Streeting declares the puberty blocker trial 'safe'

[ArabellaSaurus]

https://archive.ph/CFzK4

'On Monday, Mr Streeting reiterated that he was not “comfortable” with the trial, which involves more than 200 people under the age of 16, but said there were significant “checks, balances and safeguards” that made it safe.

He told Sky News: “The thing I’ve had to continually weigh up is that for lots of people who have been through this sort of gender identity treatment, they describe it as life-affirming and life-saving. But there is an understandable degree of public anxiety and concern.

“The crucial reassurance is that not just anyone will be able to sign up to this trial. They will go through extensive assessment by expert clinicians locally that will be reviewed nationally, and every young person would need to assent.
“They’re not old enough to consent. They would need to assent, and they would <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/CFzK4/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/12/17/children-cannot-consent-puberty-blocker-trial-wes-streeting/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">need the consent of parents.

“And so there are lots of checks, balances, oversights and safeguards and constant monitoring in a way that disgracefully wasn’t there before. That’s what gives me the confidence and assurance of knowing this trial is safe.

“There is a debate about whether this is the right thing to do. I understand that, and there’s one thing we’ve learnt about this particular area of policy is that we shouldn’t silence, debate, dissent, disagreement.

“So we’ll continue to have that, and we’ll continue to be subject to scrutiny and challenge.”

Mr Streeting admitted that the children who will be involved in the trial are “very young” and that the drugs are “very strong”.

But he claimed he had tried to take the “politics out of what has been an extremely <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/CFzK4/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/25/nhs-puberty-blockers-trial-repeat-tavistock-whistleblowers/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">difficult and sensitive issue”.

Despite the research going ahead, the Health Secretary added: “I think there are still big questions about how we ever ended up in this situation where these sorts of drugs were being routinely prescribed with and we’re continuing to get into that and looking.
“There’ll be another study looking at what’s happened to that cohort of young people over time.”'

Cass seems to be of the opinion that if the Ethics committee say it's okay then everything must be hunky dory. I think she's washed her hands of it.

Yes, we're surrounded by people who are all disclaiming taking responsibility while waving it through.

Transactivists retain immense power in the NHS - and there's a lot of evidence that despite the immense danger their beliefs cause, their lobby is embedded and powerful. I've no doubt Cass was personally targeted by some of the men at the top of the NHS LGBT medical mob:

https://www.transgendertrend.com/gender-activism-nhs/

The one who wielded the most power in the NHS was ex-head of WPATH, founder of Press For Change, and well-known TIF, Stephen Whittle. So, sadly not all just powerful men.

There are so many possible responses to that 😂😂

That's what I mean though. I don't think she's washed her hands of it. I think she's fully on board and has been since 2023 when she was at the meeting that decided to go forward with it.

She's using the Ethics committee as a fig leaf then.

I wonder if Wes Streeting would actually welcome a JR that makes the decision that the PB trial is not ethical. It gives him a perfect position of, look I supported the trial but sadly the JR found it unethical.

I could see Baroness Cass’ position of not enough/couldn’t get evidence so need a trial whilst she knew ethically it couldn’t possibly happen. Wes is definitely setting her up as the fall guy but I think he will always be tainted by it if it goes ahead.

I really admire Kiera and what she is trying to do. It’s just sad it’s going to take a lot of ETs, JRs etc to turn the tide.

He and Phillipson have certainly fixed in everyone's mind that they are not exactly strong decision makers, or willing to take responsibility, or to listen to people pointing out the bleeding obvious, or to be able to be basically ethical when it come to political lobby influences. They certainly don't look like leaders, when the leadership role looks likely to be vacant any moment.

I do half suspect that Streeting and Cass etc have decided they need to make a sacrifice of the willing to appease the genderists. TRAs have pointed put the serious flaws in the trial, its not just us.

So could well be they are setting these children/families up to fail.

@ArabellaSaurus Sadly I think you maybe right.

Do a trial and accept we may owe the children harmed compensation because we suspect the evidence will be overwhelming. This would mean long term not only can we permanently stop the NHS from prescribing but also people obtaining it over the internet.

I will be staggered if those families aren't tied tightly into legal agreements precluding payouts. Which would be ridiculously immoral if so, and prove the case on one hand that there is a very strong probability that some of those children will be back as harmed, distressed adults. On the other hand to NOT do so would be ridiculously bloody naive.

I just got an email to say the cancel the trial petition will be debated in parliament on 9th March

Wonder who will be there.

If the people debating are ill-informed and captured by the ideology we won't get much further forward.

Well, well. From getting an email to say that the trial is going ahead...to getting an email to say it's being debated - the day after women's day.

I suspect the press will be all over this one and the cognitive dissonance of being an MP on the "Be Kind" side of the street...is started to crack.

There is a hefty group of MPs against this, that's my hope it will be an actual both sides thing rather than a line of trained parrots.

Hopefully streetings supposed leadership ambitions in the wake of a major pedophilia scandal will make him think again. His party may cosy up to pedos but the general population do not.

Be interesting to see who is willing to stand up and publically argue for the sterilisation of children.

I bet nobody turns up 🙄

There will be easy and very clear arguments to be made by any MPs who speak up against PBs. We know the overwhelming majority of the public are not in favour.

Leadership challenge coming up, I hear?

As many people as possible should turn up on the day to show support for the petition. Otherwise it will be TRAs and look one sided

I am pleased that this will be debated and agree that it will be interesting to see who argues in favour of the trial. I am going to write to my MP and ask if she is attending.

I think they may try this, but a central tenet of law is that you cannot give away another persons legal rights so no matter what the parents sign, their children would retain their right to sue at a later date and expect to be awarded payouts. I remember this being discussed when employers were asking employees to waive their right to a maximum 48hour week and legal specialists stated that you could not sign that ‘right’ away, so the documents had no legal validity.

I can’t understand why this isn’t a major consideration. If they are awarding a former child $2m in the US today, how many millions would each of the 200 participants be entitled to under UK law for being included in a trial that they really cannot give informed consent for? Some of the highest medical negligence awards in the UK have been for £20-37m. It could cost the tax payer £0.5-2 billion in just payouts before you factor in life long medical care and litigation costs.

Very good idea.

I expect my MP won't answer, because he's SNP so its a point of principle to draw a large salary but not do the job.