Puberty Blocker Trial Paused

[CrocsNotDocs]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/e0a6d8e8751dbca8

Good start. Now shut it down.

Linking this thread as surely pertinent to the question of how the nhs and clinicians understand any of this, as well as the money making aspect

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5497011-nhs-saw-opportunity-for-income-generation-from-first-child-gender-clinic-in-belfast?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

Wings Over Scotland helpfully pointing out to Cathy Newman that the Interim Director of the NHS Health Research Authority has particular view on this………I’m sure her journalistic integrity means she’ll report this on this too 🙄🤔

https://x.com/wingsscotland/status/2027538578117480624?s=46&t=8_bhSW_dLxRZg35ApFF90g

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mhra-welcomes-professor-jacob-george-as-he-starts-chief-medical-and-scientific-officer-role

From this he was only recently been appointed to his current role.

It’s not as though his tweets (which I think predate this?) would have been difficult to find.

And again, what is wrong with the tweets?

wow that’s some thread!

I'm a bit confused about how the approval process works. From Chat GPT I think the following bodies must give approval for a trial to go ahead.

MHRA: The national regulator for medicines and medical devices.
REC: Ethical approval (part of the HRA?)
HRA: Coordinates approval?
NHS Trust: must give site approval and confirm practical arrangements.

Where does Wes Streeting fit into this?

Holy fuck!

Trying to understand the POV of the MHRA, perhaps they see nothing wrong with the tweets but don't what to lay themselves open to a claim from you know who, and if Jacob George wasn't even involved in the Pathways trial, perhaps they think it makes no difference. Perhaps this is just a problem with anyone posting anything on Social Media.

But then what on earth is going on with the HRA?

https://nitter.net/WingsScotland/status/2027538578117480624

A man at the head of the ethical body for clinical trial approval believes in sex and notes this when assessing the ethics of a trial on sex to try and pretend you can remove sex when you can't. Cos sex is not gender. Even if you are nice about gender and want to recognise it's legitimacy. Cos reality.

As a natural part of the informed consent process participants, or those who consent on their behalf, should a demonstrate a clear understanding of this point or they should not be approved for acceptance.

Given the posts on this thread alone, I think I'm fairly in saying we have a little bit of a problem here.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with those posts. They aren't extreme. They aren't biased. They are acknowledging the core issue at the heart of the premise of the trial.

The deliberate and wilful conflation of sex and gender. They are not interchangeable. Humans are not Lego people.

https://x.com/soniasodha/status/2027681595180700081

Sonia Soda is on the case

NEW: I put some of the questions below to the MHRA.

It's very unclear from the MHRA's statement why they have recused him from any involvement in the Pathways trial. There are some important questions for them:

1. Has he been recused because he has publicly expressed beliefs relating to the inclusion of men/those who've been through male puberty in female sport? 2. How does this relate to their general policies about public statements of positions on social media and a professional role relating to a particular clinical trial?
2. On what basis do they justify these policies and the way they apply them?
3. Can they demonstrate they have applied these policies evenly - including to other trials/areas, and in relation to people who have publicly expressed the view that men should be able to identify into women-only services, spaces and sports?
4. When do they consider that scientific fact (men have an unfair advantage in sport in relation to women) and evidence (that including men in women's sports is a safety risk) evolves into a belief for the purposes of any scientific notion of "neutrality"?

A spokesperson said this in addition to the public statement already released:

"Civil servants, like anyone else, hold personal views but must also carry out their roles in line with the Civil Service core values of integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality. While there is no evidence to suggest that decisions taken were not impartial, Professor Jacob George is recused from further involvement in the Pathways clinical trial as a precaution."

So theyll be going through the social media of all other staff at the MHRA then? And this decision and the announcement by Wes Streeting will be reversed?

Really?

Every twist and turn in this sorry story exposes more of its nonsensical, irrational, coercive and authoritarian basis.

The Times has an article on the Prof being recused

https://archive.ph/DTHrZ

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/pathways-puberty-blocker-trial-recused-jacob-george-qnn669rjx

Unless some of the GI believers are also recused this seems extremely partisan.

I think it's going to be difficult to find anyone who doesn't have an opinion on this. Assume a bunch of people with the right qualifications are unearthed who, somehow, have been completely bypassed by the gender nonsense. They're asked if they'll be willing avtrial to oversee administering drugs to children to delay their puberty so the children can decide if they want to spend the rest of their lives pretending they've changed sex. Having convinced these people that you are serious and there aren't any hidden cameras they're told they'll also need to assess the possible permanent harms that these drugs may cause these children. I'm thinking the only people who don't leave or call the police will be sociopaths.

https://seeninjournalism.substack.com/p/breaking-literally-cathy-newmans

Thanks for the link, it was very informative.

The Alphabetty Mafia strikes again, the prof, who wasn't involved in the trial but knows that sex is immutable, gets kicked into touch, and the genderwanging grifter, who's promoting this batshitery, who is involved in the decision making on the trail, gets he's way cleared and promoted. 🤬

I hope Wings and the others pluck out this corruption by it's roots, and the whole bloody lot of them get sacked. 👊

And in another post, when test results confirmed the Algerian Olympic boxer <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/o/DTHrZ/www.thetimes.com/sport/boxing/article/imane-khelif-boxing-gender-issue-trans-paris-olympics-7dfzgjbr3" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Imane Khelif was a woman

What rests were these? Scrutiny of a passport?

Tests not rests!

The biggest issue is that the neutral point IS that you can't change sex. It's an experiment to stop the functional of primary sexual organs and to stop the development of secondary sexual organs so that you may be able to later take drugs or have surgery to imitation the secondary sexual organs. At no point do you change sex.

This is why the language absolutely matters because the phrase 'sex change' is wholly misleading.

Ironically sentiments about being born in 'the wrong body' don't capture the point that you can't change that body but do actually acknowledge it.

If we are looking at the outcome for a study on this it would be that you successfully changed the appearance of your secondary organs with complication and have reconciled your discomfort with the sex of your body as a result and are happy.

I distance on pronouns and persistently pushing the idea you have changed sex is showing an unhealthy response to treatment. It's demonstrating there has been no reconciliation and the person is continuing to escalate. It shows a state of denial.

This is actually all really important. You can't ever be mentally resolved if you aren't at peace with your body and that's enough. It should not be relying on outside interactions and affirmation at all cost.

And there is lies the bias of the very premise that a small number of people are better changing sex.

Cos sex is not gender. Everyone knows this. Even those transgender. Their identity as being transgender even admits this.

They're asked if they'll be willing avtrial to oversee administering drugs to children to delay their puberty so the children can decide if they want to spend the rest of their lives pretending they've changed sex.

It's not just delayed puberty.

It's part of a pathway that permanently prevents puberty for cosmetic reasons.

If we are looking at the outcome for a study on this it would be that you successfully changed the appearance of your secondary organs with complication and have reconciled your discomfort with the sex of your body as a result and are happy.

And that prevention of puberty has no long term adverse affect on health, aside from infertility, and that these children do not regret their decision to be sterilised in later life.

Excellent from Akua Reindorf

Just wanted to post this somewhere, it wasxlinked at the bottom of the article posted on the new thread about the cancelled poet. A detransitioner whose story I don't recollect reading about before

Trans news: Scotland detransitioner shares story after spending eight years living as a woman https://share.google/LiuAnJMHLEiIEBQu1

It mentions something recommended by Cass that had completely slipped my mind. Is anyone aware of anything being done to set up services for detransitioners? Perhaps it could be something they could crack on with while the trial is paused, before they risk creating more of them.

i have watched a couple of interviews with Michael. I especially enjoyed his interview with Mr Menno…highly recommended.

His experiences with the gender services when he decided to desist were awful. Drs basically telling him 🤷‍♀️ to every query he raised. How the fuck can medical staff claim that they are gaining informed consent when they themselves are unable to explain the potential consequences of stopping treatment?

SEEN journalism have summed it up well. This combined with the current exposes of other people imvolved is showing how ideologically driven Newman and the others have to be to have not done the same research into the others. Did they really think no one else would? It really has backfired on them.

Lots going on today. Hard to catch up.