Why the NHS puberty blocker trial is appalling

[Soontobe60]

Stella O’Malley from Genspect telling it like it is - that a state endorsed trial of puberty blockers for gender dysphoric children should NOT go ahead.
the NHS are not walking into this nightmare blindly - there are enough experts out there telling them what will happen happen to these children if they’re given these life changing drugs.
https://x.com/genspect/status/1989896741358113127?s=61&t=gKvvk-rWmOlYFGMZN8QVvQ

But yeh a 12-year-old is absolutely going to fully understand all of that and the implications for the rest of her life.

I have never seen this point properly addressed.

No amount of hormones or surgery will enable somebody to reach sexual maturity as the opposite sex, so what is the imagined outcome? Adults who never reach sexual maturity?

I mean, I can barely get my head around all the implications and I'm almost 50! I'm reading these posts and thinking, I hadn't thought of that, oh yes there's that too, oh god and that...it's just mind boggling and shocking beyond belief!

So if a parent of a child who wants to take puberty blockers is really against the idea because they are worried about the health of their child, the child will rate them on that ridiculous questionnaire as some kind of bigot. How is this science?

x.com/CanSG_org/status/1992207601187057977

CAN-SG supports safe and meaningful research into gender-related distress in childhood. We believe PATHWAYS Puberty Blocker Trial is neither safe nor will it provide meaningful evidence for children and families. The protocol has not answered any of our concerns about the ethics of this trial. UK law governing research, derived from European law and the Declaration of Helsinki says that research on children should not disrupt their normal stages of development without good reason. There is no good reason for the use of PBs. There is no sound scientific rationale for puberty suppression improving lasting health for children with gender-related distress, and therefore no sound basis for a comparative trial. Other research questions about the causes of gender-related distress, and about non-medical treatment and support, should be addressed prior to subjecting children to the significant risks of puberty suppression. The trial design is incapable of answering the important questions about risk that have been raised – to cognitive function, bone health, fertility and long term health. It is unethical as it will be exposing children to risk for no clear benefit. The research will not study the real-world use of puberty blockers which is as a precursor to cross-sex hormones, with about 95% of children on PBs going on to CSH. This combination brings in additional serious risks that will not be studied in this research, yet will be real risks faced by the children being given PBs. As it will be parents who have to give consent because it is for children under 16 they will have to consent to possible harm to their child’s future fertility. It is difficult to understand how any parent could consent to that.

Hear bloody hear.

Please retweet if you can!

CAN-SG wrote this open letter in March:

https://can-sg.org/can-sg-letter-to-puberty-blocker-trial-researchers-sponsors-and-regulators-about-ethical-concerns/

Their concerns do not seem to have been given any weight.

Obvs ‪children in care will be excluded from this trial. Because it would be immoral if they are not, or perhaps just an easy way to get the numbers for the trial

open.substack.com/pub/juliebindel/p/why-do-so-many-girls-in-blackpool?r=8yvse&utm_medium=ios

I don’t understand the purpose of this study. The plan appears to be to take a child (10 to 15 years old), put them on PBs for 1 or 2 years and then stop the medication for another 2 years and then assess the situation. I can’t see anyone even agreeing to participate because they will have all the negatives of the drugs with none of (what they perceive to be the positives) of permanently blocking their puberty because surely once a 12/13 yo comes off the PBs they will resume a normal(ish) puberty?

I wonder if they sent it to Wes Streeting?
Could people write to their MPs to ask him to read it and comment?

Yes. It’s sickening. There’s no excuse for this experimentation on children. I can’t believe the NHS is going ahead with it. The only adults who want it are the transactivists who want child recruits to validate them.

Even if...
Even if this study had a better design, with long term follow up, that covered both the blockers and the almost inevitable cross sex hormones treatment that follows
Even if we could control the side effects
Even if we could really identify the children for which the dysphoria doesn't resolve with natural growth or psychological support (not sure they exist, but hypothetically...)
Even if we could be sure that they wouldn't be interested in having children
We known that puberty blockers block the normal sexual development - they will never orgasm. We are not only giving away fertility, but also sexual function and, with it, the likelihood of forming stable relationships.

I really loved the Cass review, and how it moved the discussion in the UK and internationally, but the commitment to a trial without a thorough ethical discussion was a terrible mistake.

That questionnaire cannot be for real? No one with a shred of research respect could possibly come up with such an incredibly poorly designed and entirely one sided list of questions. That is one of the worst set of questions I’ve ever seen.

IVF success rates are lower in surrogates. So you have eggs frozen with an abysmal success rate, but actually for these girls the success rate would be even lower than that because they'd have to use a surrogate.

Imagine only finding all this out in your thirties after previously being under the impression that because you had frozen your eggs when you were 12 you'd be able to have a baby despite transition.

The reality check comes when you have to fund numerous rounds of IVF, most the cost of a surrogate and then get told what the real success rate is?

And it’s so blithely dismissed. “I’ll just have a baby through a surrogate or adopt🤷🏻‍♀️” as if these are just simple easy solutions. Clinicians enable this wishful thinking too.

This is one of the knock on effects of surrogacy propaganda, “rainbow families”, sex not being binary etc: a whole cohort of youth who think babies just somehow easily happen when you want them.

Children will be assessed using this Utrecht questionnaire (among several), They are asked how much they agree with the following leading questions:

Pre-pubertal children should not know the answers to some of those questions!
It is uncomfortable to be sexual in my assigned sex.
What does a 12yo say to that?

This is awful. Could a judicial review of the ethics decision be done? Jkr may be interested to find it? It's so so important to stop this.

How exactly will they determine whether or not children understand. Ask them and they say yes? Are you sure? Absolutely certain?

Ok then, off we go.

ffs.

In the study literature there is a list of questionnaires/tools that will be used to assess participants. There are several - most of them familiar and used regularly for psych assessments. I pulled out the two that were specifically related to "gender incongruence' - there is also 'the gender identity question'.

They are quite real.

The entire thing is a glaringly obvious sham - 'gender medecine' is a farce - its absurd. Created by activists, bullshit diagnosis built on tooth fairy science.

There is nothing behind the curtain, except for sunk cost fallacies, and professional reputations, and a lucrative industry peppered with the unsavoury and genuinely insane.

I believe Keira Bell is seeking a judicial review.

They seek consent from the parents/guardian and 'assent' from the child, fwiw.

That questionnaire is entirely unsuitable for children, as well as its many other failings.

Well, it's a questionnaire that is exquisitely honest in its purpose of achieving a predetermined answer (and yet the people who wrote it probably thought they were being ever so clever and reasonable).

I dont think they ever expected to be challenged. I'm absolutely scunnered that the NHS would include something so patently ridiculous and pretend its seeking 'evidence' using such a flimsy piece of propaganda.

I can knock up a few extra questionnaires for them before breakfast.

'Lupron is the best' - on a scale of 1 to 10 how much do you agree?
'I love my glitter family'
'I am living my best life being true to myself and honouring my deepest innermost gendered soul'
'I solemnly swear never to detransition'

They may as well add in the 'Barbie to GI Joe' scale for good measure.