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

Research suggests that children whose dysphoria does persist tend to have stronger, more consistent feelings of mismatch, described in ways that clearly differentiate them from those whose feelings shift over time.

How on earth do you decide who these children are when they are 10? If the differences are so clear, why were so many children put on puberty blockers without competent assessment? From the Cass report, there is no research, and it ISN'T possible to identify which children will have persistent dysphoria.

Like I mentioned, these children are Gillick competent and absolutely should be told their distress might resolve.

How can a child both suffer from a mental illness and be Gillick competent? Or is it not acknowledge that this is a mental illness, and if not why not?

And again, what is the rush?

Gillick competence is not relevant to this trial as the parents/guardians are consenting - not the children.

I don't claim to have all the answers @ArabellaSaurus but like I say a well designed trial would have a substantial pre puberty blockers trial of psychological therapy and psychiatric assessment. It's standard to refuse those with concurrent conditions from trials.

There are various surveys etc. that are already used in psychiatric studies to assess absolute and changes over time across multiple dimensions in mental health including self-reported, parents and teachers. Obviously physical health would also be monitored.

I also agree that existing data should be extracted first by legislation if needed from clinics.

A lot of the GC right wing politicians use sound bites around trans issues, the same they use to deny or minimise genuine conditions like autism or the worsening mental health of our youth generally - a ticking time bomb.

Anyone speaking with certainty right now about what's best is in my view an ideologue. We don't really know.

"Like I mentioned, these children are Gillick competent "

No 10 year old is Gillick competent and able to give informed consent that they wish to be sterilised. That they consent to their brain function being impaired. That it's fine for their bone density to be compromised, that they consent to be inorgasmic as an adult.

Nor is any 11 year old, 12 year and so on. In fact I'd question whether anyone under the age of 21 could give informed consent to such potential catastrophic outcomes.

We're allowing these children's safety and future lives to be sacrificed because researchers want some data that nobody could be bothered to collect in previous years and dubious transactivist organisations have such a hold on the NHS and politicians that their demands for children to be harmed and sterilised to serve adult ends is considered way more important than safeguarding these children.

Anyone speaking with certainty right now about what's best is in my view an ideologue. We don't really know.

But it does not follow that because we lack knowledge that any trial must be beneficial. Logically, this trial is proposing that keeping children in a permanent pre-pubertal state is a cure for mental distress. There is no demonstration of understanding of the cause of the distress, or what it means to prevent someone from reaching sexual maturity.

Gillick competence won't be a consideration for these children as parental consent is necessary before they can be enrolled onto the trial.

BTW a mental illness doesn't mean that you can't have competence to consent to medical treatment.

We do have 'treatment' for it. And it has an 85% success rate.

And that treatment is puberty.

It's absolutely nonsensical that you would hand out dangerous drugs to 100% of a cohort, knowing that it not only has serious side-effects, but that almost all of them will then automatically be put on a pathway to severely damaging their future selves, and becoming a lifelong medical patient, but it could only ever help 15% of them.

And maybe not even then. it's a complete lottery.

The desire to have a trial to find out whether or not puberty blockers are detrimental is insane.

They are taken across the world.. Test the bloody people who are already taking them.

It's also unclear how many adults who identify as trans would really want to give up their active sex lives or ability to have children, even if they are part of the 15% who never accept their sex.

The treatment is puberty. Yes exactly.

Not to mention: if the whole group are given these drugs and 15% have life long damage, is that better or worse than 15% finding that they benefitted?

After all, those 15% who might have benefitted still have the rest of their lives to do whatever they wish to their healthy bodies with drugs and surgery. The percentage of kids with lifelong damage are done. There's nothing else they can do, it's game over. The damage can never be resolved.

Which is least harmful?

But it will still happen. Without morals or ethics or logic or anything else, nothing and no one matters beneath the wheels of the juggernaut.

But again, first principles here - what is the purpose of blocking puberty?

The stated aim is to block puberty, because these children have distress at their bodies.

But they cannot be held in a pre pubertal state forever.

Blocking puberty will not remove a penis.
Blocking puberty will not magically grow a penis.
Blocking puberty will not change the chromosomal sex of a child.

So why block it at all?

I'm not a right wing politician, btw, and I'm not using soundbites, I've quoted extensively from the study literature, with links. These seem like simple, straightforward questions that are pretty fundamental to the whole existence of the study.

I think we’re getting very near the actual tipping point with the general public on genderism, and this unwise experiment might just flip it.

Blocking puberty, in theory at least, makes it easier for a person to 'pass' as a member of the opposite sex in adulthood, if they are then given hormonal medication or cosmetic surgical procedures. It won't make them the opposite sex, but it will prevent the development of characteristics that are harder to erase.

It's quite sickening, because the main reason for the use of these powerful drugs seems to be to make the work of unscrupulous surgeons easier. It appears to have no value as a treatment for children and young people who are distressed about their sex or who wish they were the opposite sex. It doesn't alleviate their symptoms.

Any psychological or other relief appears to come from the knowledge that they have taken the first step onto the conveyer belt that will turn them into someone who may (or may not) pass as a member of the opposite sex.

Blocking puberty, in theory at least, makes it easier for a person to 'pass' as a member of the opposite sex in adulthood, if they are then given hormonal medication or cosmetic surgical procedures. It won't make them the opposite sex, but it will prevent the development of characteristics that are harder to erase.

This only applies to boys. The majority of trans identifying children are now girls. There has never been any 'benefit' like this for girls.

The condition being treated, apparently, is gender incongruence.

From AI

Gender incongruence is the experience of a mismatch between one's gender identity and the sex assigned at birth, while gender dysphoria is the clinically significant distress or unease that can result from this incongruence.

Gender refers to
socially constructed roles, behaviors, and identities associated with being male or female, but it is distinct from biological sex. Gender identity is a person's internal sense of self

Oh come ON. This doesn't make any sense, at all. Gender is socially constructed roles, and your gender identity is whether or not you feel they align with your sex?

This trial is trying to find evidence in order to treat children who object to society imposed roles, and wish they had the roles of the opposite sex. And they don't even have to be distressed by it, according to their wording.

By making them a lifelong medical patient, never being able to form adult relationships, and not, under any circumstances, actually being the opposite sex.

It really is little wonder why feminists were the first people to spot this crap from the outset.

These kids need feminism, not drugs to stop them growing up.

I sincerely hope that any legal objection will, at the very least, bring the conversation out of the shadows.

In all this, we still never really bloody well hear exactly why these children want to be the opposite sex. It's the one question that keeps being deflected, buried, hidden.

Anyone speaking with certainty right now about what's best is in my view an ideologue. We don't really know.

We do know. We know that people can't change sex. We know about all the negative effects of taking these drugs - evidence not just from trans identifying children, but from those who have taken them for precocious puberty, and adults of both sexes who have taken them for hormone-dependent conditions.

Children can't have a full understanding of all the effects of taking these drugs. They can't understand what it's like to be an adult who has had their sexual function impaired and been sterilised.

Where is the uncertainty?

In all this, we still never really bloody well hear exactly why these children want to be the opposite sex. It's the one question that keeps being deflected, buried, hidden.

Yes. Let's have an answer to this before we poison any more children.

But it doesn't. See Marci Bowers complaining that Jazz Jennings' penis was too small to carry out the vaginoplasty, because Jennings had his puberty blocked.

This only applies to boys. The majority of trans identifying children are now girls. There has never been any 'benefit' like this for girls.

Exactly.

Its as if they are using one group of the trans umbrella- middle aged male transitioners who claim to have always known and want extensive surgery, and applied the 'passing limitations' to everyone else under the umbrella.

There will boys who aren't trans at all, or who are transvestites or maybe dont want any surgery or to pass.

The girls, if under the trans umbrella may be nonbinary or would be happy with the effects of T when they are adults.

Its as if the clinics and politicians dont know about the expanded umbrella.

https://marcibowers.com/transfem/dear-colleagues-clients-and-friends/

'My concerns regarding puberty blockade and its negative impact upon later genital surgery remain and are not allayed by new techniques of vaginoplasty including peritoneal pull through. Complications and challenges for these patients are without a doubt, increased.'

...'as President-elect, I now speak for WPATH'

But in describing puberty as being 'difficult' because it causes the body to start to change 'In ways that don’t match how they feel inside", the Pathways trial suggests that it is possible to change participants' bodies so that they do match how you feel on the inside'.

The NHS seems to have got cold feet over WPATH since the publication of SoC v8, the one with the Eunuchs chapter and links to child sex abuse material on the Eunuch Archive. They have explicitly said that they don't base their care on WPATH's SoC anymore. So what the fuck are they basing it on?

Are we now in the horrifying position that the NHS is going to disregard WPATH's cautions about puberty blockade and go beyond it, even as it does a handbrake turn over the alarming subject of 'novel gender identities'?!

More than that, it's as if they don't understand what is meant by 'sex' or 'puberty'.

You're right. There isn't even a 'benefit' for boys. They may not end up with a deep voice and facial hair, but the genital surgery will be more complex or even impossible. There was the same problem with Susie Green's son (remember that disgusting video of her laughing about the size of his penis?).

What exactly are the benefits for children of taking puberty blockers supposed to be? There are none for girls and they seem to be a bit mixed for boys. What's wrong with letting them grow up and decide when they're adults with an adult capability of making decisions?

https://x.com/murnettie/status/1992907793246896535?s=46&t=tGndANTCcSFoV6PaqNg6qA

“@wesstreeting @Keir_Starmer @10DowningStreet

CALLING ☎️ Simple question you still refuse to answer:

Why have you not issued an open, public call for former Tavistock GIDS patients, many now adults in their 20s and 30s, some 15–20 years post treatment to come forward and take part in a proper long-term health survey?

You do NOT need to recruit new children. The cohort already exists. Thousands of them are out there, living with the consequences.

All it would take is one tweet from the Department of Health or NHS England with a SurveyMonkey (or Typeform/Google Form) link asking six straightforward questions:

1. Are you a former Tavistock GIDS patient (any age)?
2. Year you were discharged?
3. Would you be willing to have a DEXA bone-density scan if offered free by the NHS?
4. Would you accept comprehensive bloodwork (hormones, lipids, liver, kidneys, prolactin, etc.)?
5. Would you consent to those results (anonymised) being used for research?
6. Any ongoing health issues you believe are linked to the treatment you received?

That’s it.

Within weeks you’d have the best long-term data in the world on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in adolescents data you claim “doesn’t exist”.

They haven’t vanished. They’re on Twitter, in detransitioner groups, in quiet despair, or still transitioned and happy living their best life. All of them have bodies that are walking evidence.

If the outcomes are as wonderful as you were told for years, this survey will prove it.
If they’re not… well, that’s obviously why you’re terrified to ask.

If the Government won’t do the bare minimum, will any proper journalist or media outlet step up and run the survey themselves? One viral tweet with a link is literally all it takes. These people are not hard to find. They are desperate to be heard.

Who’s willing to give them that voice?@GBNEWS @SkyNews @hannahsbee @nickwallis

#Tavistock #GIDS #CassReview #Detrans”

What exactly are the benefits for children of taking puberty blockers supposed to be?

Its not even giving them time to think because they cant have surgery or cross sex hormones until they are adults. Regardless of PB, they have to wait the same amount of time.

I suppose PB with therapy could allow them time to get used to their maturing body. But is any family willing to put their child through PB not socially transitioning their child?