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

Yep. Public distancing won't absolve him.

And in fact stating his discomfort now but failing to do anything will arguably make it worse down the line.

He knows its wrong, he's just said as much and won't be able to claim he didnt know.

Failing to act now will be a gross derelicion of duty.

He is ultimately responsible for what happens, here.

Streeting could come ou of this as a person of good conscience who actually really helped to save children’s and young adults futures.

He is right to be cautious. Right that politicians should be led by evidence and not interfere politically in medical questions.
Right to just listen open-mindedly to the evidence. The TRAs have only got manipulation and intimidation to bring, they can’t continue trading off of suppressed research opportunities and missed opportunities for information gathering if they are not allowed to.

Once more of the already- existing information is gathered and analysed nobody seeing it will support sacrificing more kids’ futures to adult validation any more. It’s all going one way. Streeting just needs to make it clear a clinical trial is precipitate and then make money and make a safe research and NHS climate for the existing evidence to be gathered. That is being respectful of trans people’s lives and it will take years.

He may also need to have pointed out the less visible issues - like who has benefited over the past two decades from scaring researchers away from this very under-researched area. Streeting must take advice on how to weight the Ilobbying he will be getting from motivated adults. He needs to realise that the hugely significant unknowns plus the very significant known harms taken together means a lot more in the balance than highly motivated and unevidenced claims of benefits do.

In total meaning that this trial can’t go ahead unless and until follow up has actually happened and the NHS data systems are rebuilt to seamlessly follow the records of kids given powerful life altering drugs and their adult care. For decades. And to ensure that they can be recontacted to request voluntary further evidence from them (which they are free to refuse to give of course). Only then are their experiences not wasted because their voices at different points in their lives will be made plain.

One of the issues is that activists are wedged at the top of the NHS in well paid influential positions. Like Michael Brady & Clive Kay? Until they're removed from being able to influence child medicine by imposing transactivist beliefs about transitioning children, little will change I fear:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4745330-daily-mail-exclusive-treat-all-patients-as-gender-neutral-nhs-doctors-told-health-secretarys-anger-at-taxpayer-funded-guide-that-tells-medics-not-to-use-pronouns-until-patient-has-confirmed-them

I have emailed Wes at the DHSC

Dear Mr Streeting

I write to express my concerns about the proposed Pathways trial involving the administration of puberty blockers to children. I am surprised that this gained ethical approval given that it consists of live experimentation administering powerful drugs to minors who can have no clear understanding of the possible consequences of the impact of these drugs on their future fertility, sexual function or sexual pleasure.

Cass recommended further research but surely the place to start is with those who have already been given the drugs. I understand that follow up data is incomplete but surely it would be a useful first step.

The trial seems far too short lived to produce proper results. By the end of it the children will still be, well, children, with a child’s perspective on life. How can the long term impacts be gauged? Most of us past the age of about 25 know that our understanding of ourselves, others and the world once we are properly adult is very different from that of our younger selves. We see happiness and unhappiness in a very different light. Indeed, recent research indicates that the period of “adolescence” in the human brain extends far further into our lives than was previously thought. We need time to grow up as fully realised adults. Interfering in this important process is surely very unwise (and I know that you have concerns about it). Moreover, the psychological tools proposed to measure the effects of the medication seem crude and unsuitable for children, to say the least.

We know that in many cases in the past children have been manipulated by parents and professionals into thinking that these treatments will solve their problems. There do not seem to be proper safeguards against this. In many cases at GIDS, according to Hannah Barnes, parents preferred a trans child over a homosexual child. There were even in-jokes about there soon being no gay children left. The professionals involved in the Pathways trial include some who have long worked in this field and are strong proponents of the discredited “affirmation” approach.

I am not generally a Labour supporter, Mr Streeting (I have no particular political affiliation) but I have a personal regard for you as a fair and intelligent person and politician whose motives are to do the best for the country and its people. As a retired teacher who has seen many young people come through a turbulent and unhappy adolescence to become secure, happy and productive adults, and as a mother and grandmother who has seen the devastating effects of the transgender phenomenon at first hand, I implore you to think twice before proceeding with this particular experiment.

Sincerely

This.

and yes, abusive threats and violence from these activists, always look like they have something to hide.

This is nuts, isn't it? Streeting has ordered a clinical trial that he doesn't actually believe in. He's going to piss off both sides. He really needs to come down on one side of the fence or the other, because essentially he's committed himself to doing something he believes is morally wrong because some people told him to.

Keeping the Ethics committee's findings secret seems very significant? Presumably they know that if it was published the game would be up and the influence of transactivism in the NHS would be exposed?

Exactly

That just isn't acceptable in the circumstances

.

https://x.com/i/status/2000214697631494511

Nails it. In a clear and entirely unambiguous manner. Needs to be widely circulated!

Still incredible that the medical establishment is willing to experiment in such a horrific manner resolutely closing its eyes to social contagion and wrong thinking parents. Wes Streeting has lost all credibility with me now. When I was so hopeful that he was a rare politician of some intelligence.

Damn, that's good.

Noted that people are calling this 'The Streeting Trial'.

We know they're not secret: it has been approved.

I think we should very firmly nail his name to it. He needs to know that it will haunt the rest of his career

Yes. To me he already looks like he's wavering.

He will have to weigh the possibility of being named as ultimately responsible for a catastrophic child experiment, against going in opposition to idealogues in government.

I suspect he is trying to persuade people behind the scenes that this may not be the best medical trial in history in order to garner support for shutting it down.

Edited to add that yes, calling it the Streeting Trial will focus him for sure.

he's not an idiot, and he's politically savvy. He won't want to be associated with that forever

Yes. He knows how mad it all is.

He knows how unhinged the supporters are, he has plenty of firsthand experience.

And I have no doubt that he has an eye on five, ten years time, when the lawsuits have started to come in, and how those involved will be viewed.

It's the last gasp, really. There's been time for shocked and stunned empeakenings, and we must be dealing iwth the sickening thuds of realisation.

Last chance to back out now, Wes. It's not a subject you have the luxury of fence sitting on, I'm afraid.

Some interesting comments about Streeting's views in this. Is he wavering?

Farage: Puberty blocker trial is state-sponsored child abuse

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/98c62b646d66b12f

I detest Farage but he’s right on this.

'Mr Farage wrote: “The Pathways trial represents state-sponsored child abuse, dressed up as research, and is wholly incompatible with the NHS duty to safeguard children and do no harm.”'

Labour's biggest threat is bang on the nose here. Easy win for Farage - all he has to do is voice the majority view.

But does Reform's stance make it harder for Labour to back down?

I'm always reminded of the thick of it, when tucker told to the minister to get different experts with the right views.

Streeting could find experts who are against this but still be supportive of 'trans kids'. If he has the power or willingness to do so, of course.

The details of the Ethics committee have NOT been published despite requests. That means they're being kept secret / confidential / hidden from scrutiny.

I can't explain it any more clearly than that

That's the worry as all the useful idiots will just shriek "right wing bigots" instead of engaging with the issues

Its been made political, which has led to Streeting looking like he's being pressured by TRA MP or opposition MPs depending on his decision.