Netherlands Puberty Blocker Review Comes to Opposite Conclusion, Dismisses Cass Review

[ForZingyCat]

https://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/adviesonderwerpen/behandeling-en-begeleiding/transgenderzorg-voor-jonger

How many of the committee that performed the review have direct or indirect links to the prescribing of puberty blockers or hormone treatments?

https://www.healthcouncil.nl/site/binaries/site-content/collections/documents/2026/06/30/transgender-care-for-adolescents/transgender-care-for-adolescents-summary.pdf

This is the executive summary of their report.

Thanks for the summary! It says: "the potential effects of treatment on cognition and fertility have not yet been sufficiently studied, and data on long-term treatment outcomes are lacking. Furthermore, the number of people who regret treatment cannot be accurately determined based on the available literature, due to generally short follow-up periods and substantial loss to follow-up in studies"

This is pretty much in lube with Cass. They are also both in favour of continuing to provide puberty blockers - Cass in a clinical trial setting, the Dutch paper after extensive psychological work.

The problem with the Dutch is that they have not been vigorous with their research. https://segm.org/Dutch-studies-critically-flawed I find it difficult to show any regard for the conclusions of people who discard data that doesnt fit with the outcome they want. They say that international studies are not relevant because of different approaches and they are basing their conclusions only on Dutch studies.

The downloads, which contain the detail, are unfortunately written in Dutch so necessary to run them through google translate. I'm too busy to do that today.

Is there much push-back in the Netherlands when it comes to trans ideology and the transitioning of children? Somehow I think it is Britain that is the leading the way on this; including being ahead of the U.S, where the resistance has been caught up in Trump's culture war - and is far less effective because of that.

Such conclusions have to be viewed within the wider context of captured organisations and professionals seeking to justify their actions - and even though they have come to a different headline conclusion, the evidence, or lack of it, is just the same as withCass's findings.

Has there been a Tavistock scenario anywhere else in recent years?

t’s very curious that, in this field of healthcare, specialist professional experience is somehow treated as evidence that someone’s judgement can’t be trusted. That makes little sense. In most areas of medicine, we’d expect a review to be informed by people with relevant expertise, while managing any conflicts of interest transparently.

The problem with the Cass Review was precisely that it was led by people who lacked prior specialist expertise in this area of medicine. To me, that’s a much greater concern than the fact that experts have experience treating the patients they’re discussing.

Is it a medical issue or a psychological one? If it's a medical issue then what is the actual medical problem that needs to be tackled, considering that these kids do not have physical health issues and their bodies are perfectly healthy? In fact, the idea is to impair healthy bodies and body parts and to prevent the natural, regular development of the body.

Can tests - e.g. blood, scans - be done to diagnose the medical issue and determine the course of medical treatment, as with other conditions where surgery and medication are given? This goes for adults as well as kids.

Who are the medical experts in this field? Can you name any or point to credible specialist professional medical associations in the field of transitioning? Who are the great scientists and researchers who have helped advance this medical field?

The review was very much informed by the views of experienced specialist proessionals but it was not led by them. And that's how it should be done. If there is concen that lot of the experts in some specialism have gone off-piste or if there is a lot of controversy within the specialism then it's wrong to ask the professional experts in that specialism to run the review.

Instead someone with wide expertise in the broader field needs to direct the review according to the standards of that broader field. The specialism is paediatric gender care and the broader field is paediatrics. Properly done.

It’s a shame your ‘curiosity’ doesn’t extend to wondering why independence may be necessary in a review.

In any other area of medicine we’d expect those leading a major evidence review to have deep knowledge of the field they’re evaluating, while managing conflicts of interest transparently. Excluding specialists from leadership because they have relevant experience risks losing the contextual understanding needed to interpret the evidence accurately and meaningfully. And that was exactly the problem with the Cass review which makes it so poor. A review cannot adequately assess a complex specialist field without leaders who understand that field in depth.

Very good points. In Cornwall, Dr Hopper wanted his feet removed and succeeded in getting it done. Nobody thinks he had a medical/surgical problem and so it must be psychological.

Why isn't the same logic applied to the gender questioning?

They are curiously incurious about the longterm outcomes of their pathway. "We've got no data, shrug shoulders." It's weird.

I asked you this above, but you seem to have missed my post. Just who are the specialists in this field? What is the medical evidence for putting physically healthy kids on puberty blockers?

Can you provide a single name for a medical expert in this field?

Funny how puberty blockers are fine with CIS kids and only does it become a problem when they’re trans! Gotta love feminist identifying transphobes! Well done Netherlands, stick it to the captured UK

No, that is not the case. That's just not how an evidence review works. It's based on the quality of the published evidence and there are formal quality criteria. Cass understands paediatric medicine and how to conduct an evidence review fairly and correctly.

She did a sterling job. I might not agree with all of her conclusions but I can't fault her process or indeed her determination to stay neutral and listen to all points of view while she was in charge.

The children given short term puberty blockers for precocious puberty have observable abnormal physical signs and abnormal hormone levels for their age. That's why they are treated.
What are the physical signs and abnormal blood tests for gender confused children?

Trans people aren’t confused. Next.

They are not "fine"; they are recognised as serious drugs with serious side effects prescribed as a last resort for a serious medical condition (precocious puberty), and only used for a short time.

Funny how neo sexist Genderists will throw any old shit around in the hope of distracting people from their weird desire to scare children into taking really damaging "medical" treatments.

At least, I assume that's why they do it.

Because no one coukd be stupid enough to actually believe delaying precocious puberty then letting it happen naturally at a more usual age is the same thing as permanently blocking a naturally occuring normal puberty, rendering someone at best sterile, and research now shows likely brain-damaged, in order to introduce artificial hormones so thry can chemically force a handful cross-sex secondary sexual characteristics to partially develop, could they?

Trans people aren't confused. They are just wrong in what they believe everyone else feels, and that leads them to make changes to their bodies trying to fix something that was never broken.

It's terribly sad.

And the people who cheerlead for "gender medicine" are .... not people who I can have any respect for.

No, that is not the case. That's just not how an evidence review works.

You don't accept that major evidence reviews are typically led by people with substantial expertise in the relevant clinical or scientific field?

"what everyone else feels" is entirely irrelevant to whether a person is trans or not.

So what are the signs and symptoms of these children who allegedly need puberty blockers?

Exactly as they are for children with gender dysphoria.

It is absolutely fundamental to a trans identity.

A trans identity is literally "I don't think my mind is right for my body. I think my mind is not like the minds of other people of my sex I think my mind is like the minds of people of the opposite sex"

Dear God, think will you!

Being trans is literally pointing at people of the opposite sex and saying "I believe I feel like they do"!

Otherwise, and I will say this very clearly,

They
Would
Not
Be
Using
The
Word
That
Labels
The
Opposite
Sex
To
Label
How
They
Feel
Inside