Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Streeting declares the puberty blocker trial 'safe'

577 replies

ArabellaSaurus · 06/01/2026 15:04

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.”'

OP posts:
Thread gallery
27
Cantunseeit · 25/02/2026 10:36

I’m still surprised that “the father of evidence-based medicine” didn’t say “hang on, what’s the evidence?” Specially since his department had just published a systematic review showing there was no high quality evidence.

Guyatt’s just one guy - a disappointment for sure but just one - what we seem to be seeing is a society that is SIMULTANEOUSLY ignorant/uninformed yet unquestioning the first time they come into contact with the ideology. Even some parents, even now, so desperate for PBs for their kids.

I have to acknowledge that I didn’t take any notice until my kid “came out” as “trans” in 2021. Up to then I was all freedom of expression but I had no idea about what was going on until I went digging for evidence beyond Mermaids and their ilk.

I’m still frequently shocked and surprised at what is happening even though I constantly believe I can’t be shocked anymore. Including this trial where it seems like the very people who should be asking difficult questions and being across the literature are sleepwalking into state sponsored child abuse.

I hope they wake up soon

lcakethereforeIam · 25/02/2026 10:42

Apologies for this, but I have to get it out of my head, the title of this thread reminds me of the film Poltergeist. The bit just before the end where the little medium (arf!) declares, in the voice since adopted by Daniel Craig for the Knives Out movies, 'This house is clean'. If anyone has seen the film (spoilers) everything subsequently goes to ghostly shit. If the trial does go ahead I am fearful the third act will be a similar disaster.

BonfireLady · 25/02/2026 10:45

RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 10:32

One of the things I struggle with and have issue with is the arrogance of doctors and the idea that we must blindly believe and follow them without question. Its a trust issue as the result of personal experience of poor conduct by doctors who don't treat patients as thinking, feeling beings who want to make properly informed decisions.

It has lead me to look in depth at what research is examining and have a good idea about what a study is really examining compared to what the researchers say they are examining. It opens a massive can of worms and the problem is recognised well within research circles - its what Ben Goldacre and Margaret McCartney write extensively about and they identify an industrial level dedication in various area to deliberately repress and supress, obscure and hide, misrepresent and willfully lie about data and what it says and what it doesn't say.

You have to start with clear goals and clear definitions. You have to have good methodology. You have to have a clear idea about weaknesses and flaws in the study and you have to have people who aren't driven to demonstrate a position they already believe because of just how much bias it introduces. You have to understand how your questions are worded and how they might be leading. You have to have a good understanding of whether your subjects can be trusted to truthfully and accurately report issues. You have to understand concepts of undue influence and outside pressure.

This study is massively problematic for so many of the above reasons. You do not have to have a medical background to identify them. You do not need to be university educated to understand the problems.

To give an example. Given the understood nature of whats been happening, the known issues with coaching that were identified and acknowledged as problematic and harmful with the Tavistock and Mermaids, anyone taking part in this study really should not be participating in any online forum or group relating to gender transition. We KNOW this alone would be introducing huge problematic weaknesses to the study and its quality of anything it shows. It highlights the self selecting nature and underlying beliefs of those seeking blockers to a point that it might lead to the deliberate concealment of issues in acts of self harm. We see this in vocabulary and testomony given on MN where individuals have talked about the brutality and horror of what they've been through and then deny that medicalistion has been problematic for them in the same breathe. They say how happy they are whilst also stating how awful life is.

You can bet the level of social contagion and cult like behaviour won't even be considered in the methodology. Ive seen no evidence of acknowledging how this has been problematic in the past and thus needs to be considered as part of the trial as a potentially massive weakness and flaw.

I see no gathering of information in terms of how much engagement with these type of groups might be linked to a desire to get on such a trial. Thats pretty fundamental.

Great post.

I see no gathering of information in terms of how much engagement with these type of groups might be linked to a desire to get on such a trial. Thats pretty fundamental.

And no clear recognition from the government that schools are contributing to the pipeline of demand for medical interventions.

As child protection law sits with the DfE, you'd think Bridget Phillipson would be all over the idea that a vulnerability towards coerced belief in gendered souls should be baked in to all the relevant legislation. Starting with Working Together to Safeguard Children, and flowing down everywhere else. We've even got a Prevent model that can be followed for spotting children who are vulnerable to the impact of radicalised belief.

That's what this is. It's extreme radicalisation when a child is led to believe that they need to permanently alter and damage their body in order to make it "fit" with a gendered soul that doesn't match it. Children are isolated from their support networks, sometimes by staff within schools, in a similar way to other forms of radicalism.

Shortshriftandlethal · 25/02/2026 10:56

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 25/02/2026 09:18

@BonfireLady

listening to these 3 doctors talking it seems like at least 2 of them quite enjoyed the fact that nobody really knows what the point of the trial is. By "enjoyed", I mean they gave a whiff of arrogance that suggested they consider themselves superior and that lesser plebs just don't get it.

Vomitous. Examples of the worst type of researcher. The best, most amazing senior researcher I ever worked with was a woman who constantly asked questions - mostly along the line of “I don’t understand what you just said, can you explain more?” She had an enormous brain, and a depth of knowledge in her field that was astounding, but she would never, ever pretend that she had all the answers. Why would
you do that? Your job as a researcher is to have all the questions, not all the answers! She also spoke and wrote in the clearest way possible - short words, short sentences, no obfuscation. Sorry, derail. But I hate researchers who think they’re so amazing because other people don’t understand their oh so complicated work. No, that doesn’t mean you’re smart - it means you’re beyond dumb.

If you truly understand something then you ought to be able to explain it simply and cogently to those that don't.

RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 10:57

BonfireLady · 25/02/2026 10:45

Great post.

I see no gathering of information in terms of how much engagement with these type of groups might be linked to a desire to get on such a trial. Thats pretty fundamental.

And no clear recognition from the government that schools are contributing to the pipeline of demand for medical interventions.

As child protection law sits with the DfE, you'd think Bridget Phillipson would be all over the idea that a vulnerability towards coerced belief in gendered souls should be baked in to all the relevant legislation. Starting with Working Together to Safeguard Children, and flowing down everywhere else. We've even got a Prevent model that can be followed for spotting children who are vulnerable to the impact of radicalised belief.

That's what this is. It's extreme radicalisation when a child is led to believe that they need to permanently alter and damage their body in order to make it "fit" with a gendered soul that doesn't match it. Children are isolated from their support networks, sometimes by staff within schools, in a similar way to other forms of radicalism.

Cass is one of the worst offenders on this imho.

Her report TALKS about these issues to a certain level. Her understanding of the extent of issues at the Tavi and her inability to see how the study as it is proposed is liable to replicate and reproduce some of these deep seating problems is shocking. She seems to be living in a bubble were doctors are infalliable, completely ethical and unbiased and patients are perfect patients who are always honest. She can not conceive of participants actively lying about symptoms or feelings because of outside pressures or fears generated from outside. She can not conceive of doctors making decisions which are flawed, unethical and utterly biased. Thats extremely worrying in the context of a scandal THATS ALREADY HAPPENED. She isn't grounded in reality.

The prospect of being removed from the trial is one that just won't compute or be accepted to some participants due to the obsessive nature of what they believe and the environment they socialise in. There is this massive undue pressure to perform transition as part of acceptance within a social circle. Its almost competitive - your aren't committed or a true believer if you don't do x, y or z.

Shortshriftandlethal · 25/02/2026 10:59

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 25/02/2026 10:13

@Cantunseeit, there are probably three explanations for Guyatt: he’s old, he’s an academic and he’s Canadian.

He did his big work on evidence-based medicine what, 20? 30? years ago? Before GI had really taken hold, so it was not on his mind when he was doing his work. Since then Canada has really embraced it - particularly in the leftist liberal enclaves of academia. And they embraced it quite blindly - they really do think it’s gay 2.0. So he has been surrounded by that type of thought - and because his research is about research, not about GI, he probably hasn’t questioned it. So when someone came to him with a letter saying “please sign this letter, it’s to make sure no right wing nut jobs weaponise the GI study you just helped carry out” it would not seem weird for him to do that.

Now, the fact that he didn’t actually read the letter, well, that’s just dumb. But if it was presented to him in the context I’ve just described, by students or researchers he trusted or worked with, maybe not surprising.

The person or organisation that sponsors or funds the reasearch will also determine its paremters, surely?

MrsOvertonsWindow · 25/02/2026 11:16

BonfireLady · 25/02/2026 10:45

Great post.

I see no gathering of information in terms of how much engagement with these type of groups might be linked to a desire to get on such a trial. Thats pretty fundamental.

And no clear recognition from the government that schools are contributing to the pipeline of demand for medical interventions.

As child protection law sits with the DfE, you'd think Bridget Phillipson would be all over the idea that a vulnerability towards coerced belief in gendered souls should be baked in to all the relevant legislation. Starting with Working Together to Safeguard Children, and flowing down everywhere else. We've even got a Prevent model that can be followed for spotting children who are vulnerable to the impact of radicalised belief.

That's what this is. It's extreme radicalisation when a child is led to believe that they need to permanently alter and damage their body in order to make it "fit" with a gendered soul that doesn't match it. Children are isolated from their support networks, sometimes by staff within schools, in a similar way to other forms of radicalism.

Two great posts.
So frustrating that none of this is spotted by politicians.

The silencing of opposition has been so effective and means that all the dangerous age inappropriate, anti social, porn soaked, fetish and coercive control aspects of this go unspoken. And unchallenged.

Shortshriftandlethal · 25/02/2026 11:19

Canadian Institute of Health Research:

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/35752.html

"....As the only health research funding institute in Canada with a specific focus on sex, gender and health, IGH has a key leadership role in advancing sex and gender science by advancing research, bridging capacity, and convening communities for sex, gender, and health research and knowledge mobilization....."

"...A key question in quantitative intersectional research is whose experiences, outcomes, or processes need to be examined or made visible. By investigating population heterogeneity in the context of social power and studying processes of oppression, discrimination and privilege, we can develop interventions that are directly relevant to specific communities...."

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52352.html

Research Priority Plan 2024-2029 - Strengths to Solutions: Advancing Sex and Gender Science for Healthy Futures - CIHR

https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/35752.html

BonfireLady · 25/02/2026 11:21

There is this massive undue pressure to perform transition as part of acceptance within a social circle. Its almost competitive - your aren't committed or a true believer if you don't do x, y or z.

Indeed. I wonder how many of the ~2000 Tavistock patients who received PBs (and are now adults - in age, if not necessarily in brain development) feel unsure about whether their treatment was right but trapped in a situation where they still need to embrace this performance.

When detransitioners come forward, some acknowledge that their change in feelings about themselves will be hurtful to those that they care about. I wonder how many just daren't step out of that self-made emotional prison. Their lack of emotional maturity won't help here. I'm far more confident in saying what I'm feeling (and recognising that sometimes this will feel hurtful to others, despite the effort that I still put in to mitigate that) than I was at 13, 16, 18, 25.... If my emotional maturity had been frozen in time, I would feel very lost. I was a reasonably mature 13 year old but I still felt all the standard stuff that adolescents are "meant" to feel, including the fear of people not liking me.

ArabellaSaurus · 25/02/2026 11:37

RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 10:57

Cass is one of the worst offenders on this imho.

Her report TALKS about these issues to a certain level. Her understanding of the extent of issues at the Tavi and her inability to see how the study as it is proposed is liable to replicate and reproduce some of these deep seating problems is shocking. She seems to be living in a bubble were doctors are infalliable, completely ethical and unbiased and patients are perfect patients who are always honest. She can not conceive of participants actively lying about symptoms or feelings because of outside pressures or fears generated from outside. She can not conceive of doctors making decisions which are flawed, unethical and utterly biased. Thats extremely worrying in the context of a scandal THATS ALREADY HAPPENED. She isn't grounded in reality.

The prospect of being removed from the trial is one that just won't compute or be accepted to some participants due to the obsessive nature of what they believe and the environment they socialise in. There is this massive undue pressure to perform transition as part of acceptance within a social circle. Its almost competitive - your aren't committed or a true believer if you don't do x, y or z.

Empeakening can take years. It's often gradual. And people may be appalled at, say, rapists in women's prisons and women being forced.to shower alongside them, but take quite some time to join up dots and at last get to facing the issue that some of the horrific outcomes are done on purpose. There is an absolute fucktonne of emotional processing to go through, alongside defensiveness, fear, plus concerns about being fair and kind.

It is sort of Cass' job to be fair and kind in a way, too.

OP posts:
ArabellaSaurus · 25/02/2026 11:42

If you have dedicated your working life to care for children and evidence based medecine and have done your best, I can imagine it might be quite hard to consider that people high up in politics and an edifice as large and esteemed and complex as the NHS could be gamed, on purpose. Devastating, in fact.

Is it possible Cass is in denial and sees the flaws in 'gender' care as just some kind of unfortunate accident? And if they had just a wee nudge and help towards improving their research methodology all would be tickety boo?

Thats not even considering arse covering, a fundamental obsession of the NHS.

OP posts:
RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 11:47

ArabellaSaurus · 25/02/2026 11:37

Empeakening can take years. It's often gradual. And people may be appalled at, say, rapists in women's prisons and women being forced.to shower alongside them, but take quite some time to join up dots and at last get to facing the issue that some of the horrific outcomes are done on purpose. There is an absolute fucktonne of emotional processing to go through, alongside defensiveness, fear, plus concerns about being fair and kind.

It is sort of Cass' job to be fair and kind in a way, too.

The average length of time to leave a cult is known to be seven years.

It's be interesting to look at detransitioners and see timescales with this in mind.

RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 11:51

ArabellaSaurus · 25/02/2026 11:42

If you have dedicated your working life to care for children and evidence based medecine and have done your best, I can imagine it might be quite hard to consider that people high up in politics and an edifice as large and esteemed and complex as the NHS could be gamed, on purpose. Devastating, in fact.

Is it possible Cass is in denial and sees the flaws in 'gender' care as just some kind of unfortunate accident? And if they had just a wee nudge and help towards improving their research methodology all would be tickety boo?

Thats not even considering arse covering, a fundamental obsession of the NHS.

This is where understanding that there are bad people in the NHS and in research might be beneficial. Its the bubbled world where everyone is good once again.

Given the medical profession in the UK has a massive problem with bad actors who sexually abused patients and other staff but it seems unwilling and unable to adequately deal with such cases it says a lot.

TwoLoonsAndASprout · 25/02/2026 12:28

Shortshriftandlethal · 25/02/2026 10:59

The person or organisation that sponsors or funds the reasearch will also determine its paremters, surely?

There was some complicated “we didn’t know who the group was that commissioned this research and if we had done we wouldn’t have done it, but now that we have done it, and it doesn’t look the way we want it to look, we need to scramble to say that we don’t agree with it” from on-the-ground researchers involved in the Canadian study.

Guyatt was an idiot to sign the letter without reading it — which it’s clear from his interview with Mia and Stella that he hadn’t — and even more of an idiot to then pretend that what they (Mia and Stella) were talking about was some minor misunderstanding on their part. But, I am not surprised, given the GI soup that Canadian academia is currently swimming in, and given how far removed he almost certainly was from the actual number crunching that went on in the Canadian study, that he unthinkingly did it.

RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 13:31

This is what the Cass Review says on the idea of social contagion / influence (my bold):

38. Research suggests gender expression is likely determined by a variable mix of factors such as biological predisposition, early childhood experiences, sexuality and expectations of puberty. For some, mental health difficulties are hard to disentangle. The impact of a variety of contemporary societal influences and stressors (including online experience) remains unclear. Peer influence is also very powerful during adolescence as are different generational perspectives.

39. Pragmatically the above explanations for the observed changes in the population are all likely to be true to a greater or lesser extent, but for any individual a different mix of factors will apply.

40. This is a heterogenous group, with broad ranging presentations often including complex needs that extend beyond gender-related distress and this needs to be reflected in the services offered to them by the NHS.

41. Too often this cohort are considered a homogenous group for whom there is a single driving cause and an optimum treatment approach, but this is an over-simplification of the situation. Being gender-questioning or having a trans identity means different things to different people. Among those being referred to children and young people’s gender services, some may benefit from medical intervention and some may not. The clinical approach must reflect this.

AND

47. The World Professional Association of Transgender Healthcare (WPATH) has been highly influential in directing international practice, although its guidelines were found by the University of York appraisal process to lack developmental rigour.

48. Early versions of two international guidelines - the Endocrine Society 2009 and WPATH 7 - influenced nearly all the other guidelines, except for the recent Nordic guidelines.

49. Given the lack of evidence-based guidelines, it is imperative that staff working within NHS gender services are cognisant of the limitations in relation to the evidence base and fully understand the knowns and the unknowns.

Let me repeat, one of the two most influential templates for healthcare lacks developmental rigour and yet the NHS wanted to do a study based on its premise without first exploring issues around influence coming from poorly evidenced sources and sources with no evidence at all.

78. Therefore, sex of rearing seems to have some influence on eventual gender outcome, and it is possible that social transition in childhood may change the trajectory of gender identity development for children with early gender incongruence

We KNOW that parenting is leading to different outcomes in gender incongruence and yet we want to medicalise knowing this.

1.41 Support and advocacy groups advised that to hear from the young people at the heart of the Review, opportunities needed to be created where they felt safe, could be supported before, during and after their contribution, and would be engaged around topics on which they have a genuine ability to inform and influence decisions.

There is no questioning about the nature and agenda of support and advocacy groups themselves. There is no talk of the role of parents and where they could voice concerns safely and be taken seriously. Surely if we are talking about EIGHT year old and under 14 year olds generally this is kinda essential before you start talking about sodding blockers.

A failure to consider the cause, potential influences and contributory factors can lead to people taking polarised positions. Nuanced discussion is needed about how best to understand and respond to the children and young people at the centre of the debate

Hmm well yes Hilary. What was that about weaponisation again???

6.6 Academics have identified three important ways in which sex differences are expressed (Babu & Shah, 2021):
• gender role behaviours (these are behaviours such as toy preferences, play, physicality)
• gender identity (an innate sense of belonging and self-identification of one’s gender as male, female or an alternative gender)
• and later, sexual orientation (the sex of the individuals to whom one is sexually attracted).

6.7 It is thought that all three of these can be influenced by biological and social factors, and this is an evolving area of research.

But its more important to priortise and fund a trial into puberty blockers apparently. Like FUCK ME.

The ‘social brain’ 6.40 The ‘social brain’ is the network of brain regions that are involved in understanding other people’s intentions, desires and beliefs. The slowly maturing prefrontal cortex is a key part of this network, so there are considerable changes in these abilities through teens to adulthood.

6.41 Through adolescence, peers have an increasing influence and parents a lessening influence. Adolescents’ evaluation of their social and personal worth is strongly influenced by what their peers think about them. Studies have shown adolescents to be hypersensitive to social isolation, so much so that going along with peers in order to avoid social risk, even if it means taking health and legal risks, might be seen as the rational choice because it reduces the possibility of social exclusion (Blakemore, 2018).

It pretty much says teens will do stupid shit and risk their health in order to maintain social acceptance. Cass seems to have forgotten this.

7.1 A generation is a group of people who share similar birth years, life experiences and cultural influences. Every generation encounters new experiences, advances, technologies, challenges and stressors that have a profound effect on their behaviours, attitudes and beliefs.

7.2 It may appear somewhat simplistic to divide people by birth year, but this is a helpful way of understanding how perspectives, as well as health and illness, can be shaped by major world events (most recently the Covid-19 pandemic), as well as social and economic conditions.

7.3 Generation Z is the generation in which the numbers seeking support from the NHS around their gender identity have increased, so it is important to have some understanding of their experiences and influences.

7.4 They are defined as those who were born between 1995 and 2009 and are characterised by their digital nativism (proficiency in using technology and social media) and unique characteristics such as being entrepreneurial, socially conscious, pragmatic and diverse (Jayatissa, 2023).

7.5 In terms of broader context, Generation Z and Generation Alpha (those born since 2010) have grown up through a global recession, concerns about climate change, and most recently the Covid-19 pandemic. Global connectivity has meant that as well the advantages of international peer networks, they are much more exposed to worries about global threats

7.6 Generation Z and some younger Millennials (Generation Y) generally have different beliefs about the fluidity and mutability of gender than older generations. Attitudes have changed at speed, such that within a 6-month period between early 2020 and late 2020/early 2021 Generation Z adults surveyed in the USA became the first generation in which the majority responded negatively to the statement “there are only two genders, male and female” (Twenge, 2023).

7.7 There are also generational differences in the numbers of young adults reporting that their experienced gender does not align with their birth-registered sex. Based on US Census data, in 2021-2022, 5.6% of Generation Z adults identified as transgender or non-binary, compared to 2.4% of Millennials and 1.5% of Generation X.

But yes, social contagion is controversial and exists within a bubble that isn't somehow extremely relevant. It literally says that we should be listening to ideas of belief but somehow we should accept the controversy of social contagion and not ask some bloody big questions especially when this doesn't match with actual reality. This reality gap is a key point in terms of whether any medicalisation is liable to be ultimately effective!!!!

8.23 For children and young people with gender incongruence, ‘innate’ or biological factors may play a part in some individuals, in ways that are not yet understood, and in others psychosocial factors, including life experiences, societal and cultural influences, may be more important. Since biological factors have not changed in the last 10 years it is necessary to look at other possible reasons for the increase in referrals and the disproportionate representation of birth-registered females.

Psychosocial factors
8.24 Various explanations have been advanced for the increase in predominantly birth-registered females presenting to gender services in early adolescence often with complex presentations, and/or additional mental health problems and/or neurodiversity:

Societal acceptance: The proposition is that greater acceptance of transgender identities has allowed young people to come out more easily and the increased numbers now reflects the true prevalence of gender incongruence within society.

• Changes in concepts of gender and sexuality: These might include a change in expressions of sexuality versus gender and a wider spectrum of expression (for example, non-binary and other gender identities that are more common presentations in birth-registered females).
• Manifestation of broader mental health challenges: For example, in the same way that distress can manifest through eating disorders or depression, it could also show itself through gender-related distress.
• Peer and socio-cultural influence: For example, the influence of media and changing generational perceptions. This is potentially the most contested explanation, with the term ‘social contagion’ causing particular distress to some in the trans community.
• Availability of puberty blockers: The change in the trajectory of the referral curve across many countries coincided with the implementation of the Dutch approach, starting first in the Netherlands and then similarly adopted in other countries.

8.25 Simplistic explanations of either kind (“all trans people are born that way” or “it’s all social contagion”) do not consider the wide range of factors that can lead young people to present with gender-related distress and undervalues their experiences.

Note there is no thought given to social contagion being a problem to those who have loved ones they think are the victims of safeguarding and they feel need safeguarding - its like there is still a vacuum of recognising its a hugely contested area but despite this the report shows bias.

Despite the point that there is a danger of social contagion it then automatically dismisses it as a simplistic factor that should somehow be ignored too.

8.37 In reality, for any individual young person, there will be different socio-cultural influences that impact on their understanding of both their gender and sexual identity, and this is an area that warrants better exploration and understanding.

BUT BLOCKERS AND SOCIAL CONTAGION IS CONTROVERSIAL AND UPSETS TRANS IDENTIFYING PEOPLE!!! ARRRGGHHH (actually angry at this point quoting Cass's own report)

8.42 The association is likely to be complex and bidirectional - that is, in some individuals, preceding mental ill health (such as anxiety, depression, OCD, eating disorders), may result in uncertainty around gender identity and therefore contribute to a presentation of gender related distress. In such circumstances, treating the mental health disorder and strengthening an individual’s sense of self may help to address some issues relating to gender identity. For other individuals, gender-related distress may be the primary concern and living with this distress may be the cause of subsequent mental ill health. Alternatively, both sets of conditions may be associated with and influenced by other factors, including experiences of neurodiversity and trauma.

Remember folks, we are weaponising.

Peer and socio-cultural influences
8.45 Sources of information for young people are predominantly online and peer-to-peer, and this applies to multiple aspects of their lives.

8.46 The generational changes in understanding and beliefs about the mutability of gender form the basis for many young people’s understanding of their own experiences and the experiences of those around them.

8.47 It is the norm that all experiences of health and illness are understood through the norms and beliefs of an individual’s trusted social group. Thus, it is more likely that bodily discomfort, mental distress or perceived differences from peers may be interpreted through this cultural lens.

8.48 More specifically, gender-questioning young people and their parents have spoken to the Review about online information that describes normal adolescent discomfort as a possible sign of being trans and that particular influencers have had a substantial impact on their child’s beliefs and understanding of their gender.

8.49 The Review’s focus groups with gender diverse young people found that “Young people struggle to find trusted sources of information, favouring lived experience social media accounts over mainstream news outlets”.

BuT cONtRoVeRsY. bUT wEAponISation. We MuST dO TrIAl InTO bloCKerS FiRST.

Availability of puberty blockers
8.50 The dramatic increase in presentations to NHS gender clinics from 2014, as well as in several other countries, coincided with puberty blockers being made available off protocol and to a wider group of young people. The only country with an earlier acceleration in referrals is the Netherlands, where the Dutch protocol was developed.

8.51 It is not possible to attribute causality in either direction to this association, but it remains a possibility that a lower threshold for medicalisation has had an influence on the number of young people seeking this intervention.

FUCK ME. JUST SERIOUSLY. IT ACTUALLY SAYS THIS. Less safeguarding and disregard for ethics might be driving medicalisation. You mean the Tavistock was a fucking car crash?!

8.55 In later childhood and into early puberty, online experience may have an effect on sense of self and expectations of puberty and of gender. As discussed in relation to adolescent development, this is a time where the drive to f it in with peers is particularly strong. Young people who are already feeling ‘different’ may have that sense exacerbated if they do not fit in with the demonstrations of masculinity and femininity they are exposed to socially and/or online.

8.56 Peer influence during this stage of life is very powerful. As well as the influence of social media, the Review has heard accounts of female students forming intense friendships with other gender-questioning or transgender students at school, and then identifying as trans themselves.

8.57 It is the norm for people to view their experiences of life events, health and illness through their own cultural lens and personal beliefs. Cultural norms in younger people might impact how they interpret their personal, sexual and gender identity

We should medicalise because of social change? REALLY?

Safeguarding
10.43 As with all health care provision, when working with children and young people safeguarding must be a consideration. There are complex ways in which safeguarding issues may be present. Clinicians working with children and young people experiencing gender dysphoria have highlighted that safeguarding issues can be overshadowed or confused when there is focus on gender or in situations where there are high levels of gender-related distress.

10.44 Sources of risk in this group include:
• transphobic bullying in school and in other settings
• breakdown in relationships with families
• online grooming or harm
• cultural or religious pressure.

10.45 The Review has heard about a small number of cases where the child’s gender identity was consciously or unconsciously influenced by the parent. It is very important that the child/young person’s voice is heard and that perceptions of gender identity represent the child/young person’s sense of self.

10.46 The Review has also heard a series of accounts of children and young people at safeguarding risk being lost to follow-up and/or of young people presenting to the emergency department with a safeguarding history that staff were unaware of because of changes of name and NHS number

EIGHT TO THIRTEEN YEAR OLDS OFTEN WITH COMPLEX NEEDS FOLKS. We should heard their voices and rule out influence from parents. Nothing about healthcare professionals, social workers, teachers and other adults in a child's life maybe having an influence though. KINDA important if we are talking about kids with unfettered internet access don't you think?!

12.36 The information above demonstrates that there is no clear evidence that social transition in childhood has positive or negative mental health outcomes. There is relatively weak evidence for any effect in adolescence. However, sex of rearing seems to have some influence on eventual gender outcome, and it is possible that social transition in childhood may change the trajectory of gender identity development for children with early gender incongruence. For this reason, a more cautious approach needs to be taken for children than for adolescents:

Children:
• Parents should be encouraged to seek clinical help and advice in deciding how to support a child with gender incongruence and should be prioritised on the waiting list for early consultation on this issue.
• Clinical involvement in the decision-making process should include advising on the risks and benefits of social transition as a planned intervention, referencing best available evidence. This is not a role that can be taken by staff without appropriate clinical training.

HELLO TEACHERS.

• It is important to ensure that the voice of the child is heard in any decision making and that parents are not unconsciously influencing the child’s gender expression.
• For those going down a social transition pathway, maintaining flexibility and keeping options open by helping the child to understand their body as well as their feelings is likely to be advantageous. Partial rather than full transition may be a way of ensuring flexibility, particularly given the MPRG report which highlighted that being in stealth from early childhood may add to the stress of impending puberty and the sense of urgency to enter a medical [seems to be text missing]

Adolescents:
• For adolescents, exploration is a normal process, and rigid binary gender stereotypes can be unhelpful. Many adolescents will go through a period of gender non-conformity in terms of hairstyle, make-up, clothing and behaviours. They also have greater agency in how they present themselves and their decision-making.
• For those considering full social transition, the current long waiting lists make it unlikely that a formal clinical assessment will be available in a timely manner. However, it is important to try and ensure that those already actively involved in their welfare (parents/carers, any involved clinical staff such as their GP, school staff or counsellors) provide support in decision making and plans to ensure that the young person is protected from bullying and has a trusted source of support. For both children and adolescents:
• Outcomes for children and adolescents are best if they are in a supportive relationship with their family. For this reason parents should be actively involved in decision making unless there are strong grounds to believe that this may put the child or young person at risk.
• Help may be needed if a child/young person wishes to reverse their decision on transitioning, which can be a difficult step to take

12.37 The clinician should help families to recognise normal developmental variation in gender role behaviour and expression. Avoiding premature decisions and considering partial rather than full transitioning can be a way of ensuring flexibility and keeping options open until the developmental trajectory becomes clearer

Yes it actually says this.

13.3 For those who are considering a medical transition, there is a strong sense among service users that this should be facilitated by the NHS, but a recognition that there is a need for better information on which to base decisions/consent.

13.4 Young people and young adults participating in the Review’s focus groups highlighted a lack of reliable and accurate information about medical transition. In particular, the need to be informed of any known and unknown risks and potential side effects of hormone interventions when making informed decisions about care and treatment. Some participants felt there needed to be more information for people wanting to come off the medical pathway.

These are the same young people who are heavily reliant on social media rather than traditional sources for their information remember. God forbid the generation of their parents with a good understanding of some of these issues might be having some issues with whats happening with their kids and how its all about prioritising beliefs from a younger generation as society has changed.

WeApoNISinG.

RedToothBrush · 25/02/2026 13:31

It also has a whole section dedicated to issues with trials

Pitfalls of treatment trials
• A major problem in making sense of trial findings is bias. There are many ways in which results can be biased. For example, if 50% of the sample drops out, this would be referred to as a high attrition rate. It is possible that the people who remained in the study are those who responded well to the treatment, whereas those who dropped out did so because the treatment was not working for them or they had bad side effects. This could result in a positive bias in the study outcomes; in other words showing an effect when there is not one. It could also fail to show the side effects that caused people to drop out.
• Another way of biasing results is if the patients in the treatment and control groups differ in some way; for example, one group has more people who are younger, or sicker. Researchers will assess the groups on several measures and compare them to see if they are similar at the start of the study (baseline assessment). Random allocation of people to the study groups and large numbers of participants help reduce the risk of differences between study groups.
• It is very important to get the inclusion and exclusion criteria of a study right (that is, which patients can and cannot be included). For example, a trial might report that a painkiller is highly effective, but if it turns out that only people with osteoarthritis in the knee were included it would mean that the results cannot be generalised to patients with headache. Although the drug may work very well for headache, it is not possible to be sure about this on the basis of the findings of this particular study.
• In any design where patients are not blinded and know they are getting a particular drug, or where they have chosen a specific treatment rather than being randomised to one, they may show improvement because of a placebo effect (that is, they believe that the treatment will produce a beneficial outcome). • Sometimes there are confounding factors in a study, such as the patient getting another treatment at the same time as the trial treatment. Though randomisation and blinding minimise the risk of bias and confounding, this is not completely watertight.
• There must also be enough patients in a trial (the term ‘sufficiently powered’ is often used where there are) to be sure the results reflect the range of possible outcomes and do not give a ‘positive´ result by chance, a so-called Type 1 (or alpha) error. Study outcome measures are generally reported as the average for a group, but the range is usually also given and can be very wide. For example, if the average outcome for a group is 5 points out of a possible 10, a range of 2-9 would indicate much more varied outcomes across the group than a range of 4-6. Size influences whether the reported outcomes are statistically significant. In very small studies, for example one with only four patients put on a treatment and in which three got better and one got worse, it would not be possible to understand the full range of possible outcomes. Furthermore, the benefits for three individuals could have happened by chance. For a result to be statistically significant, it must be unlikely that the result could have happened by chance. This is why substantial numbers of participants are required and a key requirement of any trial is a pre-recruitment estimate of how many will be needed for the study to produce meaningful results.
• There are many other potential problems, some of which include:- unconscious bias in questionnaire design where the questions are written in a way that prompts a more favourable response;- using the wrong kind of analysis for the available data; - not following up for long enough to see the full benefits or harms of a treatment; - seeing an improvement because patients were improving spontaneously over time;- publication bias where, for example, only positive results are published.

I'm just....

WTAF.

tropicaltrance · 25/02/2026 15:36

To be clear, when this refers to "gender expression" what it means is "personality, as interpreted through the lens of sex stereotypes"?

When did the word personality go out of fashion?

TheywontletmehavethenameIwant · 25/02/2026 16:59

tropicaltrance · 25/02/2026 15:36

To be clear, when this refers to "gender expression" what it means is "personality, as interpreted through the lens of sex stereotypes"?

When did the word personality go out of fashion?

The day they turned Women's Studies into Gender Studies, it's been gender, this, that and the other ever since. 😤

DrBlackbird · 06/03/2026 10:04

This x post from the Epstein emails caught my eye. When will the penny drop for Streeting? Given the visibility on this trial, you think he would have read up as much as he could about the effects of PBs and CSHs on young people instead of constantly bleating ‘Cass’ and research and ethical approval. It really makes me wonder what might be found in the private emails of all of those medics pushing for this trial and use of PBs.

Streeting declares the puberty blocker trial 'safe'
OldCrone · 06/03/2026 10:27

I just got an email saying the debate has been rescheduled for 23rd March. It was originally scheduled for 9th March.

Madcats · 06/03/2026 11:34

Nick Wallis is tweeting from Royal Courts of Justice this am, where is appears that “The Health Secretary is (I am told - I haven't seen the paperwork yet) attempting to have James Esses/Keira Bell and the Bayswater group's attempt to stop the puberty blocker trial stayed”.

I’ve only just looked at X so am
not up to speed.

PeppyHam · 06/03/2026 12:03

Rather disappointed to find Chris Whitty apparently saying that debate about the PATHWAYS trial should be limited to specialists only.

Chris Whitty seeks to close down the conversation about PATHWAYS

KnottyAuty · 06/03/2026 12:18

Started at around 11am
https://nitter.net/nickwallis/status/2029866481358459371#m

Good morning from Court 1 of the Royal Courts of Justice for a special hearing. The Health Secretary is (I am told - I haven't seen the paperwork yet) attempting to have James Esses/Keira Bell and the Bayswater group's attempt to stop the puberty blocker trial stayed.

Proceedings start in 3 minutes. I will be live-tweeting. PLEASE NOTE THAN EVERYTHING I TWEET IS A SUMMARY AND/OR CHARACTERISATION OF WHAT IS BEING SAID. NOTHING IS A DIRECT QUOTE UNLESS IT IS IN "DIRECT QUOTES".

James Esses is in court. Keira Bell can't make it today. There are five people in wigs

I am sitting next to a PA reporter in the press bench where we have a magnificent view and strong 4G signal. It is very warm in here

I am sure the Bayswater group are represented both legally and as observers, though I no one has made themselves known yet. There are nine observers - one male, eight female.

Mr Justice Chamberlain is presiding. He's just walked in. Claimant barrister Angus McCullough KC is on his feet. Taking the judge through the submissions

There's an anonymity order application which is being discussed. One of the witnesses for the claimants has submitted there are clear and credible threats against her safety. Her name will be anonymised for the purposes of this hearing

Barrister for Wes Streeting via the MHRA is on his feet. Proposing a stay to Esses/Bell/Bayswater group Judicial Review (JR) for 8 weeks until 24 April this year

[will get barrister's name but he will be SS for Sec of State] SS Baroness Cass report of April 2024 set out need for a trial of puberty blockers. KCL submitted a proposal and MHRA approved it in Sep 2025. MHRA has to keep things under review

SS Regulation 23 is the licensing authorities to make amendments to a clinical trial and reg 24 concerns amendments by the sponsor J who is the licensing authority SS the MHRA - Sec of State

J what kind of approval - safety and scientific validity SS yes J so clinical trial auth was in Nov SS yes J letter went out last month saying there were concerns SS yes J and there's going to be a period of discussion about that SS exactly

[SS takes him to p96 of the hearing bundle lodged by the MHRA] SS this letter raises various matters as needing to consider incl minimum age restrictions, strengthened safety monitoriing, poss changes to consent process

KnottyAuty · 06/03/2026 12:22

and the need to meet with KCL to discuss J are these based on safety or ethical concerns SS both. so on the same day this was announced the MHRA wrote to the claimaints proposing a stay SS on 22 Feb Prof Jorge properly recused himself as some of his social med activity called

into question his impartiality. So the process is no longer being led by Prof Jorge J and the stay was proposed for six weeks SS we now think a slightly longer stay of 8 weeks is sensible, but we are cognisant of the need to resolve this [JR] soon

J at the end of Mr Sharland's submission there is a timetable. He says he would rather not be in this position but as we are this is his preferred solution. We must avoid delay caused by proceedings delaying the PB trial if ultimately the JR doesn't succeed

J i understand there's also an issue about funding for the trial. SS and the timing also affects the potential participants J your hearing would take us to a hearing in July and a judgment "with a fair wind" at the end of July

J the JR says there's a number of things not taken into account when regulatory approval for the PB trial was given and you are saying that now there is going to be a discussion about the PB trial and once that has been had the claimants may want to rethink or change their

JR application SS yes. KCL and MHRA are already talking and need to come to an agreed position on what amendments need to be made. And this could be done by KCL submitting them for approval. MHRA could come up with amendments which are not acceptable to KCL

SS - the MHRA has the power to impose them. We're not sure what route will be taken, but it will take 8 weeks J what will have happened by the end of the 8 week period

KnottyAuty · 06/03/2026 12:27

SS all the proposed changes will be done - so either a changed protocol, no change to the trial protocol or no protocol at all [and therefore no trial] as one can't be agreed. J C's say that if you look at the MHRA letter from Prof Jorge is that you have already capitulated

SS no we haven't J and so you might end up with a position that looks like a concession to the claim and that might have cost consequences SS we can deal with that down the line. KCL's position is that "many of" the MHRA's concerns don't arise and on examinatio many don't

J so the short answer to C's point is that you haven't withdrawn approval for the pB trial SS correct - this is just proposed amendments under the normal system. C's are saying approval should be scrapped no

J so existing approval subsists - does that change the claim SS no because after discussion between MHRA and KCL there may be a v different trial

SS re safety and integrity of the trial process. in this area given the obvious sensitivies involved. All parties have interest in integrity of the review process and safety of participants and that must mean that MHRA

and KCL must be free to get this right free from a litigation timetable which could inhibit or distort discussions about the trial

SS C's say there shouldn't be stay and the logic of that is that all parties should know where they stand before the discussion continues. But that can't be the case. J so that it SS that's it, yes

Swipe left for the next trending thread