Puberty blockers to be banned indefinitely for under-18s across UK

I don't know about the issue enough for me to comment on if she is biased or not, but I found this NYT interview (archive.org link) and she really seems to try to be playing both sides to me. Her main arguement seems to be don't treat this as an issue to resolve gender, that makes you ignore mental health/depression/other things, but with there not being the best care of that nature available for trans individuals, what avenue is left for them?

It sounds like she wants to go on about a lack of enough proof for her to stop treatment, but it also doesn't sound like she has enough proof to say it's harmful, but that doesn't seem to discourage her helping eliminate it.

Here's the biography and credentials of the primary expert: https://cass.independent-review.uk/about-the-review/the-chair/

I can understand being angry with what's happening but I don't believe there's any question about that persons medical expertise and credentials.

That's still legal. Only banned for gender dysmorphia.

While I don't agree with it's findings, there is a 388-page report this decision is based on.

A review of the infamous CASS report:

Results from 5 uncontrolled, observational studies suggest that, in children and adolescents with gender dysphoria, gender-affirming hormones are likely to improve symptoms of gender dysphoria, and may also improve depression, anxiety, quality of life, suicidality, and psychosocial functioning. The impact of treatment on body image is unclear. All results were of very low certainty using modified GRADE

Safety outcomes were reported in 5 observational studies. Statistically significant increases in some measures of bone density were seen following treatment with gender-affirming hormones, although results varied by bone region (lumber spine versus femoral neck) and by population (transfemales versus transmales). However, z-scores suggest that bone density remained lower in transfemales and transmales compared with an equivalent cisgender population. Results from 1 study of gender-affirming hormones started during adolescence reported statistically significant increases in blood pressure and body mass index, and worsening of the lipid profile (in transmales) at age 22 years, although longer term studies that report on cardiovascular event rates are required. Adverse events and discontinuation rates associated with gender-affirming hormones were only reported in 1 study, and no conclusions can be made on these outcomes.

This document was prepared in October 2020

Evidence review (.PDF): Gender-affirming hormones for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/20220726_Evidence-review_Gender-affirming-hormones_For-upload_Final.pdf

Other reading:

Fact Check: New York Times Publishes Misleading Story On Puberty Blocker Study

Gender-affirming care can improve mental health outcomes in transgender youth | Department of Epidemiology

Watching:

Exposing the Dangers of Anti-Trans Fascism | RE: The Cass Review & Labour's Downfall

think

I'm gonna stop you right there, no useful thought process was involved here at all.

They are acting upon the recommendation of the largest systematic review of the evidence in the UK to date.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/10/what-are-the-key-findings-of-the-nhs-gender-identity-review

The plan is " to set up a clinical trial into the use of puberty blockers next year and to recruit the first patients by spring. Streeting said the study would help “establish a clear evidence base for the use of this medicine”."

Essentially, the research on this has been so polarized, the results so conflicting and the science riddled with terrible methodology etc that the government is saying "fuck it, we'll establish our own gigantic study."

No.