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

She says that if a girl is going to bind her breasts, a nurse should show her how to do that 'safely'.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/fda706f1-ba98-4da1-b06c-19f6f1615440?shareToken=654236143fbfde6390f73c93afbe4e1e
There's also an article which says ;

Ethical concerns about the trial have mounted as it emerged that children taking part would be asked if they wanted to freeze their sperm or eggs.

I don't understand. If these children don't go through puberty will they have any viable eggs or sperms to freeze?

Ah yes. Shame the highly qualified medical professionals didn’t think of this.

(I believe that they can take ovarian tissue, freeze it and hope it produces viable eggs, but I’m not sure, and of course I’m not a medical professional. Sperm? Well, unlikely in my uninformed opinion.)

Even if the girls do have viable eggs pregnancy is pretty unlikely. It's worth listening to Lord Winston's speech in the HoL some time ago where he talks about the reality of the likelihood of a successful pregnancy; it is quite sobering.
That's before we even get to the issues with surrogacy...

Well, no need to worry, cos it's all completely reversible, apparently. 🙄

What is reversible, is politicians principles/beliefs.
So, the likes of Wes Streeting in a few years can say he's changed his mind on all this, or that he never really believed.
But the kids in these trials, as adults irrevocably altered, will have no chance to reverse course.
What's the last really bad outcome a politician had for being wrong, unprincipled, medacious?
Sure, they may lose an election, but they all seem to fail upwards to even better paid work.
Politics is showbiz for untalented egocentrics.

According to Cass TW have been using the ladies loos for years without anyone noticing. As puberty blockers are a relatively new part of dysphoria affirming care, it rather suggests that passing as an older person may not be the big problem it’s made out to be.

Ffs that's an absolute fantasy and it's pure misogyny.

Ms Cass:

a) if there are men 'passing' so well that honestly no one's noticed - actually honestly, we know first hand on FWR how many men believe they 'passed' because women didn't scream or shout 'it's a man', kept their eyes and head down and escaped ASAP. The women knew, the women were afraid, and the last thing you do around a dodgy bloke in an enclosed space is draw his attention or upset him. Who is telling you these blokes pass? It will be the blokes. No one will have asked or considered the women because no one does, it's like they're paint on the walls or something.

b) How madam, would you suggest we work out who passes and who doesn't, and assign permissions that vary? Because if you say yes to the man who passes, you have to say yes to to the bloke who's six foot two with stubble and tattooed arms in a tutu. (Neighbour of mine.) You also have to say yes to Karen White and Barbie Kardashian, who are in there solely to sex offend. There is no way to set a system that says yes to some men and no to others, and have you noticed the past ten years and the GRA experiment and how it has fucked over women?

c) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO WITH THE WOMEN YOU ARE EXCLUDING FROM ALL SPACES AND HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED FOR YEARS WHILE THE GENDER TRAIN FUCKS AROUND? Because let your male mates in the women's space and it STOPS SERVING ALL WOMEN.

We can give the men additional spaces.

We cannot give those women anything because the men immediately demand it for themselves. They are unable to tolerate those women being allowed provision, and ridiculous women rush to go awwwwww bless and fuck over the women to pander to them.

JHC.

Yes, didn't he say something like at the end of the day, the chances of a healthy child from frozen eggs is 6%.

I know it was a gobsmackingly low figure.

I wish, whatever the figure, it's splashed across the front page of the newspaper. Let's bloody have it.

What's really frustrating about this issue is the dearth of information being published.

At the moment, the focus is on how can children understand what freezing eggs is like, what pregnancy and parenthood is like. They also need to add and even if they do freeze their eggs, the chances of a child are X.

Yet again, the entire process of freezing eggs, IVF, and a viable pregnancy is being minimised.

Airily hand waved away.

Apart from anything else, what kind of fucked up thinking says it might be okay to allow men into women's private spaces, as long as the women are kept unaware.

Yes, didn't he say something like at the end of the day, the chances of a healthy child from frozen eggs is 6%.

I presume the success rate for using frozen ovaries with immature eggs would be even lower than that.

I've just asked ChatGPT what he said, and apparently it was 1%!

I know, you might as well ask the dog, but even so.

I was pretty sure it was down around 1-2%, just from memory. Painfully low, at any rate.

She is unconcerned by women's consent.

As is Philipson.

Women just don't really exist for them. It's bloody infuriating and terrifying in equal amounts. They're not equal stakeholders in this, they're not considered even relevant to mention in passing most of the time. Despite their bodies being utterly bloody essential for the men involved.

From the sainted Naomi, in her “peanut-free means peanut-free” blog post:

Think about that for a moment, this idea of a man who is “visually and for all practical purposes indistinguishable” from a woman. Lots of women have suffered male violence, and some of those are permanently traumatised to the point that if they are surprised by a man in a supposedly female-only space, they will be retraumatised. These women may need domestic violence shelters and rape crisis services at certain times, but they don’t engage with the world solely as rape or domestic violence survivors. They have ordinary lives, too. They use public toilets, hospitals, gyms; they visit pubs, galleries, cafés, museums, theatres. They don’t wear a special badge or uniform so that we can identify them and make sure we cater for their needs. We don’t know who they are.

Obviously it’s not acceptable to say to such women “You can’t have any single-sex spaces”. But is it better to say “You can have single-sex spaces, mostly. Don’t worry: we’ll only let men use them if they look so much like women that you won’t be able to tell that they’re men.”

Think about that. Think about its power to undermine the certainty of an already traumatised woman that the woman she is dealing with at any given moment is truly a woman. If you’re not shocked by the sadistic, gas-lighting cruelty of that, you’re not doing the thinking bit right. Think harder. Think about it until you are shocked.

I wanted to make sure I wasn't misremembering so had a dig about.

Lord Winston's speech at 12.50pm here:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-06-29/debates/7487DBB6-577B-4BDD-8ACF-1D5ED362B7DA/details

"Only last week, on BBC radio, a well-known individual who was a senior member of the HFEA said that the success rate of egg freezing is 18%. It is nothing like that. In fact, according to the figures I have just given the House, less than 0.2% of eggs that are subjected to thawing result in a live birth, and only 1.7% of eggs that are fertilised become a baby. Women do not want miscarriages, and if there is any violence that you can talk about, having a miscarriage is certainly one of them. It is really quite shocking that this goes on and that this kind of information is bandied around in this way. It is not acceptable, and it needs to be done much more carefully by the Government, because the Government are responsible for the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. It needs to make certain that the website says what the success rate is. It does not say what the success rate is; it just says it is improving."

As he mentions, he has put in numerous written questions on egg freezing too:

https://members.parliament.uk/member/1770/writtenquestions#expand-1524459

It is unconscionable that we should even be discussing this as an option with children. For a mental health problem, not a life-changing physical disease.

it’s just dystopian. How unforgivably exploitative for anyone to tell children
A) that it’s up to them to decide if they want to be set out a path to obliterating their own sexual and reproductive function. As if this is something a child could ever understand. Kids can’t consent in any informed way, to permanently reject defining adult experiences
and
B) giving them a false promise that they can still have their own genetically related child with a random woman’s assistance to grow and birth the baby. That’s some impressively shitty misogynistic reframing of what is really happening isn’t it. Women assumed to be service humans. What if ‘women’ don’t want to take that risk for other people? why should any woman be expected to? Why should any person be deliberately made reliant on ‘women’ risking their lives to carry and pregnancy for them?
C) and then we get on to the ‘storing’. What’s really being stored? Not sperm or eggs, because pre puberty, kids’ bodies obviously don’t make them. As far as Google can tell me there’s some research but no actual process for making viable sperm or eggs for boys or girls who don’t go through puberty.
So again, asking them to reject their own fertility, while also setting up a false hope for young kids. If they’re this far down a distressed state where gender identity appears to the solution then high quality support from mental health professionals is needed.
Not a potentially pointless and expensive surgical harvesting of their immature reproductive tissue, to be stored for years in hopes that one day, perhaps we will know how to make it viable for their adult selves to use in IVF with a surrogate mother.

D) how do they discuss with kids the path the kids are being put on to go towards the potentially total loss of sexual function and ability to orgasm?

E) .. and ability to conceive and carry a pregnancy?

F) And is the vast financial cost of doing this made clear to the kids, who again can’t consent to any of this because they are not adult wage earners. It won’t be their parents expected to pay either.
So clearly that the taxpayer is intended to be paying the thousands it costs for the whole process of harvesting of this immature and potentially unusable tissue from children on this trial and then.. hoping for the best?
It’s very expensive to keep human tissue stored for possibly decades or a lifetime in freezers. I hope for their sakes that research is funded that might find some way to make good on this promise of making children’s tissue produce viable mature adult eggs or sperm that’s safe enough to use to make a baby. Because the kids already made infertile through ‘transitioning’ deserve that, as well as kids who lose natural fertility through cancer treatment and so on.

But when this loss of fertility is intentionally create then who’s paying for the fertility treatment for IVF with or without donor eggs and sperm and for the surrogate’s time at the end of this? What does that mean for tapyers and what does that mean for women in general? Are women’s wombs going to be prescribed out to others on tne NHS?

I’d be interested to see a government impact assessment on what happens if PBs are trialled, let alone put back on the table as a routine treatment. This looks like an extremely expensive package of interventions with no definite benefit to the child. Nothing is on offer that can equal or replace the natural adult sexual and reproductive capacity that they would have developed, if left alone to go through their natural puberty.

https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2019/fertility-preservation-cancer-young-boys

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/managing-cancer/side-effects/fertility/preserving-fertility-in-children-and-teens-with-cancer.html

My opinion of Hilary Cass is taking a dip. She talks about a turn to the right with Liz Truss. What has politics got to do with science and biological reality.
Quote from the interview;

Most people's instinct is live and let live.
They believe that trans people should be respected and supported.

They recognize the discrimination and difficulty, and they're proud that things have improved in recent years.

Although I'm going to put a qualifier on that.

Where most are happy for children to self-identify, what they were concerned about was young people making changes to their bodies without fully understanding the consequences.

Things did change during the lifetime of the report, and we can't ignore the context.

When Liz Truss came in, there was a very dramatic swing to the right.

The media became more aggressive towards the trans population.

When Briana Guy was killed, we were speaking to, as I say, the support and advocacy groups.

We knew how frightened young trans and gender-questioning people were through that period.

I think the politics of this has had its ebbs and flows, but it's definitely more concerning now.

Where is this interview printed?

Details here on this thread @Shortshriftandlethal

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5464589-leaked-cass-interview?reply=149392070

'Where most are happy for children to self-identify'

Eh? This is not science. This is absolutely taking it for granted that gender identity takes presidence over sex.

Cass is lost to the Woo.

We've got medics in this country seriously suggesting that 10, 12, 14, even 16 year old girls undergo what women having IVF must do:

Take drugs to stimulate hyper ovulation,
Have heavy sedation,
Legs in stirrups,
Needle attached to probe poked through vaginal wall into ovary for egg extraction.

On what planet is this acceptable?

(image to follow in next post)

In an awful way the stats about poor results from thawed human eggs arent relevant to these kids. Because those frozen eggs in the stats are mature eggs taken from adult women who had a natural puberty

No medical process at the moment in existence, can induce the frozen tissue taken from kids’ pre pubertal bodies, to then make usable mature sperm or eggs in the lab that could be used in a fertility clinic.

Sadly for anyone in this position right now the only correct figure to discuss with them is zero, 0%

Egg retrieval in women:
Sorry - image won't post