quoted her were not aiming that particular fact at a particular poster…but a fact it remains

(but thats what it will turn into on other FWR threads 😒)

In light of the clinicians raising alarms about fertility, this is a remarkable claim. And it seems to also ignore that we know that there are cases where female patients are having to have their ovaries removed due to atrophy caused by testosterone treatments.

Also, we also know from detransitioners reporting their still very high testosterone levels even five years after they stopped taking those drugs that testosterone can remain in the body far longer suggested. Causing continued damage long after the last dose.

I see. Thank you. I have read back and I have found this thread very confusing and contrary.

But this is a study of men who went through a male puberty and then took cross sex hormones. Not someone who was puberty blocked first

A male child who is blocked at tanner stage 2 (about 12 years for boys) and then placed on cross sex hormones will NEVER make sperm or have an orgasm. They will have been chemically castrated.

As for girls - no one really knows? There’s been discussion around removing the immature ovarian tissue prior to blockers and testosterone but it’s unknown whether those undeveloped eggs can be coaxed in a lab into maturity.

Nine adult men went on oestrogen then came off oestrogen after a while and got their sperm production back. Somehow this is evidence that puberty blockers given to children aren’t rendered sterile or infertile. Wild eh?

This is one of the problems with organisations like PP with a link posted earlier in the thread. Gender zealots absolutely refuse to be honest about what they do and the implications of that, so they hide it behind “other services” and claim “no harm is being done”. Deep down they know they’re harming children, but they believe it’s worth it if the child gets what they want for their nebulous “innate gender identity”.

This study states very clearly that the male people were over 18 years old. However, as an academic, can you please explain the relevance of this study?

Just plopping a link down with no explanation of the relevance, or pointing out the relevant sections doesn't strengthen your argument.

This article seems to be irrelevant to the discussion, but since you are an academic, perhaps you are seeing something in this article that I don't. Could you please clarify why this article is relevant.

@NotBadConsideringIve given the benefit of the doubt that pp may not actually understand what is meant by the term “puberty blockers”. Hopefully they’ll read up before making any more uninformed comments.