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

Its mystifying why the government/NHS are choosing to press on. The vast majority are against this treatment, for all the obvious reasons.

'This is the aspect of the transgender rights debate on which the public view is most one-sided. When it comes to treatments for under-16s, 75% say puberty blockers should not be allowed, with 78% saying the same of hormone treatments.'

Yougov

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/51545-where-does-the-british-public-stand-on-transgender-rights-in-202425

I am still waiting for a definition of Gender
that is not circular
and would stand up to Naomi Cunningham cross examination

all else falls if Gender is not provable

It's standard to refuse those with concurrent conditions from trials.

Unfortunately those with other issues, conditions, or personal situations make up most of the cohort of 'trans' kids in the first place.

If we could screen out kids who think they might be gay, lesbian or bisexual, have autism or OCD, have parents who are registered sex offenders, have parents who are homophobic, looked after kids, kids who have been sexually abused or raped, kids with attachment issues...I think you will find that there would be barely anyone else for these people to experiment on in the first place.

And 'gender incongruence' is made up, and didn't even exist a few years back. If enough people are 'gender incongruent' then at some point this 'incongruence' tips into being 'gender congruent'.

So how many girls that like football does it take for people who think girls liking football is 'incongruent' with being a girl, for it to actually be totally 'congruent' with being a girl? Bit late to find that number out once they took your breasts off because you like football.

I'm not going to try to add to the many wise posts about competency and harm, as I don't have anything worth adding, so I'm just going to post something that could possibly reach the ears of a politician who only cares about his reputation and future career:

Wes, the tragedies and horrors that will emerge from this trial won't take long to start appearing. And when they do, the general public will be very angry, and will need someone to blame. And as the politician in charge of allowing Mengele level experimentation on children for effectively no hope of any gain whatsoever, at the behest of adults with dubious motivations, it's going to be you who the public blame.

Forget about even the next election- you'll stand no chance of re-election, let alone any hope of being a future prime minister. And in decades to come, the politics, history and medical textbooks will be naming you as the man who allowed this to happen. History will not be kind to you.

https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN69296987

Ethics approval(s)
Approved
17/07/2025, London - City & East Research Ethics Committee (2
Redman Place, Stratford, London, E20 1JQ, United Kingdom; +44
2071048124; [email protected]), ref: 25/LO/0251

https://archive.ph/4ONnU

archive of above link

Good article from Suzanne Moore

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/c79daa5268956e12

That's a great piece. The govt need to grow a spine, but I'm not optimistic.

Ye gods & little fishes. The first member I've spotted is a paralegal with special interests in Modern Slavery & Human rights.
Were I not incandescent with rage I would despair.

Why does it say ‘lower age limit 5 years’?

I've often heard the figure of 85% desisting vs. 15% persisting. Is that a rule of thumb from before the big rise in referrals of kids to gender clinics in the 2010s?

Alas I come back and see the usual extreme comparing any trans medical intervention to anorexia.

As someone who has partly recovered from anorexia that's pretty offensive.

Surely anyone with half a brain - or less - can see that encouraging someone with anorexia to lose weight will never work?

If we could lose some weight and then live we would. That's not how anorexia works. Similar with body dysmorphic disorder which overlaps and is treatable.

Some people do transition to living as the opposite gender (however you describe or call it) and live happy functioning lives. Sure some don't.

No they won't truly be the opposite sex depending on what you mean by it. Some may pass as it.

Apologies for those who gave reasonable comments but it's so draining being a moderate gender critic on here, so I'm off.

Excellent article. She's fuming and scared. And it comes across.

Anorexia and other body dysmorphia conditions are reasonable comparisons.

Yes there are differences: Anorexia is life threatening and to support it may lead to death so you wouldn't. But to treat it you do need truth and honesty,you do not lie, and the aim is to make them comfortable with their body instead of destroying it through starvation.

A better comparison is probabky other extreme body modification through surgery. If someone is seeking to look like a cat, or Barbie, or a vampire, or even just a never ending an obsession with altering their perfectly normal body, is this something that should be supported in children? Even if its causing them distress to not be this thing they want, even if puberty will make it harder? NO.You don't harm healthy developing bodies for an irrational dysphoria.

That should be obvious.

Adults can do crazy extreme things to their bodies. But even then I don't think doctors should support it, it shouldn't be regarded as health care, and it shouldn't be viewed as the answer to a mental health problem.

But with children it should obviously just be seen as insane and evil to consider it.

I'm sorry for what you're dealing with. It must be hard.

Anorexia seems a very pertinent comparison to make, and I'm not sure why you need to reach for ad homs when dismissing those comparisons.

We're discussing dysphoria and conditions related to body perception. Anorexia and BIID seem highly pertinent.

Yes. We're also discussing children - as young as 10. Their co morbidities are very relevant with eating disorders being one of them for come children.

Adults must be able to discuss these issues - it's no debate that got us into this mess.

Absolutely. Some people may well find the issues disturbing - we're talking about sterilising healthy children!

What is 'extreme' about discussing other conditions with relevant issues?

What is 'moderate' about suggesting those things should not be discussed?

If you were arguing in good faith you would acknowledge that we are discussing a process that prevents adults becoming sexually mature.

Yes, we know that some people describe themselves as living in a gender different to their sex. A large proportion (the majority?) Will not have sacrificed their sexual function or ability to have children. Genital surgery is rare. So, again, what is the point of this treatment?

Speaking to the relevance of making comparisons between gender confusion and anorexia, studies have shown that gender confused individuals have brain scans that closely resemble those of anorexics. The hypothesis is that both have to do with some sort of body self imaging problem, possibly along with an extreme need to exert control.

Apologies, don’t have the link to the studies to hand at the moment.

Susan Evans speaking on radio 4 now.

And Nick Robinson was very fair. I didn't think Sue very clear though. Too ramble,toomuch about puberty being about 'developmental tasks' and nothing on ability to consent and known harms.

But the fact that Today invited her is - well - great. Thankyou The Telegraph.

She and her husband Marcus Evans have written an open letter to Wes Streeting. Nick Wallis has put the whole thing on Gender Blog.

ETA link
https://genderblog.net/tavistock-whistleblowers-call-for-immediate-halt-to-puberty-blocker-trial/

I agree. A big step forward by the BBC but too much jargon from SE and talk of "developmental tasks" was confusing.