Streeting says puberty blocker trial is ethical

Original poster

Apollo441 · 03/12/2025 17:52

Such a disappointment....

OP posts:

EasternStandard · 03/12/2025 17:56

That’s awful.

PaleBlueMoonlight · 03/12/2025 19:12

He said several times that Cass recommended this trial. My understanding is that is not true, she said that there would need to be a trial to determine whether PBs were effective, but she didn't specify what the trial should be. Is that right?

Toseland · 03/12/2025 19:15

A traitor to all young lesbians and gays. May it haunt him forever.

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 19:27

If he genuinely believes it is ethical to experiment on the brains and bodies of children, so that data can be gathered, he is a dangerous idiot.

It pains me to say it, but if Baroness Cass also believes this is ethical, she is too.

I don't mind if Streeting and Cass believe that everyone has a gender identity. In fact, I found it helpful that Cass clearly does because her report helped by highlighting that even a believer was concerned about the unevidenced "treatments" that had been delivered for many years. I had hoped that perhaps both of them were banking on this trial failing to pass as ethical. That's certainly what I had been expecting.

But these quotes from Streeting suggest he's all for this mass experiment. And if Cass is foolish enough not to spot that this trial is as low quality as the ones she's already reviewed as "weak", both of them are little better than Mengele. I believe he also kept data well when experimenting on children.

StripeySuperNova · 03/12/2025 19:28

Hmmm. I heard him on Radio 4 this morning. He seemed to express some personal doubts about the trial but stressed that he was following the experts - Cass, the researchers, the ethics committee. He seems to be putting his faith in them and he ought to be able to. He would have to be supremely self-confident to go against all those experts in the field.

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 19:29

PaleBlueMoonlight · 03/12/2025 19:12

He said several times that Cass recommended this trial. My understanding is that is not true, she said that there would need to be a trial to determine whether PBs were effective, but she didn't specify what the trial should be. Is that right?

Correct. Although I did read somewhere that she is apparently delighted that this trial is going ahead.

However, it could be that this is a misquote and that perhaps she was delighted that a trial is going ahead. If she isn't backing this trial, she needs to speak up.

TheKeatingFive · 03/12/2025 19:29

Well he can share the conclusions of the ethics committee then, can't he? If he's so sure.

Chersfrozenface · 03/12/2025 19:31

StripeySuperNova · 03/12/2025 19:28

Hmmm. I heard him on Radio 4 this morning. He seemed to express some personal doubts about the trial but stressed that he was following the experts - Cass, the researchers, the ethics committee. He seems to be putting his faith in them and he ought to be able to. He would have to be supremely self-confident to go against all those experts in the field.

Covering his arse, then.

When the trial is eventually exposed as at best useless, at worst harmful, he can say "Yes, I was nominally in charge, but I was just following orders the experts".

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 03/12/2025 19:39

I'm really tired of this government looking disaster in the face and identifying as not seeing it.

We don't live in that fantasy reality.

LizzieSiddal · 03/12/2025 19:49

StripeySuperNova · 03/12/2025 19:28

Hmmm. I heard him on Radio 4 this morning. He seemed to express some personal doubts about the trial but stressed that he was following the experts - Cass, the researchers, the ethics committee. He seems to be putting his faith in them and he ought to be able to. He would have to be supremely self-confident to go against all those experts in the field.

I heard him too and felt the same. He said he understood why people had grave concerns but felt he had to follow the Cass review recommendations.

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 19:58

Chersfrozenface · 03/12/2025 19:31

Covering his arse, then.

When the trial is eventually exposed as at best useless, at worst harmful, he can say "Yes, I was nominally in charge, but I was just following orders the experts".

Show quote history

I wonder if anyone actually has accountability here. When some of these children sue as adults, with permanently prepubescent bodies and brains, I assume they'll get some kind of government-paid compensation.
But Streeting will no longer be in the hot seat and he'll simply have disappeared off with his "I was following experts" nonsense. Nobody will ever need to admit accountability. It'll just be one of those somber state apologies.

I really hope that this can be stopped before any child is given his or her first puberty blocker.

FelineFeasts · 03/12/2025 20:03

PaleBlueMoonlight · 03/12/2025 19:12

He said several times that Cass recommended this trial. My understanding is that is not true, she said that there would need to be a trial to determine whether PBs were effective, but she didn't specify what the trial should be. Is that right?

How do you think a better trial determining whether PBs are effective would look? Genuine question - not intended to be loaded!

EasternStandard · 03/12/2025 20:04

StripeySuperNova · 03/12/2025 19:28

Hmmm. I heard him on Radio 4 this morning. He seemed to express some personal doubts about the trial but stressed that he was following the experts - Cass, the researchers, the ethics committee. He seems to be putting his faith in them and he ought to be able to. He would have to be supremely self-confident to go against all those experts in the field.

Or rational and a politician who can make decisions against harming dc in a trial.

Shedmistress · 03/12/2025 20:08

FelineFeasts · 03/12/2025 20:03

How do you think a better trial determining whether PBs are effective would look? Genuine question - not intended to be loaded!

Show quote history

We know they are effective, as they do indeed block puberty. And are not 'fully reversible' in any way. So very effective at what they do.

Before one trials drugs that sterilise a person, one might ponder on why they are treating 'playing with the wrong toys' instead of just, letting kids play with whatever toys they want.

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 20:23

Shedmistress · 03/12/2025 20:08

We know they are effective, as they do indeed block puberty. And are not 'fully reversible' in any way. So very effective at what they do.

Before one trials drugs that sterilise a person, one might ponder on why they are treating 'playing with the wrong toys' instead of just, letting kids play with whatever toys they want.

Show quote history

Indeed.

Because there is already evidence of significant harm associated with stopping puberty, because "first do no harm" is an important principle and because the desired outcome (happy, healthy children who have overcome gender dysphoria) does not require a specific method to achieve this, the only viable trial in the first instance is talking therapy.

One group could undertake social transition and be affirmed in their identity throughout the trial. The other could continue to use the pronouns associated with their sex throughout the trial.

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 20:35

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 20:23

Indeed.

Because there is already evidence of significant harm associated with stopping puberty, because "first do no harm" is an important principle and because the desired outcome (happy, healthy children who have overcome gender dysphoria) does not require a specific method to achieve this, the only viable trial in the first instance is talking therapy.

One group could undertake social transition and be affirmed in their identity throughout the trial. The other could continue to use the pronouns associated with their sex throughout the trial.

Show quote history

.... and everyone in the trial could wear whatever they like (as long as it's not indecent), play with whatever toys they like and pursue whatever hobbies they like. Obviously all within the means of their family budget and logistical commitments etc.

FelineFeasts · 03/12/2025 20:40

Shedmistress · 03/12/2025 20:08

We know they are effective, as they do indeed block puberty. And are not 'fully reversible' in any way. So very effective at what they do.

Before one trials drugs that sterilise a person, one might ponder on why they are treating 'playing with the wrong toys' instead of just, letting kids play with whatever toys they want.

Show quote history

Sorry, I was asking whether PP felt the Cass recommendation of a trial of PBs was for a different type of trial. Obviously whether people think there should be a trial of PBs or not is a totally different question.

spannasaurus · 03/12/2025 20:45

Didn't Cass recommend that a review/study of previous patients should be undertaken before any trials of puberty blockers started

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 03/12/2025 21:49

BonfireLady · 03/12/2025 19:58

I wonder if anyone actually has accountability here. When some of these children sue as adults, with permanently prepubescent bodies and brains, I assume they'll get some kind of government-paid compensation.
But Streeting will no longer be in the hot seat and he'll simply have disappeared off with his "I was following experts" nonsense. Nobody will ever need to admit accountability. It'll just be one of those somber state apologies.

I really hope that this can be stopped before any child is given his or her first puberty blocker.

Show quote history

I will be staggered if the planned trial group parents and children have not had to sign legal documentation ensuring they cannot later sue the arse off the government and everyone else involved.

Edictfromno10 · 03/12/2025 22:02

Even those recruiting to the trial feel uncomfortable about it... and yet it keeps getting pushed right from the top.

HildegardP · 03/12/2025 22:05

Not everyone quite understands the distinction between "passed by an ethics committee" & "ethical". Sure, the distinction ought not to be there but it's 2025 & a lot of stuff is broken.

HildegardP · 03/12/2025 22:10

FelineFeasts · 03/12/2025 20:03

How do you think a better trial determining whether PBs are effective would look? Genuine question - not intended to be loaded!

Show quote history

Retrospective. We have a sizeable cohort who've graduated into adult gender services from the Tavi, Gender GP & allied trades. Most will still be NHS patients, ie not moved abroad. Their records should be collated, anonymised & analysed before we start giving any more kids GnRHas all because some Dutch men were sad that they didn't look feminine enough - the entire "lifesaving" BS is a post-hoc invention.

PaleBlueMoonlight · 03/12/2025 22:42

spannasaurus · 03/12/2025 20:45

Didn't Cass recommend that a review/study of previous patients should be undertaken before any trials of puberty blockers started

I think she did. I am being a bit lazy as I should probably go back and read the case report again.

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 03/12/2025 22:49

spannasaurus · 03/12/2025 20:45

Didn't Cass recommend that a review/study of previous patients should be undertaken before any trials of puberty blockers started

Yes the data linkage study of those who had already received blockers.

Which the clinics refused to comply with and the government haven't intervened 🙄

We could also have tests on monkeys as to the long term effects on brains/ bones/ cancer rates etc. All we have, AFAIK, is a short term study on spatial awareness of sheep (they got worse and it didn't get better after stopping pbs).

Going straight to humans is unheard of.