Puberty blockers for children with gender dysphoria to be banned indefinitely by UK Labour government

[-]

BigMeat2005@reddit

This is terrible I think all kids should be out on puberty blockers and all furries should be spayed and neutered

[-]

Aren‘t puberty blockers mostly prescribed to kids under 10 who undergo puberty too early while their body isn‘t able to cope with the developments? I hope this law won‘t prevent doctors from helping their patients.

[-]

gravygrowinggreen@reddit

I hope this law won‘t prevent doctors from helping their patients.

Well, it will prevent doctors helping kids with gender dysphoria, but it won't prevent puberty blockers from being prescribed for treatment of things other than gender dysphoria.

[-]

corbynista2029@reddit

Which is ridiculous because theortically a doctor can prescribe puberty blockers to a 15-year-old cis kid but if they do it with a 15-year-old trans kid, they can be jailed for it.

[-]

Tomoomba@reddit

If they did do that for a cis kid though and he didn't actually need it. Wouldn't that be malpractice and not actually allowed?

[-]

corbynista2029@reddit

If there is a medical need to prescribe to a 15yo cis kid, the doctor won't be jailed.

If there is a medical need to prescribe to a 15yo trans kid, the doctor will be jailed.

JuniorAd1210@reddit

the goal is to go through puberty as naturally and normally as possible

Who are you to decide what is or isn't the goal? The problem is, that puberty is, irreversible. Seems rather counterproductive to force someone to go through it, only to make a "transition" afterwards so much harder.

what's wrong with being visibly trans...

Nothing. But we have no right to force upon that choice on anybody.

[-]

just-a-cnmmmmm@reddit

their natural puberty (precocious) is abnormal. you understand what i'm saying don't you? they make the puberty normal. blockers stop it all together. it is not medically necessary. most children will feel their identity doesn't match, they tend to grow out of it. if they don't, they can make the decision to transition as adults.

[-]

JuniorAd1210@reddit

their natural puberty (precocious) is abnormal. you understand what i'm saying don't you?

Yes, I'm just pointing out that their abnormality doesn't invalidate someone else's abnormality, nor does this abnormality have anything to do with whether something is natural or not. The question still stands.

it is not medically necessary

I think that's up to medical professionals together with the patients to decide. Not you, I, or the government.

most children will feel their identity doesn't match, they tend to grow out of it

And if they don't? How does one kid "growing out of it" justify banning a treatment for others?

if they don't, they can make the decision to transition as adults

When it is essentially too late, and will have a more severe health impact (not just mentally, but physically as well, even in terms of life expectancy). But, I guess they don't matter, do they? Just the imaginary children you think this legislstion will save.

homosexuality does not require medical intervention

That's not what people 50 years ago thought. Also, I didn't use it as a comparison. I used it as an example to teach you the difference between the words natural and normal; words that you were misusing to make your point before.

We're talking about legistlation that is basically used for silly "save the children" moral political points, but that will have actual negative impact for the handful of people that it actually concerns.

[-]

just-a-cnmmmmm@reddit

what severe health impact, regarding life expectancy, are you referring to?

[-]

JuniorAd1210@reddit

Well I asked you, how about we force you to a sex change and see what happens? What kind of medical impacts do you think it might have?

Going through male puberty will shave some decade or so from your life expectancy right there. And getting on hormone therapy after the fact will shave some more.

[-]

just-a-cnmmmmm@reddit

surely you understand that there is a difference between forcing something vs not doing anything and letting things happen as they should. children can't consent to this. i'm not replying further

[-]

A child is around the range of 4 to 12. The lumping of teenagers in with language that sounds like people under 10 are transitioning is wrong

[-]

MuchCat3606@reddit

Ok, that makes sense. Sounds like a different drawing of the line of consent. I personally am more comfortable with 18.

[-]

Liamface@reddit

Teenagers aren’t children but they aren’t adults and typically cannot provide consent on their own behalf.

Teens and children can get cosmetic surgeries but it’s with informed parental consent.

In this case, hormone blockers are safe and can be stopped. It’s very telling that these are only banned for trans minors but not minors entirely.

[-]

Wilder9507@reddit

The gender dysphoria is a medical condition.

[-]

dairy__fairy@reddit

Mental health condition. That’s why it’s in the DSM 5.

[-]

Bwunt@reddit

A genuine gender dysphoria is not yet treatable and it's unlikely that it will ever be. It's mainly caused by the BNST part of the brain (which is sort of gender firmware) being "wired" for wrong gender; in this sense, gender dysphoria is effectively a low-level intersex disorder.

Just like higher level intersex, such person will never psychologically accept their sex. Person's gender identity is hardwired into their brain, it's medically proven (as unethical as that experiment was, conclusion was pretty solid)/

[-]

dairy__fairy@reddit

I don’t really disagree with that. But it’s not what “trans” rights supporters argue or admit.

Plus the bigger issue now is the social contagion problem. We are having way more people than statistically possible start claiming all these things as a social marker. And lots of grifters encouraging it for political allyship or money.

That’s a serious problem that needs intervention. Sadly, most prominent figures involved are openly partisan and resist for unscientific reasons.

[-]

Dr_Mocha@reddit

Doctors often prescribe medicine for said mental health conditions. Like SSRIs.

Doctors know best practices for gender dysphoria. Mind your business.

[-]

Nice try but you're not qualified.

[-]

just-a-cnmmmmm@reddit

but even if a qualified person said the same thing you'd find a way to disagree....

[-]

nick_mullah@reddit

Well of course, because the qualified person would be transphobic.

[-]

plumjuicebarrel@reddit

False equivalence. Go be a clueless dork somewhere else.

[-]

dairy__fairy@reddit

My aunt is one of the inventors of PCIT — parent child interactive therapy and a world renowned research psychologist. I’ve discussed this issue plenty with her and others. Hell, we were discussing this two decades ago as dsm 4 revision came out since she’s involved in it. And my field of war was national politics so I’ve gotten it from every angle.

I understand better than most how much personal politics goes into these public decisions. Presumably you do too. Keep moving, doc.

[-]

No, you just aren’t understanding what they’re saying. They’re saying that if a trans kid medically requires puberty blockers, they could not legally receive them because they are trans I.e. they have gender dysphoria, which is correct. Even if a trans kid needed them for a reason outside of starting their transition, they would not be able to receive them.

They are not designed, or intended to "cure gender dysmorphia". There isn't even any such thing AS "gender dysmorphia"? Is it too much to ask a clown like you to even get the basic terminology right?

When the government interferes with treatments that the medical consensus approves of in the US, that's crazy country, leading to related treatments being denied out of fear of being targeted.

When the government interferes with treatments that the medical consensus approves of in the UK, that's not crazy country, so it won't lead to related treatments being denied out of fear of being targeted.

Really, though, this conversation should be primarily about the fact that the UK just banned a treatment endorsed by the British Medical Association, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, World Health Organization, World Medical Association, Endocrine Society, Pediatric Endocrine Society, American Academy of Pediatrics, World Professional Association for Transgender Health, American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Psychological Association, Canadian Paediatric Society, Australian Professional Association for Trans Health, European Society for Pediatric Endocrinology, Australian Professional Association for Trans Health, New Zealand Medical Association, Swedish Association for Transgender Health, German Society for Endocrinology, Dutch Society for Endocrinology, French National Authority for Health, Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Norwegian Directorate of Health, and so on.

[-]

justgivemeasecplz@reddit

Endorsing a treatment is one thing, prescribing said treatment to a child which will have irreversible life altering effects is another.

We typically don’t give children the opportunity to make those kind of choices so it’s in the hands of the government to make a ruling

[-]

Panic_angel@reddit

>prescribing said treatment to a child which will have irreversible life altering effects is another.

Denying them the blockers also has "irreversible life altering effects"

[-]

justgivemeasecplz@reddit

You can’t claim ‘doing nothing’ alters anything at all

[-]

Wilder9507@reddit

Doing nothing ensures a medical condition gets worse. Whether it's cancer or gender dysphoria.

[-]

Gender dysphoria is a mental condition that can kill you, just like many other mental conditions like depression, bipolar disorder, schizophenia, etc. This is, again, the medical consensus.

[-]

justgivemeasecplz@reddit

Of course it can but it’s completely insignificant compared to cancer mortality so the comparison is ridiculous.

According to statistics online, there were just over 3000 deaths attributed to mental illness in the under 75s in the UK in 2021. Or 0.5% of the total deaths that year. Gender dysphoria isn’t even mentioned as one of the included conditions so we could conclude it’s a fraction of the already small fraction.

Cancer on the other hand was 23% of all deaths in the same year.

[-]

How are you not already aware of that study? The Lancet is a major medical journal. You are advocating interfering in the decisions of doctors and youre not even aware of the most well known research on the condition?? Shame on you. That's disgusting.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(22)00280-2/abstract

Are you telling me that with a prescription of puberty blockers, this sample group will be guaranteed to go on and live long happy lives?

Of course not. That is not how therapies work. Chemotherapy doesn't ensure you don't die of cancer.

You clearly have no idea what youre talking about, but are comfortable ruining peoples lives anyway. Im not interested in continuing a discussion with someone that belligerent.

[-]

Panic_angel@reddit

>You can’t claim ‘doing nothing’ alters anything at all

So... Puberty does nothing at all?

[-]

justgivemeasecplz@reddit

Who’s prescribing puberty? It’s not a choice someones making, it’s natural development of the human body

[-]

Panic_angel@reddit

Some natural developments are harmful in certain contexts, and refusing to acknowledge that does not constitute a valid argument for or against anything.

[-]

the8thbit@reddit

Then why not just ban all medication? Nearly every medication that exists can have side effects. Many of them quite dangerous side effects. Chemotherapy, for example, is far more dangerous than puberty blockers. If denying people chemotherapy doesn't have "irreversible life altering effects", then surely the best course of action is to ban it?

But of course, denying someone healthcare does have life altering effects. In the case of puberty blockers and chemotherapy, those effects can be life ending.

[-]

justgivemeasecplz@reddit

Cancer and gender dysphoria are not the same. If thats not obvious to you then there really nothing else to discuss

Minors can receive plastic surgery with the stipulation that the doctor believes it beneficial (as well as parental consent). You’re just wrong that it has to be life or death. Hell I decided to check and there’s not even a minimum age requirement for a vasectomy. Trans healthcare is shown to overwhelmingly have positive outcomes. It is a gross double standard, and factually incorrect what you’ve said.

[-]

justgivemeasecplz@reddit

The stretch is unreal.

This isn’t the point I was arguing which you’ve conveniently ignored.

It might not be exclusively life or death but a minor is only going to get plastic surgery on the NHS if they’ve had a serious injury resulting in disfigurement. I would love to hear some stats on the number of vasectomies given to minors as that sounds extremely rare.

[-]

the8thbit@reddit

children shouldn't make these descisions

I actually meant doctors shouldn't make these decisions unless the condition is life threatening

I actually meant doctors shouldn't make these decisions unless the condition is life threatening or some other unspoken set of characteristics are met

If a "wood transfusion" was done in the past and had a success rate as high as puberty blockers have had, I would have no problem with people getting them.

what's the success rate of puberty blockers preventing dysphoria and adverse mental health outcomes in minors? citation required.

[-]

FaThLi@reddit

What is your definition of success rate, because that might influence whatever citation you are looking for.

Here is a good article that might show you how successful puberty blockers are. It at least shows that it isn't "just a phase" for them, and is something they want.

This study It takes a look at the mental health of teens who receive puberty blockers, versus teens who wanted to but could not receive puberty blockers. It concludes the mental health of the teens who received them is superior.

Here's a study that shows people who took puberty blockers are highly unlikely to regret having taken them. Of 220 participants only 9 regretted it, and they did not look into why they regretted it, only that they reported that they regretted it. Which could be due to side effects, or external pressure from friends and family, or it could be that they really just discovered they weren't trans. I think that would have been really nice to know.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

the first study found the 1/3 of the group who were males did not stop taking their blockers from median age of 14 till median age of 20, and for the majority who were female, from age 16 to 19. surely reassuring that they want to be taking these, but that's not really an efficacy endpoint, obviously.

the second study, a large self reported survey (already low quality by definition), did find a reduction in reported lifetime ideation between those who wanted blockers and had them vs those who wanted blockers and didn't have them. there was no difference in suicidality in the last year, or mental health and substance abuse. did their suicidality prevent them from getting the meds, or did the meds cause a reduction? how seriously do we take self reported survey data? this is the definition of low quality evidence.

for your third study, again, it's not surprising that people who want to be on the meds are still taking the meds. that's not an efficacy endpoint.

thank you for posting actual studies!

[-]

DontUseThisUsername@reddit

\^See that's the logically consistent stance. Plate their skin with wood and inject them with tiny amounts of wood so they can look more like the feel.

Go on then, point me to where it says people can't be treated with puberty blockers for other reasons?

It's like saying morphine will no longer be prescribed for a missing nail, and you think that means if you have both a broken arm and a missing nail they won't be prescribe it for the broken arm.

[-]

Backwards. The restriction is on what they can be used for, not who.

[-]

Dorgamund@reddit

Kind of a bizarre hair to split. So the blockers are banned for all kids with gender dysphoria, but not trans kids, ignoring the fact that the one almost necessarily implies the other. What scenario does that clarification even matter? A trans kid who also needs to be treated for precocious puberty, and that is what is written on their sheet?

[-]

I feel like it's just people taking it as the worst possible scenario are running with it, pretty common for any hot button topic, assuming everyone's got the worst intentions and that the worst outcome is the most likely one

[-]

Phaselocker@reddit

Yes, cause surely the same hasnt happened for abortion laws and then the worst case scenario DOES happen and the person is still punished. Oh wait, that literally does happen.

No, prescribing puberty blockers for dysphoria is currently stopped and may be banned.

Prescribing them for something else wouldn't be affected.

That is made worse when the body quickly morphs into the very thing that you fear and have disgust with becoming. This leads to many trans children killing themselves.

This will be a crisis and many children who wouldn’t have otherwise will get very sick and may hurt themselves or worse.

Imagine if you just started to turn into the opposite gender one day and everyone gaslit you and told you that’s normal….

[-]

Aaron1945@reddit

Then maybe stop talking to children about things that aren't appropriate for them?

Children will not come to these conclusions seriously on their own unless its the adults around them pushing it. Children should not have disgust at men or women. Again, that's an adult perspective.

The crisis, is a sizable group of adults, who refuse to stop indoctrinating children with this nonsense. Given how common depression and suicide after transitioning is, and the permanent damage puberty blockers cause, people who keep pushing this on their children should be charged with child abuse.

This shit is like young kids being super aware of race. That comes from parents, putting their ideologies before their childs wellbeing.

You're messing with these kid's lives, for aesthetics. Literally for these children to be prettier.

Also, suicide rate doesn't change after a person with gender dysphoria changes gender. The suicide rate actually increases after gender affirming care.

"The two studies that used either the general population or matched age and sex controls found a much higher prevalence of suicide-related outcomes, specifically suicide attempts and death by suicide, in post-GAS patients than in control groups."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/26318318231189836

[-]

ColonialDagger@reddit

That study you posted was for delaying female reproductive organs. And only studying SHORT TERM use in rats. The period was FOUR WEEKS. We are talking about having children on these drugs for YEARS.

Yes, I did. The reason I did is because that is the best case scenario. However, real life is never a best case scenario, which is why in that same sentence I posted another study that painted a much more negative light on the fertility of transgender patients.

How about this study...

That's the same study I linked, so great job in being reactionary and not actually reading what I said. There's a reason that same article you're talking about also says,

"The transgender population faces many barriers to care, such as provider discrimination, lack of information, legal barriers, scarcity of fertility centers, financial burden, and emotional cost. Further research is necessary to investigate the feasibility of experimental FP options, provide better evidence-based information to clinicians and transgender patients alike, and to improve access to and quality of reproductive services for the transgender population."

It's literally in the abstract. Like I said, these are extremely complicated medical procedures that require an informed doctor and an informed patient, not a lawmaker. Do we really think that Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, or Boris Johnson cares enough to look at these studies to try to actually understand this?

Furthermore, you stated about this study:

where they found that 43 out of 49 boys had significantly lowered sperm counts.

That's not what the study said. At all. It actually stated, "In children treated with GnRHa, 43 of 49 patients had a decrease in testicular volume.", citing this study which didn't measure fertility, it measured the effectiveness of GnRHA puberty blockers. It also didn't measure the rate of regrowth after being off that treatment. The reason this was included in the study we both cited is because that section talks about the effects of puberty blockers in a phsyiological sense, not yet in a fertility sense. All that sentence does is help clarify that puberty blockers do work. Frankly, if puberty blockers didn't decrease testicular volume, that could be a huge problem because that could be an indication that those blockers aren't working since puberty induces testicular growth.

Let's continue to the part of Estrogen therapy two sections under where you pulled that quote from. In this section, it states:

"In the first study to describe the impact of GAHT on semen parameters, Adeleye et al. evaluated a cohort of 28 transwomen who presented for sperm cryopreservation (32). The authors compared 18 patients who had never used hormones, 3 who had discontinued hormones before specimen collection (mean discontinuation period of 4.4 months), and 7 who had continued hormones at the time of specimen collection. There were significant differences in concentration, motility, and total motile sperm count between the three groups; the hormone-naïve patients had the best semen parameters. Three of the patients who had continued hormones were azoospermic while all patients who had discontinued hormones had semen analysis parameters that were within normal limits based on World Health Organization (WHO) reference values (32)."

Keep in mind we're not even talking about puberty blockers anymore, now we're on puberty blockers and estrogen therapy.

You're messing with these kid's lives, for aesthetics. Literally for these children to be prettier.

Again, it's not for aesthetics, it's so they don't end up killing themselves. Taking puberty blockers and not taking puberty blockers are both irreversible decisions that a transgender minor have to make, but you're conveniently ignoring that part where not taking those blockers is also a choice. When necessary, yes, minors do need to make choices about the future of their own lives.

Also, suicide rate doesn't change after a person with gender dysphoria changes gender. The suicide rate actually increases after gender affirming care.

This is blatant cherry picking, and I try to give the benefit of the doubt a lot, which is why I even replied to your comment in the first place. That excerpt you posted is in reference to other studies. The study you pulled that quote from fully disagrees with that assertion. It's also a meta-study that evaluated "five studies compared the same patients pre- and post-GAS", so two indicated an increase in suicidality and three indicated a decrease. The odds are not in your favor. If you gander your eyes to one sentence before that quote, you'll read:

"Overall, suicide-related outcomes were found to be less frequent in patients after GAS when compared to those same patients’ pre-GAS indicators."

Alternatively you can look at the sentence after that states:

"However, the studies that compared the treatment groups with either patients in an earlier phase of the transition or those who desired but had not yet undergone surgery showed lower post-GAS suicide-related outcomes, including suicidal ideation and suicide attempts."

Or you can even look at the conclusion of, again, the abstract, which reads:

"Suicidal ideation was generally found to decrease post-GAS; results regarding suicide attempts were inconsistent, and there was insufficient data to draw any conclusion about the effects of GAS on death by suicide."

At least try to read past the sentences that support your point. These are scientific articles. You can't just take the sentences you like and run with them, you need to read all around them, too. If I can so easily call out what you are saying as wrong using your own sources, you really need to do better research into those same sources that you are using.

[-]

Easy-Purple@reddit

I’m going to refer to this post the next time I get into an argument with a European trying to criticize American domestic policy

[-]

Blarg_III@reddit

When the child reaches adulthood, they can make that choice.

A lot of these children don't reach adulthood, and the effects of puberty largely are not reversible.

[-]

Snakend@reddit

The effects of puberty blockers is also not largely reversible. So you stick with nature's choice. Also, suicide rates in trans people does not change after gender affirming treatment.

[-]

Dmanrock@reddit

You're over stretching, if the child needs the treatment due to whatever medical reason, it's perfectly fine and legal. If it's due to gender dysphoria, then yes it would be illegal.

[-]

Amadon29@reddit

Yes this was under the advice of medical professionals after reviewing the evidence. I think they know more than you

[-]

MintCathexis@reddit

You misunderstood the ban, the ban is not on prescription of puberty blockers to people with gender dysphoria, but for gender dysphoria. A person with gender dysphoria can still be prescribed punerty blockers for other reasons.

And I don't agree with the ban btw, I think it's needless and harmful pandering to the right in an effort to prevent Reform from gaining more supporters after recent immigration statistics came out.

[-]

watzimagiga@reddit

That depends who you ask. Lots of people like to argue that you don't have to have dysphoria to be trans. You can just self ID.

[-]

SZEfdf21@reddit

Yes, all (?) trans kids have gender disphoria, but not all use cases for puberty blockers in 15 year olds are for gender disphoria.

Prescribing puberty blockers to a 15 year old trans kid under one of those other use cases is still allowed.

Considering the suicide, anxiety, and depression rates of trans teens who are unsupported…

I’m not really seeing a big difference here. Or are we not considering suicide a death caused by a medical issue legitimate?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32345113/

https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2024/09/25/nx-s1-5127347/more-trans-teens-attempted-suicide-after-states-passed-anti-trans-laws-a-study-shows

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-transgender-youth-suicide-1.6487787

[-]

False_Ad3429@reddit

Gender dysphoria would call for medical treatment.

[-]

Wheream_I@reddit

A 15yo straight kid wouldn’t be prescribed puberty blockers, as that isn’t precocious puberty.

[-]

QuackingMonkey@reddit

Being straight has nothing to do with this. Gender and sexuality are separate things.

[-]

Snakend@reddit

We don't let children make life altering decisions in any other case. In many cases the child is rendered sterile by the puberty blockers. We don't let 15 year old girls have hysterectomies because they don't want to have kids. Kids change their minds all the time because they are kids. Ending a child's ability to reproduce because they want to be part of the cool LGBTQNP group is asinine.

And I get it, they won't look as good in adulthood as they would if they started treatment before puberty. But that's it. We are trading aesthetics for potential castration.

[-]

When they are adults they can take the risks. Not as children.

[-]

drhead@reddit

That is what puberty blockers are used for, to allow children to make the choice of whether or not to transition when they are an adult, instead of being forced to go through a puberty that will worsen their outcomes. 98% of people who start using puberty blockers for gender dysphoria end up continuing with HRT as an adult, so it's ridiculous to try to pretend that the benefits don't outweigh the risks.

[-]

Snakend@reddit

Puberty blockers are used to stop young children (10 or younger) from entering puberty too young. Not to treat gender dysphoria.

[-]

Unexceptional men are transitioning to women and competing in women's sports and breaking world records. That's a major issue. It impacts other people.

Your starting premise here is anecdotal and doesn't hold up to rigorous study. Current studies indicate no evidence of athletic advantages from historical puberty for people on HRT for multiple years, and there is additionally no evidence nor reason to believe in athletic advantages for trans women who never went through a natural puberty.

Giving a child puberty blockers until adulthood has major risks to future fertility. It is potentially reversible, but it some times causes sterilization. Patients undergoing gender affirmation treatment are advised to freeze sperm and eggs in case something like that happens.

Gender dysphoria increases risk of suicide. Risk of suicide takes priority over risk of infertility, and going through puberty is guaranteed to have irreversible effects. You already know the rate of desistance is low at 2% from what I mentioned earlier, so you know that there aren't droves of cis people being put on puberty blockers and ending up sterile. This isn't complicated for anyone who isn't horrendously biased against trans people.

This is also a prime example of why we tend to think of you, the cishets, as being the weird ones. You are literally more worried about a child's future fertility over them actually living to adulthood. The fuck is wrong with you?

[-]

Snakend@reddit

Suicide rates don't go down after gender affirmation care. You're entire premise is faulty. You assume the cure to gender dysphoria is gender reassignment. It is not. Many of these people continue to feel not themselves in their own body even after gender reassignment. In fact, trans patients who undergo surgery have a higher rate of suicide.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11063965/

[-]

HermeticAtma@reddit

Unfortunately this is what happens when some scientific fields get politicized… Detransitioning is rarely talked about due to fear of the LGTBQ community backslash. And not get me started with the often parroted suicides rates.

[-]

drhead@reddit

The study you linked is comparing trans patients who have undergone gender-affirming surgery with the general population. No shit the people who are part of a widely hated and discriminated against minority group have a higher suicide rate than the general population.

The only useful conclusion there is to be had from the study (and indeed the conclusion that it makes) is that gender-affirming surgery on its own is not enough, which is not at all surprising if you have any idea about how society generally treats trans people. The experience of being trans is more than just gender dysphoria, it also involves dealing with society running a constant witch hunt against people like you, it often involves friends and family disowning you after coming out or trying to coerce or force you into conversion therapy. Those issues are outside of the domain of what medicine can fix. Medicine can help with the gender dysphoria aspect, but unfortunately there is no pill or surgery that stops cis people from being dicks.

QuackingMonkey@reddit

Trans people's suicide rates don't go down after gender affirming treatment.

Yes they do, combined with an accepting environment these rates drop to the same level as the general population.

And yes, puberty blockers can absolutely sterilize the person undergoing the treatment.

Sure, anything can sterilize a person, but I'm talking about normal use, you're talking about an extreme outlier yet were saying it affected 'many cases'.

They are advised to have their eggs or sperm frozen for future use just in case that happens.

Well of course, most people who start with puberty blockers will follow through with HRT and/or surgeries that can/do cause sterility. Part of making an informed decision is knowing what's ahead of you, and for someone who (may) want(s) to have kids this is a thing they need to know about and decide what works best for them in the long run.

[-]

Refflet@reddit

In many cases the child is rendered sterile by the puberty blockers.

This is the first I've heard of that.

[-]

PineappleFrittering@reddit

Going straight from puberty blockers on to cross-sex hormones, as most of the Tavistock children did, would lead to infertility and loss of sexual function. Jazz Jennings, for example, will never be able to orgasm or have a child.

[-]

Refflet@reddit

Well yeah, one would think that going onto cross-sex hormones before puberty took its course would lead to infertility, even without the puberty blockers.

[-]

Wegwerf157534@reddit

As if they want it because they are cool.

This little snippet is revealing your low opinion. And that is shit, cause you otherwise brought arguments one could discuss about.

We do treat other illnesses though with trade offs, don't we. Heroin addiction with methadone, cancer with chemo. I'm not a doctor, but trade offs are a classic for medicine.

[-]

athural@reddit

I can't find any evidence that puberty blockers alone cause sterility, can you help me with that?

[-]

Moarbrains@reddit

bad bot

[-]

WhyNotCollegeBoard@reddit

Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.82475% sure that QuackingMonkey is not a bot.

It’s at a different demographic. Puberty blockers are traditionally used for 7-9 year olds going through puberty extremely early.

They were not originally intended to be used indefinitely by 12 year olds to stop puberty. Now they could be safe, but I don’t think there’s been clinical research demonstrating that.

[-]

Oppopity@reddit

This is based on the case report which is deeply flawed. They looked into how to treat kids with gender dysphoria but never consulted with any trans groups and legitamised the views of doctors who didn't even believe being trans was a real thing so they clearly had an agenda. They also threw out high quality evidence relying on people who don't know how evidence was grouped, as people would think high quality meant good evidence when it actually referred to the strengths of the sources. High quality evidence would be things like double blind trials which couldn't be done for puberty blockers. It would be unethical to deny those suffering from gender dysphoria from treatment and the group not given puberty blockers would know they're in the control groups when their puberty happens. Despite all this, the cass review couldn't even come to the conclusion that puberty blockers were harmful, just that we aren't sure. Even though we've been using them for decades on cis kids.

[-]

dylphil@reddit

Lol I would love to see your sources on all this. I’m gonna guess a very pro-trans journal which of course has no bias of its own.

If they do double blind studies for cancer patients, they can do them for trans people. The UK set up a clinical trial for them next year.

And this is exactly what I said. They aren’t sure if they are safe, so they aren’t advocating widely using them.

[-]

Oppopity@reddit

My source is the cass review itself lmao.

And no you can't do double blind trials with puberty blockers. It's unethical to withold treatment from people, and pointless because those in the control group will know they are in the control group when their puberty happens.

[-]

dylphil@reddit

The doctors admit in the study they don’t believe being trans is real?

Well I have no idea how they are setting up a clinical trial, but they are doing one. You are free to look into it

[-]

rapchee@reddit

The doctors admit in the study they don’t believe being trans is real? That seems odd

how did you come to this conclusion?

[-]

dylphil@reddit

Their comment. He said he got it from the report

[-]

rapchee@reddit

i can't find "The doctors admit in the study they don’t believe being trans is real" or anything similar

[-]

Moarbrains@reddit

You can even give them to a trans kid for other reasons.

[-]

Wanderstern@reddit

I don't want to be misconstrued as a transphobe or accused of concern-trolling, but I have stage IV deep infiltrating endometriosis and was urged to take Lupron for 6-12mo after my (first) surgery. I read the side effects (mental and physical) and was terrified. I refused to take it. I was shocked when I found out that some kids remain on GnRH agonists for years. I wanted to find out more about whether that's safe, but ran into biased accounts on both sides. I know that adults are typically only approved to take Lupron for 12mo at a time because it causes severe loss of bone density (and a host of other issues). I presume this is a concern for children as well?

Anyway, I hope that everyone affected is able to access the necessary support to process this decision. I don't say that lightly.

[-]

DickBlaster619@reddit

Read the article

[-]

It's a mental issue

[-]

kaoburb@reddit

less than 1% of all those who do

[-]

MuchCat3606@reddit

How do you know?

[-]

kaoburb@reddit

Research?????

[-]

LooseInvestigator510@reddit

You mean the percentage you just made up? Cool story. Hopefully the US follows.

Interesting that reddit claimed transgender surgies aren't done on minors and now there's a major legal case about a girl who says was pushed into hormones and a mastectomy by california doctors as a minor 🤔

[-]

mrgeetar@reddit

I did a lot of reading of medical studies about this issue recently. Prior to that I had the same opinion as you. Turns out trans kids have fairly consistent and measurable differences in their brain architecture even before hormone treatment. If I remember right it was cortical thickness and white matter density in the parietal lobes that were particularly notable on the MRIs. Their brains do appear to have structural similarities to that of the other sex, in multiple studies. It's not a big leap from that to say it's a medical condition. It made me question if the only difference between medical conditions and mental health ones is our lack of understanding when it comes to the brain.

[-]

mstrgrieves@reddit

These findings have been found in homosexuals and it's extremely debatable at best to state that there are morphological distinctions after controlling for homosexuality.

[-]

Oppopity@reddit

There is usually nothing physically or medically wrong with children with gender dysphoria, their symptoms are primarily psychological.

In other words. There is something wrong. Gender dysphoria is a mental disorder after all.

It would be a bit of a bugger if a transgender person ends up with some serious side-effects from blockers somewhere 10-20 years down the line

We've been using puberty blockers for decades on cis kids but now that trans kids are using them suddenly there's all these possible dangers we might not know of.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Also, if the distress of one's body turning into the 'wrong' sex drives a person with 'gender dysphoria' who is refused puberty blockers to suicide - what might happen 20 ears down the road will be the least of their problems.

They'll already be dead.

[-]

Special-Remove-3294@reddit

The point is that it is no longer a medical need for people with gender dysphoria to get this treatement. That is what this law does.

[-]

Suspicious-Leg-493@reddit

If there is a medical need to prescribe to a 15yo cis kid, the doctor won't be jailed.

If there is a medical need to prescribe to a 15yo trans kid, the doctor will be jailed.

That's the difference.

The medical needs for the cis kid could apply rhe same to the trans kid.

It only becomes a crime under that rule when prescribed for gender dysphoria purposes.

Which while a medical need also isn't the same as "if a trans kid ends up prescribed this it is illegal"

[-]

Pls-Dont-Ban-Me-Bro@reddit

You seem to be having a fundamental misunderstanding here. It’s not illegal under the ban to give these blockers to trans kids it’s illegal to give them to kids for the purpose of transitioning.

[-]

SendPicOfUrBaldPussy@reddit

If a 15 year old trans kid is going through early puberty, the doctor won’t be jailed.

It’s banning puberty blockers for gender dysphoria related problems, not for kids with gender dysphoria. If there is a non-gender dysphoria need for puberty blockers, trans or gender dysphoric kids can still be given puberty blockers.

[-]

MalaysiaTeacher@reddit

One is a verified usage for which the drug was intended. That's the difference.

[-]

podcasthellp@reddit

Not true. The kid can be trans and still get puberty blockers for other reasons. You can be trans and not block your puberty. also, we shouldn’t let kids make major permanent life altering decisions. I for one believe that when you are 18, do whatever you want. When I was 12, I wanted to be a dinosaur. I shouldn’t have had my limbs chopped off because at 13 I wanted to be a human

[-]

lin00b@reddit

Just simplify it to 15yo kid. Regardless of their mental state, technically if they haven't started the process they aren't trans.

[-]

24bitNoColor@reddit

If there is a medical need to prescribe to a 15yo cis kid, the doctor won't be jailed.

If there is a medical need to prescribe to a 15yo trans kid, the doctor will be jailed.

That's the difference.

excluding all the studies that demonstrated it's effectiveness.

which studies are these? the o ly ones I've seen have been extremely low quality, lacking even a control group. THAT is a legitimate criticism, not a "low quality" criticism which doesn't even make sense in this context.

whose saying it has to be double blinded? not all RCTs are double blinded. something with a randomly assigned control group would be sufficient.

wanting a treatment to have established benefit is not the same as morbid curiosity.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

which studies are these? the o ly ones I've seen have been extremely low quality, lacking even a control group.

You do know that placebo treatment doesn't work with something like this, right? Not to mention that the only reason they're "low quality" in your mind is that they don't agree with your ideological crusade.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

who said placebo? surely not me.

Not to mention that the only reason they're "low quality" in your mind is that they don't agree with your ideological crusade.

absolutely false. I have no issues with people transitioning medically if it's going to help them. we just don't have good data to this effect right now.

quality of evidence is a well established system when evaluating scientific studies and suggests that the available studies are not sufficient to determine a difference between the treatment groups. Just because you don't understand how to evaluate medical evidence does not mean that those who disagree with you are just as ideologically biased as you are.

http://cgf.cochrane.org/sites/cgf.cochrane.org/files/uploads/uploads/how_to_grade.pdf

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2364804/

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

who said placebo? surely not me.

lacking even a control group.

Literally what a control group does.

absolutely false.

opposes them transitioning

Ok buddy.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

control group and placebo are not the same thing. have you considered having even a modicum of competence on the topic at hand prior to opining on it? it helps a lot.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

have you considered having even a modicum of competence on the topic at hand prior to opining on it?

Lmao, says the guy who thinks control groups don't get placebos.

I have no issues with people transitioning medically if it's going to help them.

Yet you continuously argue against letting them. You're straight up lying, you absolutely have issues with them transitioning, you're literally celebrating them not being allowed to.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

control groups may or may not get place is. there are plenty of times where a placebo is not necessary or practical, ie see the rarity of a placebo or sham surgery. that doesn't mean you can't do an RCT on a knee repair or appendectomy vs not.

you're confusing a placebo, which is important in a blinded or double blinded study, for something needed in any RCT. It isn't. the advantage of an RCT is the ramdomization and control, being double blind is just extra.

Yet you continuously argue against letting them.

actually, i'm arguing that the data for efficacy isn't strong. note that you've not even addressed that yet despite it being the core of my argument.

you're literally celebrating them not being allowed to.

i'm sure you can quote me directly where I do that.

[-]

Oppopity@reddit

You can't have a control group because it would be unethical. If you were unsure about the safety of knee surgeries you couldn't just have a bunch of people with knee problems not undergo surgery so you could compare them to those that did.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

its unethical to have a control group for something with established efficacy. this is not the case here.

f you were unsure about the safety of knee surgeries you couldn't just have a bunch of people with knee problems not undergo surgery so you could compare them to those that did.

you can do exactly that.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

actually, i'm arguing that the data for efficacy isn't strong.

No, you're arguing that you don't like the data because it doesn't support your view. There's strong data, plenty of it, but you dismiss it because they don't join you in your ideological crusade against trans people's existence.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

thanks for unblocking me to make this comment!

I'm clearly not arguing I don't like the data. one doesn't evaluate evidence based on,like or dislike. or I don't anyway, you seem to.

There's strong data, plenty of it

please link me a single clinical trial you would consider strong data.

[-]

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

Good to know you have literally nothing to bring in against it. Gotcha. Should've known, transphobes never can.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

bring against what? a link to the comment section of an 8 month old megapost on a lame sub where the highest ranked comment is a numbered lists of ad homs and well poisoning that doesn't actually provide any good clinical data?

if you're going to outsourse your brain to someone else, you should probably pick something better.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

Lmao. You consider it a "lame sub" because it doesn't mirror your desire to see trans people eradicated.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

actually, it's because the comments are filled with fallacious and low quality ones like the top of the one you linked me too.

your vile desire to see trans people eradicated.

lol is this some kind of projection?

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

"everything that doesn't support my crusade against the existence of trans people is low quality. Now allow me to refer to the cass report, a political hackjob written exclusively to demonise trans people that has been thoroughly shown to have less scientific rigour than a flat earther convention"

So shall we ban dentistry for children next? Until we determine under a long term study of children that dentistry is beneficial, how can we be sure we can make those decisions for children? Tooth pain is just a part of growing up.

[-]

TurnYourHeadNCough@reddit

It's been established that puberty blockers along with gender dysphoria psychological treatment produces better long-term life style results compared to gender dysphoric children who received psychological treatment into adulthood alone

are you referencing the jama open retrospective study of \~120 kids whose comparator arm were those who were non randomly excluded from receiving puberty blockers? or is there a new study on this with a real control group?

Children on puberty blockers report lower cases of suicide or suicidal thoughts

assuming we're talking about the same study, those on puberty blockers actually had no change in their psychological well being, but those who were not eligible for gnrh-a's had a decline in well being. because we don't know why that group was not eligible (likely due to not meeting criteria for the blockers, medically or psychiatrically) it's hard to attribute that decline to them not receiving the drug.

not establishing a risk in something poorly studied is obviously not the same as saying it is safe or effective.

i agree that dentistry is also bereft the type of high quality data we demand in medicine, but there's actually a ton of studies over many years (albeit often of low quality) on pediatric dentistry

[-]

AntifaAnita@reddit

Every medical treatment has more "don't knows" than "knows". We know children have better results with the treatment. We know it's been part of successful treatment of cancer in children. We have case studies showing that delaying puberty is not particularly risky to the long term health of a person. We make decisions based on what we know and study the things we don't. There's nothing to suggest that puberty blockers are risker than no treatment. So the best decision for treatment is to keep that avenue open for medical professionals, not to worry about convincing the ideological Extremists that have singled one minority.

The issue with trans studies is unlike teeth, trans people represent a tiny amount of population and are difficult to consistently study in the long term because people keep trying to kill them for being trans. They're demonized by politicians. They're harassed. They are driven to suicide because debate lords have nothing better to do with their lives than obsess about the medicial history 3000 children they have never met.

[-]

ballfondlersINC@reddit

puberty is reversible?

then why would you need blockers in the first place?

[-]

xAlphaKAT33@reddit

>The Department of Health and Social Care said the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM) had published independent expert advice that there is “currently an unacceptable safety risk in the continued prescription of puberty blockers to children”.

Sounds like what they're saying is just because randos on reddit with no medical training declare that puberty blockers on trans kids is the answer, medical experts do not say the same thing.

[-]

Lamballama@reddit

I'd there is a medical need due to gender dysphoria for a 15yo trans kid, that's not allowed. Strictly, if there is a medical need due to gender dysphoria in a 15yo cis kid, that's also not allowed. Gender dysphoria is not the same as being trans.

[-]

DrBarnaby@reddit

So your saying there's already a system in place that protects patients, except motivated by the patient's needs instead of hatred? Funny how that works.

[-]

Tomoomba@reddit

Who creates malpractice law

[-]

False_Ad3429@reddit

In both cases presumably the kids would need it, it's just the law had now said one of those kids don't "really" need it

[-]

FollowsHotties@reddit

Wouldn't that be malpractice and not actually allowed?

For cis kids they are used to treat a physical ailment with basically no side effects, as their puberty cycle is simply being reset

For trans kids they are used to treat a psychological ailment with side effects from delaying puberty cycle

[-]

bexkali@reddit

For trans kids their use is effectively to reduce their chance of becoming actively suicidal during what they feel is an enforced transition into the WRONG adult body compared to what their brains say they are.

Puberty blocking medications are used to reduce suffering and save lives.

Who gives a f*ck about long-term after-effects if someone's trans kid falls into despair and kills themself?

Moot point, wouldn't you say?

[-]

POTARadio@reddit

If we don't know the long term side effects, then we can't honestly claim that it's reducing suffering. The idea that puberty blockers are a miracle treatment which regularly prevents suicide is not backed up by good evidence. The UK is joining the likes of Finland, Sweden, and plenty of other countries that have stopped routine prescription of puberty blockers.

There's an enormous difference between delaying a precocious puberty, and never going through a natural puberty matching one's sex. The latter carried with it all kinds of risks, like being infertile or inorgasmic.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Versus possibly dead long before being infertile or anorgasmic would even be an issue? Do you hear yourself, here?

By your knee-jerk response, I take it you either really don't believe that genuine trans kids sometimes don't make it though what they see as their incorrect development during puberty..or you simply don't care about them as potential 'collateral damage'.

You honestly don't give a f*ck if they might kill themselves due to their suffering?

[-]

POTARadio@reddit

The idea that gender dysphoric children are highly likely to commit suicide without blockers and hormones is not backed up by evidence. Finland studied giving some dysphoric children blockers and hormones, and gave another talking therapy. They had the same mental health outcomes. Infamously, the Cass Review found the Tavistock clinic d to find positive impacts of blockers but continued to prescribe them anyway.

Governments across the world are taking a closer look at claims that puberty blockers and hormones save lives and stave off suicide. Blockers have been banned for a better part of a year now. The absence of a flood of suicide among teens shows how these claims were bunk.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Temporary Gender Dysphoria aside, there are NOT that many truly trans (brain developed structurally at odds with the rest of the body regarding sex characteristics/identity) people. So no, there wouldn't be a 'flood' of suicides regardless- again, not all GD people are trans, though all trans experience GD. Do you see the difference?

But denying those remaining small percentage most as risk for suicide because once they've gone through puberty their body will never really be completely successfully changeable into the body their brain tells them they are...is still unacceptable.

[-]

POTARadio@reddit

Careful now. The idea that "temporary gender dysphoria" exists would indicate that there's some people who identify and feel like the opposite sex, but will desist at a later date. That kind of idea will get you shunned in a lot of pro-trans communities.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Well that is the 'rationale' behind banning pre-pubertal use of hormones to delay puberty, isn't it? - the claim that some dysphoria 'resolves' upon completion of puberty, and so, more simplistically behind the ''Force 'em all to mature on schedule; they'll see it was just all temporary!" initiatives...right?

Even though gender affirming care correlates in research with much better mental health outcomes in trans kids. And even though trans adults looking back have described that forced puberty as the worst period of their lives.

[-]

POTARadio@reddit

> the claim that some dysphoria 'resolves' upon completion of puberty, and so, more simplistically behind the ''Force 'em all to mature on schedule; they'll see it was just all temporary!" initiatives...right?

"some" dysphoria is more like 60-80%. But when kids are put on puberty blockers, desistance is extremely rare, in the single digits. Any evaluation of the net benefits of blockers needs to be weighed against the effects on persistence rates. Being trans is extremely hard, even if someone suppressed their natural puberty.

> Even though gender affirming care correlates in research with much better mental health outcomes in trans kids.

Nope, most comprehensive reviews have determined that this claim about improving mental health is not backed up by good evidence. Finland, Sweden, the UK, and more countries have all reached this conclusion. Finland commissioned their own study where they gave some dysphoric youth blockers, and didn't give it to others. The group that weren't chemically castrated actually saw better mental health outcomes.

> And even though trans adults looking back have described that forced puberty as the worst period of their lives.

They're comparing reality against their imagination of what life would have been like. Of course reality doesn't measure up well against their imaginations. In order to back up the claim that puberty blockers have positive outcomes, we can't just interview adults who didn't have blockers and ask them what they think life would have been like if they got blockers are kids. We actually have to measure the outcomes of children.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Amazing reply. General gender affirming care guidelines ARE still the current standard, and a puberty-delaying option - that temporarily suppresses the hormonal release of puberty - is part of that, while kids figure out if they're really 'trans' or not. Some kids end up being basically 'screened out' - they're found to be dealing with being ambivalent about being gay, or perhaps are a very anxious cis kid who is frightened of maturing, etc. - but for genuine trans kids - very helpful tool.

Because for trans kids - the gender dysphoria will never 'resolve' - until their body matches, best it can, the sex their brain labels them as.

And it's their right to pursue their happiness by making that transition. During puberty. Because this small percentage of the population is fixing a developmental mistake. The kind you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy.

A very small group of people with a rare mismatch due to some kind of pre-birth developmental screw up - and everyone just wants to dump on them.

Sucks to be them, the current societal 'Scapegoat du jour'.

[-]

mstrgrieves@reddit

The evidence for this claim is, to put it mildly, not great.

[-]

BeyondDoggyHorror@reddit

Didn’t the lawyer of the aclu just admit that there’s no evidence that denying gender affirming care causes higher rates of suicide?

[-]

Puberty blockers for trans kids was the compromise

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

Indeed, but the people who think trans people should be exterminated aren't happy with that and are now pushing this as part of their anti trans agenda.

[-]

Ocean_Fish_@reddit

It really does come down to "do you think trans lives are worth saving?"

[-]

SmallGreenArmadillo@reddit

True. Puberty blockers are used to make sure that puberty happens at the right time. Because this is crucially important.

[-]

JeruTz@reddit

For cis kids they are used to treat a physical ailment with basically no side effects, as their puberty cycle is simply being reset

Not precisely true. There are still side effects of the drugs themselves that are universal no matter when you use them. It's simply that the risks are often considered acceptable compared to the medical issues that come from having children enter puberty too early.

The issue, as I understand it, is that if puberty isn't prevented, delayed, or at least drawn out, the body will not properly grow to adult proportions. And while children grow steadily before puberty before hitting their growth spurts, if puberty starts early, it will also end early, which effectively stops people from growing any further.

In short, you'd have children who get growth spurts when they're too young, then stop growing when other kids are going through puberty.

As an aside, I have also heard of some wealthy families using puberty blockers off label on their teenaged children to make them grow taller, as it extends their growth phase. Not sure what the legality of that use is in general, but it presumably would be covered by this law.

[-]

Cimorene_Kazul@reddit

In what situation would a 15 year old need puberty blockers? Precocious puberty stops getting blockers at age 9-10.

[-]

Useful_Secret4895@reddit

A 9 years old, not a 15 years old. Puberty at 15 is normal. Not at 9, and that's what for those drugs were developed for.

[-]

msmeowwashere@reddit

A doctor can prescribe oxycodone to treat pain. A doctor cannot prescribed oxycodone because that person wants to be high.

They could go to jail for the second one.

Medical consensus outside the UK is that undergoing the incorrect puberty is more harmful than any of the (well known and understood) potential risk of puberty blockers. Even the BMA has found much of the Cass report to be unsubstantiated.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Even the BMA has found much of the Cass report to be unsubstantiated.

Oh no! Not a trade union!

By the way they retracted their position: https://www.bmj.com/content/386/bmj.q2137

Happens when you call to publicly criticize a document and to review it internally at the same time. People accuse you of bias. Can't imagine why.

Also the whole "you are a freaking union what are you even doing".

You know who didn't "find much of the Cass report to be unsubstantiated"? The relevant authorities.

[-]

oswaldluckyrabbiy@reddit

BMA receives huge political pressure and realises that they aren't going to win. Withdraws to what is considered the 'politically neutral' position shocker. One need only look to the dismissal of Dr Nut to know the UK public and government cares little for medical findings they ideologically disagree with.

They are a healthcare union meant to champion proper medical practice. OF COURSE THEY SHOULD BE REVIEWING WHETHER HEALTH POLICY MATCHES RESEARCH.

Funny how almost every medical institution outside of the UK disagrees with the Cass Report.

[-]

MuchCat3606@reddit

I think what the poster is saying is that they'd already condemned it before reviewing it. It makes their condemnation weak.

[-]

CyberneticWhale@reddit

We understand the impact in the context of using puberty blockers to delay precocious puberty to when it is supposed to happen. In the context of delaying a normal puberty to occur significantly later, we don't have as good of an understanding.

Hence the need for more research.

[-]

oswaldluckyrabbiy@reddit

You are lying.

Puberty blockers have been used in trans healthcare since the 90's. The "Dutch Protocol" underwent numerous studies (one of which involved 70 subjects which considering the tiny available sample pool is impressive) and was adopted as standard treatment.

The use of puberty blockers were deemed safe, reversible and saw reduced suicidality and improved social lives. They were found to overwhelmingly produce lifesaving impacts on a scale of 6 years which is far greater scrutiny than what other medications have received.

The only widespread papers published opposing the use was the Cass Report which has been internationally criticised for its predudical use of evidence and clear editorial goal of reaching the conclusion that blockers are bad. That even the BMA is critcising it when the UK is TERF island goes to show how bunk the contents are.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

The only widespread papers published opposing the use was the Cass Report which has been internationally criticised for its predudical use of evidence and clear editorial goal of reaching the conclusion that blockers are bad.

Yet no relevant medical body came up with an actual, peer reviewed critique of the paper. Funny how that works.

That even the BMA is critcising it when the UK is TERF island goes to show how bunk the contents are.

And nevermind you are an activist I'm done caring about you misinformation types.

[-]

oswaldluckyrabbiy@reddit

McNamara et al (2024). An Evidence-Based Critique of “The Cass Review” on Gender-affirming Care for Adolescent Gender Dysphoria
Noone et al (2024). Critically appraising the Cass Report: Methodological flaws and unsupported claims.
Davie, N. and Hobbs, L. (2024) Cass: the good, the bad, the critical
Horton, C. (2024). The Cass Review: Cis-supremacy in the UK’s approach to healthcare for trans children. International Journal of Transgender Health , 1-25.
Horton, C. and Pearce, R. (2024) The U.K.’s Cass Review Badly Fails Trans Children. Scientific American
Grijseels, D. M. (2024). Biological and psychosocial evidence in the Cass Review: a critical commentary. International Journal of Transgender Health, 1–11.
FGEN (2024). Letter from academics concerned about The Cass Review.

Go kick rocks.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

I'm giving you more attention than I should.

McNamara et al (2024). An Evidence-Based Critique of “The Cass Review” on Gender-affirming Care for Adolescent Gender Dysphoria

Self-published. Not even peer reviewed. Nobody cares about this shit

Noone et al (2024). Critically appraising the Cass Report: Methodological flaws and unsupported claims.

Not even published! It's a fucking preprint! WHO. CARES. Nobody that's who

Davie, N. and Hobbs, L. (2024) Cass: the good, the bad, the critical

I can't even believe you even mentioned this. It's basically a blogpost.

Again, no, I'm done. Not even going to touch the rest. It's always the same gish gallop, torrent of absolute bullshit. Every. Single. Goddamned. Time.

[-]

oswaldluckyrabbiy@reddit

I notice how you stopped right before the reviewed and published Horton paper.

I'm not an academic I grabbed the first couple of papers that came up in a search to prove that papers existed. There are plenty of papers that are peer-reviewed and not independently published.

Also love how you ignored all my previous points to hyper fixate on me talking about academic papers.

Claiming 6 years isn't a long enough study of after effects isn't in good faith. Its a way of preventing healthcare by demanding we 'wait for results'. You essentially want a 30 year study that wouldn't be completed until the current generation of trans children have already grown and/or statistically died from lack of care.

Using the same tactics as Cass of tossing any contradictory evidence is on brand. By her own admission she considered 60% (though it was likely more this is just what she herself admits to) of evidence to be 'poor' which enabled her to dismiss it out of hand.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If I were to declare half of all literature on vaccines to be wrong then I have to be able to prove my position. I can't review only the few papers that agree with me and use those to reach a conclusion.

Even with all the selective evidence Cass still failed to prove puberty blockers unsafe and had to settle for 'we aren't sure'. This finding has now been used to ban their use as unsafe.

She hasn't even any experience in the field of trans healthcare. It has been confirmed she was the only one approached to led the review. She was given a life peerage in August. A reward for a job well done for Baroness Cass?

[-]

Ocean_Fish_@reddit

What are you on about? A quick search would show a bunch of peer reviewed critiques of cass.

[-]

Oppopity@reddit

What's funny is that despite all it's bias and dismissal of evidence, the cass review still couldn't conclude puberty blockers were dangerous, just that there needed to be more evidence.

[-]

CyberneticWhale@reddit

First paragraph of the relevant section in wikipedia:

"Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria. Although puberty blockers are known to be safe and physically reversible treatment if stopped in the short term, it is also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of factors like bone mineral density, brain development and fertility in transgender patients.^([40])^([79])^([80])^([81]) There is limited high-quality research on puberty suppression among adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence. No conclusions on impact on gender dysphoria, mental health and cognitive development could be drawn."

The short term effects are well known, however the long-term effects is where the issue lies.

Isn't it strange how before the existence of trans people became a culture war wedge point that the healthcare community were able to provide treatment without criticism? People like you ignorantly sealioning about the 'risks' are no better than the idiot antivaxers who do the same with vaccines. Everyone has the right to scrutinise consensus (thats how the scientific method operates) but wilfully denying the answers you receive is where you should be deplatformed as a critic as clearly the scrutiny at that point isnt in good faith.

Neither side is currently right, wholly.

The trans activist side are fucking insane saying a 12 year old should be able to ELECTIVELY walk into a trans clinic and receive hormone replacement therapy, puberty blockers and gender reassignment surgery is absolutely nuts to me.

I also think the NHS has done a massive disservice by not researching the topic further to date and the only answer they have is "we don't know enough so lets stop medically intervening for now".

But one of those doesn't permanently disfigure and irreversibly affect the biology of people who are wrongly electing or wrongly diagnosed. We should sit on the side of caution.

[-]

DeadlyPear@reddit

The trans activist side are fucking insane saying a 12 year old should be able to ELECTIVELY walk into a trans clinic and receive hormone replacement therapy, puberty blockers and gender reassignment surgery is absolutely nuts to me.

They aren't saying that. Fuck off.

[-]

Ocean_Fish_@reddit

Couple things

You're either lying or deeply ignorant/have been lied to

By "members of the trans community" Do you mean all leading trans medical bodies in the UK and internationally. Including BMA and Yale

No, children are not walking into buildings and getting surgeries, Mr Trump

No one is adcovsting for that, Mr Trump

The side of caution is the one with fewer dead kids, so I'll sleep fine knowing that

[-]

MSnotthedisease@reddit

Do you have a link to this large scale empirical research? I’d really like to view it so I can make an informed decision on how I feel about this

[-]

Ocean_Fish_@reddit

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/26895269.2024.2328249?scroll=top&needAccess=true

There's plenty of citations and links read through. It used to be easier to look this stuff up, but the media storm really burries actual research.

Even the most critical studies will conclude there needs to be more research done because childrens lives are on the line.

Basically, you can be skeptical that the decades of research are enough, but you there's no argument on its effectiveness and relative harmlessness.

[-]

SoggyMattress2@reddit

That's not a large scale empirical research paper, its a subjective critique of the CASS report claiming it was biased.

It doesn't refute any of the objective findings from the CASS review.

[-]

CheridanTGS@reddit

You're not really seeing the issue from the eyes of a trans person. Puberty causes permanent, drastic (and in this case unwanted) changes to ones biology.

[-]

SoggyMattress2@reddit

Oh no I absolutely am. The risk far outweighs the reward.

Referrals and diagnosis requests have increased massively over the last decade. In Scotland the waiting times for a gender identity service quadrupled. Clinics in Nottinghamshire and London have reported roughly double the requests over the last decade.

Towards the end of 2023 there were 31,000 on a waiting list for a first appointment at a gender identity clinic on the NHS.

We are not talking about a few hundred people there is 31,000 NEW people that may be receiving permanent, biology altering, irreversible procedures.

A female to male transition with only puberty blockers and HRT will make them infertile. For life.

That alone should be cause to ensure we are conducting thorough, longitudinal research to first establish it's efficacy, safety protocols and risks.

[-]

Psudopod@reddit

You are so concerned about hypothetical pregnancies over people's present medical needs. Pause the surgical prep, we need to get her a pregnancy test STAT! There are long term consequences for delaying treatments in favor of hypothetical pregnancies, I really do not think it should be a medial priority for anyone unless the patient says so, cis or trans.

[-]

MuchCat3606@reddit

But it is something to be concerned about. I hated babies at 12 and would have absolutely signed on to something would take that away. I'm older now and have two kids who are the center of my world. Priorities change as you age.

[-]

SoggyMattress2@reddit

You are picking holes in a single example that I gave to prove a point instead of interacting with the discussion. Don't hyperfocus on the example, discuss the topic.

There are countless, irreversible biological outcomes from medical treatment. There is also the bone density research, which is not hypothetical - with bone density being one of the most reliable predictors of mortality in older age.

Even if I grant you MOST of the trans people who elect for surgery and HRT have good outcomes (this is hugely disputed currently) it STILL isn't a good enough reason to have those treatments as ELECTIVE treatment paths because not all of the people electing to have the treatments will be making the correct decision, and from a moral and ethical standpoint a fucking 13 year old shouldn't be allowed to be making such a dramatic life altering decision without an accurate diagnosis.

[-]

Wischiwaschbaer@reddit

Oh no I absolutely am. The risk far outweighs the reward.

Maybe let the trans person and their doctors decide if risk outweighs the reward?

[-]

SoggyMattress2@reddit

Maybe let's not allow 13 year olds to electively receive treatment vectors that permanently change their biology when we have next to no empirical research to show efficacy and risk.

Yes I agree, let's let the doctor decide through a full diagnostic panel instead of ELECTIVELY allowing it.

[-]

fouriels@reddit

This is a bit semantic but it is, quite literally, illegal forever - until there is legislation to change their minds, the ban is in effect indefinitely.

[-]

SoggyMattress2@reddit

But theyve publicly said the empirical research just isn't there right now so it's safer to ban it until they learn more.

Now we can have another conversation about how much we take the government on their word but that's a separate thing entirely.

[-]

Wischiwaschbaer@reddit

But theyve publicly said the empirical research just isn't there right now so it's safer to ban it until they learn more.

And the resaerch will just magically appear?

First it is there and countries who weighed the evidence themselves instead of basing their whole policy on one biast report have come out in favour of puberty blockers.

Second, are you seeing any efforts to research this further? Seems like nobody is very much interested. Which makes sense, since further research would only further show how absurd this law is.

[-]

SoggyMattress2@reddit

No, the research is not there, that was the primary focus of the Cass review. In a meta analysis of existing papers on all manners of trans treatment protocols there were 50 major papers cited, of which 49 was junk science with only 1 showing any promise.

They will learn more by conducting primary empirical research.

I have no idea I don't monitor journals for trans papers but I would assume because the waiting list has skyrocketed and it's a hot topic social issue there is a plethora of papers being worked on because securing funding will be easy.

[-]

Hyndis@reddit

Once the kid becomes an adult they can do whatever they like. So its not illegal forever, its just delayed until the person's brain has developed enough so they can make an informed decision.

There's a reason why we don't let kids enter into contracts - their brains literally are not developed enough to have a good understanding of life changing, long term consequences. We don't regard kids as mature enough to legally get tattoos, piercings, or smoke cigarettes for similar reasons.

[-]

fouriels@reddit

To an extent this is uncontroversial, but when it comes to medical issues the UK recognises that under-16s are 'people, not property' under Gillick Competence - which is to say that under-16s who understand the medical treatment being proposed are capable of consenting to medical procedures. Notably, this does not extend to other 'life changing consequences' like tattoos.

Which is ridiculous because theortically a doctor can prescribe puberty blockers to a 15-year-old cis kid but if they do it with a 15-year-old trans kid, they can be jailed for it.

[-]

JosephScmith@reddit

That's what happens when UK doctors went wild transitioning kids without following proper procedures.

[-]

Stubbs94@reddit

Proof?

[-]

JosephScmith@reddit

But I saw your edit, thanks for the clarification. Source for my comment https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/gender-dysphoria/in-depth/pubertal-blockers/art-20459075 under side effects.

Their source is-Olson-Kennedy J, et al. Management of transgender and gender-diverse children and adolescents.

http://esacc.corteconstitucional.gob.ec/storage/api/v1/10_DWL_FL/e2NhcnBldGE6J2VzY3JpdG8nLCB1dWlkOic5NDY2ZTBiZS1mNGZlLTQ0MTktOTZlNC05ZGNiMjA5ZTk2YmEucGRmJ30=

The other part of his comment about Gender dysphoria when they’re young not persisting into adulthood showed 80%+. Studies werent done in a Marjorie Taylor Green anti gay conversion camp from what I could tell.

“At the time of follow-up in adolescence or adulthood, these studies showed that, for the majority of children (84.2%; n 1⁄4 207), the GD desisted.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23702447/

Of the 139 participants, 17 (12.2%) were classified as persisters and the remaining 122 (87.8%) were classified as desisters.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.632784/full

[-]

Levitz@reddit

That's a whole different issue and would be an untenable solution.

If specialists are jumping through procedures, you work to enforce the procedures, you wouldn't just remove care.

[-]

JosephScmith@reddit

They already vetted the doctors when they gave them their license. The issue was that there is so much leeway for the doctor to make their own decisions that it led to a wild West sort of situation where one doctor won't touch the subject and another is making shit up about suicidal thoughts in a patient in order to justify giving the hormone therapy to kids. So the option becomes, fuck up a lot of kids who didn't need therapy or potentially fuck up a few kids who actually are trans by not transitioning them sooner.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Ok but then the problem still wouldn't be the medication.

You are talking about medical malpractice. If medical malpractice is common in one specific treatment and you simply forbid the treatment, it's just a matter of time until it happens somewhere else since you haven't addressed the problem.

So it doesn't make any sense to prescribe one to a 15-year-old.

They aren't literally "puberty blockers", though. They're prescribed to people of all ages to reduce sex hormone production.

That reduction prevents puberty from occurring in young children, but there are other reasons a person might want/need to reduce their hormone levels.

[-]

Ambitious-Beat-2130@reddit

Unless the trans kid has the same condition as the cis kid suffers.

[-]

Simply_Epic@reddit

Oh no, looks like this kid happens to have a mild case of precocious puberty. Better prescribe puberty blockers. Don’t mind the fact that they’re also trans.

[-]

missplaced24@reddit

For some background, there is a lack of evidence for the safety of prescribing these medications for gender dysphoria and a lack of evidence in the benefits of these medications. There is much better data on the risks and benefits of prescribing these meds for some other conditions.

Given the political climate, it is easy to jump to the conclusion that this was a decision made for political reasons, but when they don't know the risks or benefits, they can't give doctors the guidelines they need to make an ethical decision for their patients.

The frustrating part of all this is arguing false equivalencies will draw much-needed attention away from conducting the studies that absolutely need to be conducted. There is some evidence to suggest these meds can cause some very significant - and potentially irreversible - side effects. There is some evidence that suggests this medication can have a significant positive impact on mental health. There is not enough of either to confidently say what dosage for how long is likely a net positive.

[-]

BufferUnderpants@reddit

The arguments for their safety were based on the results from them being used as treatment for kids undergoing early puberty, and being taken off them to go through it at the expected age, not from them being used to prevent puberty altogether

The approach of using them in a timeframe up to 14 years of age and then transitioning or getting back on natural puberty “sounds right” to me, but I’m not an expert either

[-]

Open access funding provided by the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine.

Sarah C. J. Jorgensen has received a conference travel grant from the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine.

From their Wikipedia page:

The Society For Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM) is a non-profit organization that is known for its opposition to gender-affirming care for transgender youth and for engaging in political lobbying.

[-]

axlee@reddit

Yes and ? Genetic fallacy

[-]

Pattern_Is_Movement@reddit

an organization whose purpose is to find evidence against something is not a good source, it needs to be a 3rd party without other motivations

[-]

axlee@reddit

Who will study those things, except people who are either for or against it ?

It's like criticizing a climate scientist to do research about the climate because he has "motivations".

[-]

bexkali@reddit

THEY HAVE AN OBVIOUS CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

[-]

historicusXIII@reddit

Are you equally skeptic to a pro-transrights organisation coming up with contradictory data?

[-]

worfres_arec_bawrin@reddit

From a 30 second google search, one study from 2016 and one from 2021. Studies werent done in a Marjorie Taylor Green anti gay conversion camp from what I could tell.

“At the time of follow-up in adolescence or adulthood, these studies showed that, for the majority of children (84.2%; n 1⁄4 207), the GD desisted.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23702447/

Of the 139 participants, 17 (12.2%) were classified as persisters and the remaining 122 (87.8%) were classified as desisters.

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.632784/full

[-]

ile141@reddit

Yes, both of those studies showed a large majority desisting after an amount of time. Based on the DSM-IV standards, of course, which (in the other study) required the patient to have all of the criteria met. The DSM-IV criteria aren't exactly great; very possibly including non-trans children and excluding trans children in the cohorts.

Neither study used puberty blockers, so that point is moot - though I doubt you intended to follow up on that point. In addition, desistence itself is a little too broad of a term. The reasons for desistence were not explored in depth, particularly of interest could have been social stigma and lack of support. You can not argue that GD was 'cured by puberty' in all of the desisters. The conclusion of both of those studies - surprisingly enough! - was largely about needing further studies with larger subgroups.

It was interesting how the other study certainly went into interesting tangents not exactly relevant to the statistical study in question. One of the authors, K. Zucker, seems to be associated with quite the gender-conforming ideals, which may have influenced the study's approach.

On the other hand, you can have studies about the benefits of puberty blockers in adolescents suffering from GD, 1 and 2, or maybe 3. Taking into consideration the literal reason for puberty blockers: having more time to further explore the gender identity of the adolescent, while avoiding the irreversible impact of puberty, it is quite hard to understand the hard line against the use of puberty blockers. The fact that some may not exhibit GD later on (or report it in interviews) does not necessarily imply that GD is cured.

Not to mention the generalization based on small, specific cohorts. From 20 years ago. With outdated criteria.

Though my response is in part to /u/Instabanous with their somewhat lacking opinions, but I suppose I'll just leave it here as I've already mentioned the articles a bit. I am too lazy to write, apparently.

[-]

worfres_arec_bawrin@reddit

This study shows that if you treat children who exhibit signs of Gender Dysphoria, they are more likely to will be happier and more comfortable in their bodies.

[-]

worfres_arec_bawrin@reddit

Sorry, I was only looking for sources regarding your comment on the “78% of children who have gender dysphoria cease to after puberty” claim the other commenter made. I agree I don’t think I saw mention of puberty blockers in either paper.

Admittedly I have a very basic understanding when it comes to full scientific study terminology and could definitely of gotten confused on the results. From the pubmed link it states “Many children will not continue to experience dysphoria into adolescence and adulthood.” and I interpreted that as, without socially transitioning being a factor, they would no longer feel like their gender identity was incorrectly matched to their biological sex. Was that incorrect?

It did say that a substantial %, up to 27% in some studies would still feel dysphoria into adulthood and seek gender affirming care, which i interpreted as transitioning/becoming trans to help alleviate their dysphoria but again I could be wrong. And like you said, supportive care resulted in great results, go figure!

They really get detailed with multiple variations on each subset, andro/bi/gynephillic, multinomial logarithmic regression, etc etc. Enough to confirm I would not have made a good scientist. If I did misrepresent or mischaracterise anything it certainly wasn’t my intention. I want trans kids to get the support they need, but I’d be lying if I said puberty blockers don’t worry me. Luckily these things aren’t up to my gut feeling and if the medical research says it’s safe along with the help it provides then I’m fully supportive. One positive takeaway from the absolute nightmare of this being spotlighted as a political hot button is that should help fund and push research and studies on these things along. Just about every study I’ve read was highlighting the need across the board for more and longer term studies along with certain benchmark research becoming outdated.

[-]

mormon_freeman@reddit

The alternative to getting puberty blockers from your doctor is to get them online, or illegally where there isn't oversight on dosage, what is even in them, and where there are actively bad actors who could harm children. This is likely going to be done without parental consent, and could potentially be extremely dangerous.

Teenagers may not be fully developed mentally, but they know themselves well enough to identify their issues, and crucially, if they want to do something for themselves they can figure out how to do it.

It's whether or not you want to make access to it safe and with oversight, or if you want to leave medical decisions to drug dealers.

Puberty blockers work as a treatment, and have much less long term effects than other drugs they prescribe to children. And they're not given out without a lot of consultation and work from the patient side.

Science isn't going to come up with an answer to philosophical questions like "who am I?" and "what does it mean to be me", and it's ok for that to be the case. Most drugs and medicines work in ways we don't understand, but if the result is positive we tend to be fine with it until something better comes along.

Kids and teenagers who are trans come to those conclusions on their own, and a good parent will support them in their journey.

This bill solves a problem that is entirely hypothetical, and assumes that nobody involved in these decisions has any agency or oversight, and ironically their solution is to create a problem where parents and doctors have no agency or oversight.

[-]

volthunter@reddit

This was done by anti trans groups

[-]

lobonmc@reddit

I did found something but haven't had the time to read through it

Yea because the kid with gender dysphoria needs therapy not delayed puberty

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Actual kids whose brain sex doesn't match their body sex will NOT 'desist' once puberty is competed.

They're at a high risk of suiciding DURING that 'wrong' puberty.

The UK is basically saying, "We're willing to take that chance of making it much more likely the actual trans kids won't make it through alive to the time (2027?) where we make our decision whether the puberty blockers are safe for them."

AKA: "You a real trans kid who won't survive enforced development into the wrong sex's body shape, according to your brain? Sucks to be you!"

[-]

SpaceNerd005@reddit

“A real trans kid” does not exist. A kid with gender dysphoria has a mental illness.

Therapy based treatments have studies showing they are effective a treating this, but you would prefer to chop up kids because why not

[-]

koenigkilledminlee@reddit

Yeah dude they do, studies have been done showing that trans brains more closely resemble the sex they identify with, and besides that, if we view dysphoria as a mental illness, the treatment with the most efficacy is transitioning. Outside of that, these are just to block puberty so that they can make a better decision at adulthood, maybe they do want to transition, maybe their dysphoria alleviated.

Children can be born with any number of physical differences than the norm, my sister has one kidney and two uteruses, is it so far beyond the realm of possibility to you that a female brain developed at the same time a male body did or vice versa. Dogmatic rigidity is not scientific and puberty blockers are much more effective at harm reduction than therapy rooted in telling them that they are wrong about themselves.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

You want a small percentage of kids whose brain is genuinely formed as one sex to very probably kill themselves because they're being forced to form the wrong shape sex/adult body during puberty.

You Sick, sadistic Transphobes.

[-]

spudmarsupial@reddit

Yet. These are conservatives remember, even if they are hiding behind the title Labour.

[-]

gravygrowinggreen@reddit

I don't think conservatives give a shit about treatment for precocious puberty. This is entirely targeted at trans kids.

[-]

ThatHeckinFox@reddit

That's exactly right. They dont give a fuck. Hence why they are entirely willing to throw them under the bust to hurt transkids

[-]

worfres_arec_bawrin@reddit

So do we trust doctors and scientists then or not? We just had a couple years of banging our collective heads against the wall trying to get conservative segments of the population to believe in science and the basics of the scientific method…and this decision is coming from a larger report conducted by doctors specialising in children’s care. Is the idea now that we don’t listen to medical professionals if we don’t agree with their findings?

The larger report was requested specifically to make recommendations on how to improve gender affirming care due of the massive increase in children looking for it over the last 5-10 years. Why on earth would they be trying to court conservative voters by spending tax payer money on a report blatantly stating its goal is to help kids with their gender identity??

[-]

Levitz@reddit

The problem is a little more complex than that.

The Cass review itself doesn't propose banning puberty blockers. It advocates for restrictions to specific cases and tying those cases to research. This should mean that trans advocates ought to be pointing at the review itself to defend their point, in my opinion.

BUT it turns out trans activists generally despise the review because it says a whole lot of stuff they don't like. There were avenues of misinformation on the subject pretty much as soon as it came out and many are still at it, so that's a no-go.

Did you mean to respond to my comment? I was commenting about how it makes zero sense that this is a targeted attack on trans kids in order to court conservative voters.

But to what you were saying, I think the doctors outlined the main reasoning is that there is worry from doctors that there could be detrimental effects due to the uncertainty and lack of proper scientific research.

mormon_freeman@reddit

Do you have a source for these numbers you cited?

[-]

worfres_arec_bawrin@reddit

Sorry, you’ve asked a few times and didn’t see you get an answer

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23702447/

Treatment of gender dysphoria medically calls for puberty blockers.

How about politicians stop making medical decisions for doctors?

[-]

I-Here-555@reddit

How about politicians stop making medical decisions for doctors?

Taking this to the logical conclusion, if you find a licensed doctor willing to make a medical decision, should any treatment or medicine be fine, with no regulation whatsoever? Is that what you're proposing?

I'm not taking a stand on minors with gender dysphoria specifically, since allegedly even experts disagree. However, some degree of gov't oversight of doctors in general seems like a good idea.

[-]

123yes1@reddit

Medical boards outline best practices for doctors and actually use peer reviewed research to form broad consensus on proper treatments.

In areas where there is not a broad consensus, then yeah individual doctors should be able to apply their craft in whatever manner they believe will best treat their patient if they have the patient's consent.

Politics should not play a role in science nor medicine. It took over one thousand years to shake off bullshit catholic dogma in medicine that prevented physicians from examining human anatomy to actually improve patient outcomes, instead of adhering to medical texts that were literally written during the 2nd century.

It will take time and research to determine broad consensus on the best way to achieve the best outcomes for gender dysphoric patients. So in the meantime, butt out. Let people get the treatment they want. It's not anyone else's fucking business.

[-]

I-Here-555@reddit

Medical boards outline best practices for doctors

Is "The Department of Health and Social Care said the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM)" who "had published independent expert advice" not a UK equivalent of a medical board you describe?

if they have the patient's consent

That's a problem with minors, isn't it? They can't give proper consent in many situations.

[-]

123yes1@reddit

But once again that's not what the report recommended. It did not advocate for the banning of puberty blockers on transgender youth. A greatly exaggerated version of the study's position is being taken. Plus, one study does not make medical consensus.

Second, parents and guardians consent for minors all the time. I'm not sure why people only start giving a shit with trans issues. If you take the position that they cannot ever give consent, then they could never benefit from any medical interventions, such as vaccines, or setting a broken bone, or cough syrup.

Find me literally any case where a parent is forcing a child to become trans against their will.

[-]

dinosaur-boner@reddit

Regarding puberty blockers, the Cass Report specifically found that there is clinical indicia for prescribing puberty blockers to patients assigned male at birth based on the need to suppress certain irreversible changes. The implemented guidelines do not reflect this finding, and ban blockers for all youth outside of research studies.

Additionally, the Cass Report is improperly being used all over the world to push for significant restrictions on HRT and other gender affirming care for youth.

[-]

Psycko_90@reddit

Literally the first sentence of the article...

The UK Government has said that, following official advice from medical experts

[-]

spudmarsupial@reddit

I know people who got "medical experts" to perscribe all sorts of harmful drugs to children.

you've made dozens of comments in this thread alone.

very weird hobby to have tbh

[-]

jamany@reddit

I've not?

[-]

W-ADave@reddit

This you?

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1kcc40/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1k49nu/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1k3qbd/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jqz3a/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jw567/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jwde5/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jqz3a/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jqoxn/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jkcqp/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jgmf6/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jh3dw/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1ji93r/

https://old.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1hbuh4h/puberty_blockers_for_children_with_gender/m1jqoxn/

Like i said champ, it's just really weird to obsess over and spend so much time on something that doesn't impact your life in any way.

Maybe try getting a less embarrassing hobby?

[-]

jamany@reddit

I wouldn't know who that is without clicking them. Why would I be embarrassed? Its a major political issue, everyone is, and is allowed to be, talking about it.

[-]

W-ADave@reddit

It's not just blockers though, hence why I used the term 'gender affirming care.' Obstacles are being put in the way of trans people that cis people would never need to jump through. Equally, healthcare that society doesn't see as gender affirming, but people do want (like tubal litigation) is denied to cis people. It's pretty obvious that the west has a major issue of gender beliefs infecting healthcare decisions... Just not in the way many people in this thread seem to think.

[-]

Elman89@reddit

I hope this law won‘t prevent doctors from helping their patients.

The Cass Review has been called out as no better than the rag I wash my ass with. No offense, but if multiple other journals, peers, and organizations come out against your published work… you fucked up.

Frankly I’m not against further studies, but at least the UK could be less of a Nancy about their own works and biases.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

What a load of crap. And you probably don't wash your ass.

The Cass review is a big standard literature review that has very normal inclusion criteria. There's nothing wrong with it.

It also arrived at the same conclusions as the peer reviewed Karolinska review of childhood gender medicine.

[-]

SeatKindly@reddit

Yeah I’ve followed this long enough and read enough scientific literature to understand how precisely the Cass Review is a problem. Here’s a synopsis. I’m not going to argue with you because I don’t care about your opinion. I’m American. I can do whatever the fuck I want in my state.

https://ruthpearce.net/2024/04/16/whats-wrong-with-the-cass-review-a-round-up-of-commentary-and-evidence/

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

This is literally a list of opinions without citation.

It's also awfully convenient to just refuse to address the Karolinska review, which was peer reviewed and came to the same conclusion.

[-]

SeatKindly@reddit

Primarily because I actually have to read a paper to refute it to any measure. I have not heard of Karolinska. Without reviewing personal credentials, who funded the study, the actual review foundation, or the surrounding literature from what was selected I can’t fully refute it.

The hyperlinks to the actual penned statements are green hyperlinks. I don’t care for the individual’s opinions, just the organizational and professional statements that are consolidated give my familiarity with most of them.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Maybe you should familiarize yourself with Mr. Karolinska then.

[-]

SeatKindly@reddit

Given Karolinska Institutet isn’t a person. I think perhaps you should as well. The white paper you’re referring to was primarily penned by Jonas F Ludvigsson, Berit Kriström, and Mikael Landén.

You’re perhaps unaware of this fact, but academic research is literally my job.

They reviewed 9934 abstracts, assessed 195 of them, and only utilized 24. Of which three of the papers did not utilize hormone blockers, only cross-sex hormones. They only reviewed English papers, which isn’t an issue, but is worth noting.

That said, the paper only identifies one significant fact. Which is that there isn’t enough research that meets their standard for review. Most of which were disqualified for their sample sizes being too small, or for failing to follow up over extended periods. Naturally, it’s a bit harder to do that with such a small group of people. Beyond that… no one gave a fuck until about three years ago.

This bothers me as well.

2.6 Statistics

No statistical analyses were performed.

2.7 Ethics

Ethical approval is not applicable for this systematic review.

They excluded 12 papers for bias that met their selection criteria based on the possibility of bias, but had no ethical approval for the review. That’s… a red flag. Especially given during their mental health review, they state that they cannot make a conclusion on the mental health impact due to “risk of selection bias.”

That said, word for word they also state this prior to that

“Improvement in quality of life most pronounced in subjects receiving puberty-blocking hormones, followed by gender-affirming hormone treatment Some improvement”

They found no loss of bone density in the dual x-ray observation, but then… tailored it to a Z-score to get the result they wanted.

Even with the result they wanted, they found a rebound in bone density. I think this is silly as hell give the population sample is too small to attribute for health changes. Even still, this should already be assumed given approximately 66% of trans individuals are trans-females and thus are going to see a reduction in bone mass regardless.

Irrespective of anything said. No one refutes that more studies would be good. I’d love to see more studies, funded at scale to ensure the safety and health of these kids and even adults. There are countless interventions we can include, or change to counteract these issues. No one cared though until just recently, and many that do care only do so for the wrong reasons.

Even still, unlike the UK, Sweden still has not totally announced a ban on the practice. They just stated it should be treated with the same conditions as experimental medical care. Which is hilarious given we have decades of case studies a meta analysis could be conducted over right now.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Given Karolinska Institutet isn’t a person. I think perhaps you should as well.

I was mocking you. I'm aware of what the Karolinska is.

They reviewed 9934 abstracts, assessed 195 of them, and only utilized 24. Of which three of the papers did not utilize hormone blockers, only cross-sex hormones. They only reviewed English papers, which isn’t an issue, but is worth noting.

This is typical for literature reviews where most of the research is low quality. Inclusion criteria are set prior to review to avoid selection bias. I don't think there was anything unusual about their selection criteria.

“Improvement in quality of life most pronounced in subjects receiving puberty-blocking hormones, followed by gender-affirming hormone treatment Some improvement”

What a resounding success for rather invasive and consequential drug intervention. /s

They found no loss of bone density in the dual x-ray observation, but then… tailored it to a Z-score to get the result they wanted.

This is already understood:

"Although DXA is considered the golden standard technique for the evaluation of BMD, it has the limitations of being a 2D technique, thus providing an areal density that can result in an underestimation of BMD in short bones. To overcome this limitation, the bone mineral apparent density (BMAD) can be calculated and represents an estimated volumetric BMD; however, it is not commonly used in clinical practice"

It's pretty likely that puberty suppression causes a reduction in bone density and there's plenty of reason to worry about it beyond the very limited research on the subject in gender dysphoric children.

Even with the result they wanted, they found a rebound in bone density.

A rebound != a return to normal or no effect. If I lose 90% of something and then get 10% back, it rebounded, but I'm still at an 80% deficit.

Even still, this should already be assumed given approximately 66% of trans individuals are trans-females and thus are going to see a reduction in bone mass regardless.

In 50 years from now maybe. Why would that eliminate the concern exactly?

Even still, unlike the UK, Sweden still has not totally announced a ban on the practice. They just stated it should be treated with the same conditions as experimental medical care.

The U.K does indeed plan to set up clinical trials for the use of these drugs for this application. Their position really doesn't differ from Sweden, Finland or Norway's.

Which is hilarious given we have decades of case studies a meta analysis could be conducted over right now.

....no, because the quality of research is basically dog shit, which is why most of it has been excluded from several literature reviews.

[-]

SeatKindly@reddit

Actually, a majority of the research that was discarded, was initially discarded as duplicate abstracts, not because the research was poorly conducted.

That said, disregarding anything contained within the paper itself I have massive issues with Karolinska conducting these studies to begin with. They had a massive scandal barely a decade ago that led to multiple deaths, and largely attempted to hide misconduct. Irrespective of an institution’s educational merit, this is significantly problematic to begin with.

In addition, the study’s lead is primarily an Epidemiologist and a Pediatrician. While I’m not concerned with his general skills, this study should have been headed by an endocrinologist, which it seems to be lacking.

That said, unlike the UK, it appears Sweden is also approaching this situation correctly. Uppsala Universitet is conducting an actual longitudinal cohort study on health outcomes.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/4/e066571

Unfortunately I cannot read Swedish, so until I find an english translation of any of the med pubs connected to this study, I can’t speak on its outcomes at present.

That said. My biggest issue is that there are nearly fifty years of case studies to pull from. You’re telling me you can’t consolidate enough of these cases to create an independent opinion? No, they won’t. I imagine no one will fund such a study given it would run counter intuitive to the narrative being pushed against trans identities and individuals if enough data was collated to genuinely find an outcome.

Irregardless, it’s just like the report distributed to the House of Commons that stated Trans-women were more likely to be sex offenders. A population of 78 people…. Of 48,000.

You’re trying to paint 48000 people as some villainous monster because .22% of a population committed a particular crime. I should add that .22 is also high, given the census from 2021 included nonbinary and other identities that a lot of trans individuals identify as, so the population of Wales and the UK is certainly higher than 48k.

[-]

Stubbs94@reddit

The CASS review has been used as the sole reason to ban gender affirming care to at risk children... Despite the calls from the people actually treating the children of the germ this will cause.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Should a literature review showing that there's very weak evidence for the treatment approach being used not be sufficient reason to pause on that approach and collect evidence more rigorously or change course if the evidence shows poor results?

Isn't this exactly how science is supposed to work?

The Cass review isn't the only literature review that reaches this conclusion by the way. The Karolinska review reached the same conclusions. The APA is currently conducting their own literature review and given that the available evidence is all the same, I wouldn't anticipate that their conclusion is any different.

[-]

X-XIQ@reddit

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/integrity-project_cass-response.pdf

It'd be easy to tell if blockers were being prescribed properly for precocious puberty, because the patients would be very young and they would stop taking them at an appropriate age to start puberty. Also, half the problem in the US is doctors being scared of a murder charge, which really wouldn't apply here.

I’m no doctor but usually there will be some type of work up with labs and tests for precocious puberty. Doctors don’t usually prescribe medicine without some sort of documentation on what the issue is

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

And who's going to decide what the doctor truly prescribed it for?

And how would they know?

It just means it needs more consideration, and not a 'I think I want...' 'ok, great, here's some meds'

[-]

bloobityblu@reddit

'I think I want...' 'ok, great, here's some meds'

That's not what's going on now though.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

And how would they know?

Threatening ppl with suicide is psychological abuse.

If a child is having issues up to the point that they'd commit suicide, I would think they would need psychological help, and not playing into their dysphoria.

But I'm going to bow out if this discussion, I don't think it's very constructive. I don't agree with children getting puberty blockers for 'gender dysphoria', and others do.

That's ok. We don't need to agree on this.

In my experience, ppl who do agree on puberty blockers for children are very passionate about this opinion. And it's good to have a passion. But it's not going to go anywhere positive.

[-]

Ocean_Fish_@reddit

No ones threatening you, so you can unclutch your pearls.

It no more a threat that saying banning abortion results in higher pregnancy related deaths. Its a statistical fact

Rates for self harm and suicide among trans youth ALWAYS goes up when medication is banned or restricted. That's not a complicated concept.

Puberty blockers are the compromise to giving children hormone therapy since Pb have virtually no side effects, unlike puberty.

Taking that away is saying you don't care weather trans people live or die. Those are the consequences of your beliefs

Accept it. Deal with it on your own. It's not my problem if that upsets you

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

I'm not upset. I'm just not surprised by the absolute refusal to accept ppl disagreeing, when it comes to the subject.

'If you refuse to agree.. you are pro- kids offing themselves'

No. It means I disagree on the use of puberty blockers. AND I think kids should have easier access to professional psychological support. Which should be more the focus of treatment, anyway.

What are the waiting lists for psychological support for children in your region? Over here, it's like a year and half. THAT is much more concerning than access to puberty blockers, in my opinion.

[-]

Ocean_Fish_@reddit

It's basic cause and effect.

And do you really think kids are getting prescriptions without psychological evalution? That's how you get the puberty blockers, genius.

You're making my argument for me

This isn't a matter of opinion. You're just empirically wrong on this subject.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

If the puberty blocker is not for gender dysphoria, it would still be allowed for So if it's vital the patient gets the meds, they should still be able to, if it's only banned as treatment for GD.

We've seen how that works out in practice in the US when it comes to abortion bans. Doctors hesitate with all kinds of care because they don't want to get in legal trouble. I don't see doctors being as willing to prescribe puberty blockers for non-GD related issues after this ban no matter how much people want to pretend this is only a crusade against trans kids.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/20/health/doctors-weigh-litigation-miscarriage-care/index.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/09/state-abortion-bans-doctor-care-pregnancy

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

I don't think 'not getting puberty blockers' is anywhere near the same as 'not getting abortion, even if you're actively miscarrying'

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

Thank you for letting me know you are intentionally missing the point, i've explained it to you multiple times now and I refuse to believe someone exists that is stupid enough to not understand it by now if they're trying to.

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

Not agreeing with you does not mean I'm stupid. It means I disagree with you.

You explain your point of view. And I have a different one.

You do not have a monopoly on 'being absolutely right'.

Ppl disagree. No need to be condescending.

You are passionate about kids having access to puberty blockers. I'm not, but I am passionate about women having access to abortion. One is life threatening, one is only 'life threatening' because 'they might get so upset they might commit suicide' that's not 'life threatening'. That's a need for psychological intervention.

But ... let's agree to disagree. Without being rude.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

You're only further demonstrating that you are intentionally missing the point by spelling out in detail how you didn't even try to engage with the argument.

[-]

EH1987@reddit

This, just like abortion restrictions, puts unnecessary hurdles in front of people who need healthcare as well as creating legal risks for doctors.

Transphobia is a mental illness.

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

To be fair.... I do think nowadays, the treatment of that mental illness is focused too much on having the body changed to fit the mental illness, and not on treatment of the illness at all. At the beginning, we (a lot of regions) went overboard, and now we're reigning it back in. There will be a healthier balance, eventually.

[-]

EH1987@reddit

You need to read my comment again.

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

I did. You are comparing kids with gender dysphoria not getting their puberty blockers to women dying from sepsis after a miscarriage. I think that's not even in the same hemisphere of risks.

Like you said, gender dysphoria is a mental illness. You don't treat a mental illness by changing reality to the illness. You treat the illness, so the person can find balance within reality.

Some ppl will eventually transition.
A LOT of youth with gender dysphoria are just in puberty, uncomfortable with their body's in general, and/or uncomfortable with gender roles and expectations.

I know where you stand, and that you think it's a shame that puberty blockers will not be a free for all anymore.
But your statement of gender dysphoria being a mental illness illustrates why the easy use of puberty blockers really isn't a good thing.

[-]

EH1987@reddit

You clearly didn't understand what you read.

You are comparing kids with gender dysphoria not getting their puberty blockers

No I didn't, I explained how this affects even those who need puberty blockers for other reasons.

Like you said, gender dysphoria is a mental illness.

I didn't say that, I said transphobia is a mental illness. I said nothing about gender dysphoria.

Puberty blockers aren't "free for all" anywhere, that's nothing more than right wing propaganda. These are decisions that should be left to medical professionals on an individual case basis.

[-]

Special_Lychee_6847@reddit

You're right. I had a spontaneous case of dyslexia, it appears.

[-]

SilverDiscount6751@reddit

Meaning for early puberty issues like aa kid starting at 8yo.

[-]

Wischiwaschbaer@reddit

I hope this law won‘t prevent doctors from helping their patients.

I mean it will do that by its very intent...

[-]

MemesJihad@reddit

Maybe in 0.0000001% of the time. Not the rest tho

[-]

ThatHeckinFox@reddit

It's a conservative law, it's meant to hurt a specific group of patients. But when did conservatives know restraint when it comes to malice?

[-]

I-Here-555@reddit

The law was passed by the Labor Party gov't, which is left-leaning. Perhaps surprisingly, the Conservative Party is conservative.

[-]

AwTomorrow@reddit

Perhaps surprisingly, they don’t change the name of the party even when different factions take over. Right now we have a fairly conservative Labour Party, even as the Conservative party launches itself off a far-right cliff

[-]

I-Here-555@reddit

Conservative party launches itself off a far-right cliff

If Conservatives are that extreme, what would you call Reform/UKIP (Farage)?

[-]

AwTomorrow@reddit

Not even that far right of the Tories atm, given the current Tories have seen them as a target to aim for.

[-]

[-]

LaniusCruiser@reddit

Yeah none of that is even remotely true. There is no evidence that puberty blockers affect neurological development in any meaningful way. There is a small amount of evidence that puberty blockers can sometimes negatively influence bone density, but no evidence that it causes osteoporosis.

[-]

CalvinbyHobbes@reddit

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/14/health/puberty-blockers-transgender.html

New York Times has a really good article on this subject, would love to know what you think because Lupron does seem to have caused a lot of damage.

https://www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems/

Valerie Ward, 25, who lives outside of Pittsburgh, said she took Lupron for precocious puberty from age 9 to 12. Like Derricott, Ward said she sees a carousel of medical specialists for excruciating muscle and bone pain, depression, weakness, and fatigue.

The symptoms mystify each woman’s doctors. Yet they sound all too familiar to Chandler Marrs, a researcher who has studied Lupron’s side effects in adult women under treatment for uterine disorders.

Marrs, an endocrine specialist who studies women’s health, said she was surprised by the severity and duration of Lupron’s side effects, so she posted a survey aimed at getting more information. With little funding to do outreach, more than 1,000 surveys came back.

The women reported a wide range of symptoms: 30 percent cited severe joint pain, 29 percent, severe body aches; 26 percent, cracking teeth; and 20 percent reported osteoporosis. More than half reported moderate to life-threatening depression. Fifteen percent of the women rated their suicidal thoughts as life-threatening to severe.

——-

And here is a very recent study (this February) on neurological development:

The results from these studies are broadly consistent and indicate that the suppression of puberty impacts brain structure and the development of social and cognitive functions in mammals, but the impacts are complex and often sex specific, consistent with the MRI evidence of sex-specific differences in neurodevelopment in human adolescence.

Results

Sixteen studies were identified. In mammals, the neuropsychological impacts of puberty blockers are complex and often sex specific (n = 11 studies). There is no evidence that cognitive effects are fully reversible following discontinuation of treatment. No human studies have systematically explored the impact of these treatments on neuropsychological function with an adequate baseline and follow-up. There is some evidence of a detrimental impact of pubertal suppression on IQ in children.

Conclusion

Critical questions remain unanswered regarding the nature, extent and permanence of any arrested development of cognitive function associated with puberty blockers. The impact of puberal suppression on measures of neuropsychological function is an urgent research priority.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.17150#

And if they suicide because they can't face developing a 'wrong' adult body?

OH WELL.........

[-]

anthony2445@reddit

Maybe if people stopped teaching them about things like “wrong bodies” and taught them to accept themself for what they are, they would kill themselves irrelevant (because we both know that they kill themselves after transitioning anyways)

[-]

bexkali@reddit

If it turns out that trans kids (ones for whom the gender dysphoria never ends) are the result of a mismatch between the brain and gonads before birth...and that the current standard of care (briefly delaying puberty, then having them take the correct hormones to go through the 'correct' puberty for their brains if they truly want to...is the best and easiest way for them to survive and thrive... would you walk back your 'Accept your wrong body that someone else brainwashed you into and get over it' therapy suggestion?

At the moment, your assumption that other people are egging them on unnecessarily to being trans and claiming trans kids just need to be essentially 'de-programmed' sounds dangerously like the proven to be ineffective and cruel 'gay conversion therapy' so beloved of homophobes.

Is the thought that relatively rare (compared to the overall populations of humans) pre-birth developmental mismatches regarding sexual preference or sense of self as being boy, girl, or...in not really feeling like either (or like both, depending on the situation).... do occur...and that we should accept, but also help those people survive and thrive if they need help, so very disturbing to you...?

Only a small percentage of humans have these specific rare differences (the current standard of care for kids with gender dysphoria includes screening out the kids who aren't actually trans but just temporarily confused or anxious!)...it's not like we're going to go extinct due to this phenomenon!

[-]

anthony2445@reddit

This is such an idiotic line of reasoning, claiming that brains can be biologically male or female, and that for some reason some will just get the wrong one. Meanwhile many on the left won’t even approach the idea of what defines a woman, and others will claim that they are somewhere in the middle, how does that factor into the brain being one or the other??

Truthfully, some people with severe trauma are goaded into irreversible bodily harm by those that should be helping them, and they’re made to do so in many different ways. It’s sickening and sad, those that force the transgender agenda will never take any responsibility for all those that kill themselves after transitioning, because the root cause of their unhappiness ended up not being their gender ultimately.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Notice how I said "IF". Like it or not, believe it's possible or not, it's possible it will turn out to be a literal developmental mismatch. (There's been recent research indicating that brains of trans people do not look the exact same as cis brains do in certain areas).

You seem really obsessed with the idea that sick, twisted people are evilly convincing kids to make weird body changes they don't need.

You...are aware that trans kids have been known to realize something is 'off' about their sex/body compared to who they feel they are....very young...right? Like, for example...as early as around 5 years old. (They just don't really know what it means, certainly not until starting puberty.)

Or are you just going to dismiss that, too?

Only a very few kids appear to really be trans...and when they are, they know it. No one's 'tricking' them into being trans/wanting a different body.

Imagine feeling born into the 'wrong body'...from early on. Wanting to act like what you are even as a little kid...and being told "NO!" Or even worse, mocked, and bullied, and/or punished...

I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy...would you?

So...what makes you so certain that someone would do this for any reason other than its real for them, their truth?

Manipulative politicians have chosen this rare, small societal group as a scapegoat to distract people who don't understand and who are squicked out by people who are not the usual heterosexual norm, to disbelieve and harass.

Trans folks lives are hard enough already - and now, lots of extra people - some of whom 'mean well', are nevertheless disbelieving, talking down to, and by doing that, and by trying to force them to develop into the wrong body (despite gender affirming care being THE world-wide standard for care), tormenting them.

Please just let them be, stop interfering with their private lives, and let them work out whatever it is they need to do, in consultation with their parents and their medical care team.

[-]

Magic_Mink@reddit

We all knew anorexia and bulimia were primarily popularized by being a social contagion. Sterilizing vulnerable children whom were coerced and manipulated into transitioning will be looked back on as abhorrent. As bad or worse than the medical community performing lobotomies on fake medical diagnosis such as "hysteria" or other misunderstood disorders.

Its all so political no one can take a moment and stop and think what is worth more, the other political side "winning" the argument. Or sterilizing and destroying children's lives.

Astrology levels of critical thinking and rational thought applied to the basis of medical science. What could go wrong.

[-]

lady_ninane@reddit

We all knew anorexia and bulimia were primarily popularized by being a social contagion.

No, that's not how that works.

Sterilizing vulnerable children whom were coerced and manipulated into transitioning will be looked back on as abhorrent.

That's also not what puberty blockers do.

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

You have any evidence for any of these claims which doesn’t come from people who also want to push “exploratory therapy” on children?

Any source on that?

[-]

LunarWelshFire@reddit

I’m a volunteer for a trans youth charity in the UK. It is a considerably larger number than you would think. I speak with parents weekly and this ban is terrifying families. It’s breaking families and many are considering moving or at the very least remortgaging to finance healthcare abroad. Many of these amazing kids are already on suicide watch and self harming thanks to the temporary ban. I am dreading the next few weeks and months. Fuck Wes Streeting!

[-]

le-o@reddit

How did trans kids avoid killing themselves before puberty blockers were available for them?

[-]

LunarWelshFire@reddit

I highly recommend that you bring this conversation to a transgender person, if you really car enough to know- who would have once been a transgender youth for sure, and ask them how they survived a world that doesn’t give a shit about them enough to know the answer to this fucking awful question.

[-]

You have one case of someone getting on puberty blockers due to medical malpractice.

Puberty blockers don't cancel out puberty they just postpone it, at worst they'll have fertility issues if they reconsider.

Do we ban puberty blockers entirely because of it? No. Puberty blockers are not easy to get, same with transitioning as a whole. If you are getting them then you will be warned numerous times by doctors and it will require a greenlight from your therapist. There is an overwhelming amount of trans people that don't regret transitioning and puberty blockers are there to buy them time before hormone therapy.

You mentioned Tavistock case and I think "It was for clinicians rather than the court to decide on competence" is very much reasonable.

[-]

PhysicalIncrease3@reddit

"trans woman"... You're referring to a pre-pubescent young boy here. We're talking a 10 year old.

[-]

weneedastrongleader@reddit

And?

[-]

PhysicalIncrease3@reddit

And? You rather see 10 year olds kill themselves?

If a 10 year old is killing themselves because they aren't allowed puberty blockers I'd seriously question the quality of the parenting.

Also if they are actually not trans, they can just stop taking the blockers and go through puberty.

Well as the report shows, it's not actually anywhere near that simple. There can be significant long term consequences. Puberty is not just an off/on switch you can freely switch with a pill. Some never go through puberty property and end up infertile with weak bones.

This is not new information. For example we know that taking the pill for a long time without breaks is bad for women.

So your option are either: suicide rates for trans children or administering medication.

lol no, those are definitely not the only two options.

Why do you want children to kill themselves? Are you mentally insane?

The insanity is how you're framing this entire discussion as "Give 10 year old children puberty blockers or else".

[-]

Square-Compote-8125@reddit

And yet there are comments on all these posts about how they are killing trans kids by denying them access to puberty blockers.

[-]

weneedastrongleader@reddit

Because of the suicide rates. They went down when they administered puberty blockers.

All the “THINK OF THE KIDS” comments somehow don’t give a fuck if trans kids kill themselves.

[-]

MonsterDimka@reddit

They are important. Going through puberty for trans kids without hormones is absolutely devastating.Things you hated about your body just get even more prominent.

[-]

The suggestion that only trans patients experience an increased suicide risk because of the same meds

I don't belive that's what's being suggested here. Rather that one of the core arguments for puberty blockers is as an effective mental health treatment that reduces suicide in trans teenagers. That's why you'll sometimes see criticism of any ban along the lines of "kids are going to kill themselves without access to this". It's a pretty strong reason for maintaining their access - after all, any harm to bone health etc is far more acceptable if a patients life is saved. But the evidence appears to be relatively weak that this is the case.

If suicide rates are not reduced by teenage access to puberty blockers, then the argument in their favour is essentially 'cosmetic'. And that's a different bar for patient safety to pass.

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Yup! Sacrificing those kids who won't make it through is a sacrifice the biased board members for that study are willing to make! Go figure!

[-]

JimWilliams423@reddit

This is just the first step too. They always come for the kids first because they can't fight back. But once it is normalized for kids, they use that as the foundation for the next step which is to ban it for adults.

They did that in the US, Oklahoma started out banning it for kids and then they started banning it for everyone up to age 26.

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/7a/ca/a9/7acaa93144ac46397bba04928b93b556.jpg

[-]

ycnz@reddit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Po4adxJxqZk

[-]

JimWilliams423@reddit

Why is Labour doing this? I'm very confused.

Labour seems to be trying to be torie-lite, just like the democrats keep trying to be maga-lite in the states. A strategy that worked out great ... for the real maga.

For example, a couple of weeks ago they bragged "The tories lost control of our borders. Labour is taking it back. Keir Starmer has organized the three largest deportation flights in UK history."

[-]

Haztec2750@reddit

Ah yes because people in the Labour heartlands of the northeast famously don't care about immigration.

Oh wait, they do more than your average Tory voter. Source: I live here.

[-]

JimWilliams423@reddit

If you had read the information on the other side of the link you would have seen that labour's attempt to be tory-lite has coincided with a rapid decline in their popularity.

[-]

Haztec2750@reddit

What are you talking about? The last time Labour won a general election before this year was under Tony Blair in 2005. He's called a "tory lite" more than Keir Starmer, and was the only Labour leader to win 3 general elections ever.

[-]

JimWilliams423@reddit

What are you talking about?

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

Who do you consider a “reliable source”? JK Rowling?

Many people have broken down exactly how the research questions are flawed and the people associated with the review very specifically have an agenda that they wished to push.

[-]

ParkingPsychology@reddit

Jeez Louise, hostile much? You can try to talk to me in a normal manner, you know.

I just don't know of any of those sources. You're free to chime in your own if you have any.

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

I mean if you end your comment with “reliable source” and say that you didn’t find any, you will get a hostile response because that was a hostile comment.

Here’s the literal first result from Google:

Yale:

https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/integrity-project_cass-response.pdf

An excerpt from the above that I found funny:

The Review conducted a series of focus groups with healthcare workers of varying backgrounds, some of whom are not even clinicians. It is not clear what the expertise of these individuals might be in the field of transgender health. Of note, 34% stated that their understanding of "gender questioning children and young people" came from the public discourse and the media. Further, 32% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed with the statement "There is no such thing as a trans child. "23,24 Denying the existence of transgender people of any age is an invalid professional viewpoint. The involvement of those with such extreme viewpoints is a deeply concerning move for a document that issues recommendations on clinical care. A guideline that solicits opinions from those who will not acknowledge the condition for which care is sought should not be used. These individuals may express these ideological views, but their involvement in a process that led to recommendations for clinical care is a failure of the Review.

Some more results:

https://osf.io/preprints/osf/uhndk, or Preprint DOI: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/uhndk

https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2024.2328249

https://doi.org/10.1080/26895269.2024.2362304

an article, instead of a publication: https://medium.com/my-trans-child/a-rebuttal-of-the-deeply-flawed-cass-report-563ef270aa69

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

So u/Levitz decided to throw an angry shitpost out then blocked me so I couldn’t respond.

Since I can still see the comment itself,

No. That is normal. That is due. You have no idea what you are talking about. You can't reasonably expect people who work in a field to gauge on the validity of the field. If they didn't have a vested interest and a stance they wouldn't even be there to begin with

To take a very simple example, who would you expect to contribute to decisions on whether a certain cardiac medication should be used or not: a doctor working and experienced in cardiac medicine or one who has never worked in cardiac care?

same for paediatrics, orthopaedics, or any other field of medicine you care to name.

By that metric, I should be allowed to ask for bans to any and all medication based on my viewpoints of those fields of medicine, regardless of the veracity of my claims.

You are QUOTING. ACTIVIST. GROUPS. And in the same breath complaining about bias How are you this fucking brazen? Why would ANYONE give a shit about what you have to say?

And are they wrong? This is a pure ad hominem attack, where you dont attack the argument or the assertion but rather the person making it in hope that people ignore the point.

If you can disprove said allegations, why dont you do that in the first place? Oh wait, maybe you cant.

Yes because Cass doesn't even say that.

BMJ explicitly uses an example of a double blind trial being done with respect to GLP-1 medications in teenagers as a refutation to the claim in the Yale paper that there is high quality study on the long term effects of said medications.

I expect you to atleast read your own sourced papers, rather than make points that you dont even understand.

No. You, in your hysterical bubble of play pretend where people say this over and over again, repeat the bullshit.

And here we go. “Play pretend” is really the key phrasing that we should focus on here.

One would see that there are 2 possible interpretations to this. Either you believe my arguments about trans people and their doctors calling it trash involve me playing pretend with science, or you believe that being trans is playing pretend.

For the first one, its pretty easy to prove, given the public backlash that healthcare specialists and trans people across the world have said, and more importantly, how WPATH SoC already exists as a framework for trans healthcare.

So clearly, it has to be the second one. Theres really only group of people who will call being trans as playing pretend, and that falls squarely on transphobes. Lets move on though.

Same as the transphobia conspiracy allegations, same as pretending for a single second that absolute dogshit documents like what you are trying to defend hold any value.

This is mainly personal attacks without any evidence backing it, so easily ignored.

The reason this kind of legislation goes ahead without caring for what people like you say is that it's a whole lot of incoherent batshit insane crap.

Weird, I thought that happens because politicians like Starmer and Harris pander to conservatives for votes abandoning their core voterbase, and then act surprised when their core base no longer supports them.

Or maybe because billionaires like JK Rowling and Elon Musk are willing to throw women, children and just generally people under the bus to pretend that they care about them.

Sorry that reality is not what you want. Glad that you get ignored. Absolutely sick of this.

I somehow doubt that im being ignored, given the huge rambling rant that this message was.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

I’m sure I can find more, but even the Yale response alone goes very in depth into all the flaws with a purported “medical research paper”

Do excuse me if I just copypaste from a different comment:

Ah cool, the Yale (not from actual Yale but an activist group) self published (not peer reviewed) paper that has an actually peer reviewed paper that rips it to shreds!: https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2024/10/15/archdischild-2024-327994

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

Go for it:

1) if you actually read through the paper, it doesn’t “rip it into shreds”

To take a point from the BMJ paper, it argues that in order for Cass to be “independent”, it must not include people who have experience in transgender healthcare.

That alone shows that people should not be making decisions about people’s lives based on the review, purely because the review has no reference point regarding the healthcare and issues with it.

Additionally, there are multiple people who have ties to anti-trans groups, which further negates the argument about independence

[-]

Levitz@reddit

To take a point from the BMJ paper, it argues that in order for Cass to be “independent”, it must not include people who have experience in transgender healthcare.

That alone shows that people should not be making decisions about people’s lives based on the review, purely because the review has no reference point regarding the healthcare and issues with it.

No. That is normal. That is due. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The BMJ review also blatantly ignores the points stated in the Yale response where you literally cannot do a blind trial

Yes because Cass doesn't even say that.

Even from a general systemic standpoint, most people who are trans or are involved with treating trans people call the Cass review garbage.

No. You, in your hysterical bubble of play pretend where people say this over and over again, repeat the bullshit. Same as the transphobia conspiracy allegations, same as pretending for a single second that absolute dogshit documents like what you are trying to defend hold any value.

The reason this kind of legislation goes ahead without caring for what people like you say is that it's a whole lot of incoherent batshit insane crap.

Sorry that reality is not what you want. Glad that you get ignored.

[-]

sblahful@reddit

Yeah the BMJ letter takes a notably more balanced and informative approach. The whole topic area is so emotive to people.

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

Balanced….?

These misunderstandings, based on flawed and non-peer-reviewed analyses intended for legal (rather than clinical) purposes, jeopardise the implementation of crucial reforms in the care of gender dysphoric youth. The UK clinical community should move beyond these critiques and focus on the Cass Review’s recommendations to establish a safer, more holistic and evidence-based service model for children and young people experiencing gender identity issues.

These groups think it IS a good thing:

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

American Academy of Dermatology

American Academy of Pediatrics

American Academy of Physician Assistants

American Medical Association

American Nurses Association

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology

American Association of Geriatric Psychiatry

American College Health Association

American College of Nurse-Midwives

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

American College of Physicians

American Counseling Association

American Heart Association

American Medical Student Association

American Psychiatric Association

American Psychological Association

American Society of Plastic Surgeons

American Society for Reproductive Medicine

American Urological Association

Endocrine Society

Federation of Pediatric Organizations

GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBTQ Equality

The Journal of the American Medical Association

National Association of Nurse Practitioners in Women’s Health

National Association of Social Workers

Ohio Children’s Hospital

Pediatric Endocrine Society

Pediatrics (Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics ) and Seattle Children’s Hospital

Texas Medical Association

Texas Pediatric Society

United States Professional Association for Transgender Health (USPATH)

World Health Organization (WHO)

World Medical Association

World Professional Association for Transgender Health

[-]

bexkali@reddit

But apparently don't care if they suicide due to not having access to them.

[-]

SlingeraDing@reddit

That’s a BS claim

[-]

bexkali@reddit

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

In recent years, the sociopolitical climate in the U.S. has amplified inaccurate, stigmatizing messages about gender diverse identities and gender-affirming healthcare, leading to bans on gender-affirming medical care for minors in over 20 states (Borah et al., 2023). Restricted access to safe and equitable healthcare has increased mental health distress, including suicidality, depression, and anxiety among TGD youth (Abreu et al., 2022, Redfield et al., 2023).

From:

T. Zachary Huit, Claire Coyne, Diane Chen,

State of the Science: Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender and Gender Diverse Youth,

Behavior Therapy,

Volume 55, Issue 6,

2024,

Pages 1335-1347,

ISSN 0005-7894,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2024.02.010.

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005789424000340)

Abstract: Gender-affirming care is a framework that has developed over the past two decades and has experienced a rapid proliferation of empirical evidence. Given increased attention to transgender and gender diverse (TGD) youth in sociocultural spheres, there is a need to examine the current evidence base for effective gender-affirming mental health treatment. In this State of the Science review, we highlight general treatment frameworks that best support TGD youth and families in a variety of contexts, using gender-affirming psychosocial approaches. We use groupings of presenting concerns for TGD youth and families outlined by Coyne et al. (2020) to highlight differing mental health support needs, emphasizing the need for individual, contextually-based care models that consider aspects of gender-related marginalization and resilience. We further discuss needs for care access and equity and need for further attention in future research and intervention approaches.

[-]

Svorky@reddit

I know this is a personal and emotional topic for a lot of people, but this is just a government implementing recommendations of the NHS, really.

[-]

Aaron1945@reddit

The treatment harms a lot of people... pretty bias viewpoint there.

Look at the actual data.

And it's tax money that pays for it so, it effects the whole country. It's money from the NHS pot, being spent on something that, frankly, does almost no good, but leaves a lot of lives destroyed.

If this were a treatment for ANYTHING else, and it eventually resulted in as many deaths or ruined lives, everyone would decry it.

But because its tied to trans people and virtue signalling, so many people have gotten behind this terrible idea. Or maybe it's just the treatment part that suits the ideology?

No one who supports it seems to care about all the people who kill themselves because post transition there's no going back, people who kill themselves because their bodies are fucked by blockers, or people who realise they're OK part way through the process and are fucked up for life.

Y'all are way to selective with what evidence you look at.

[-]

ChristianBen@reddit

Also reminder that another important finding of Dr Cass’s report is that resources to treat kids reporting gender dysphoria is so scarce most kids basically had to wait half a decade before they can get to any proper doctor to look at this issue reported. I am sure these issue is addressed just as swiftly as the ban /s

[-]

Levitz@reddit

There is actually a whole lot of addressing, yes.

"Reality has a well-known transphobic bias."

[-]

JimWilliams423@reddit

Good to see Labour are tackling the important issues facing the UK and not focusing on a treatment that harms no-one and affects only a handful of people in the entire country.

Labour seems to be trying to be torie-lite, just like the democrats keep trying to be maga-lite in the states. A strategy that worked out great ... for the real maga.

There is no evidence of brain problems or infertility. There is a small amount of evidence pointing to a negative impact on bone density, but calling that "bone problems" is misleading.

[-]

Speeskees1993@reddit

proof?

They dont just jump to medical transition lol. It goes child distress > parents > psychologist > medical physician > parental consent > if under 15 or 16 puberty blockers > reassessment for hrt at 16. This is a proven way to drastically reduce risk of suicide in trans people under 18.

It also prevents years of painful changes and future surgery requirements.

[-]

re_carn@reddit

This is a proven way to drastically reduce risk of suicide in trans people under 18.

No, it doesn't.

It also prevents years of painful changes and future surgery requirements.

Oh the “painful changes” that no one thought of until it became popular. If there are “painful changes,” you need psychological support. And trying to use puberty blockers is just child abuse.

[-]

tgc220@reddit

Im sure just because you say it makes it true lol you have 0 clue what your talking about so no point in engaging with you.

[-]

re_carn@reddit

Of course, since you've provided plenty of evidence for what you say. /s

-20 years of depression and suicidal thoughts - thousands in psychologist cost for related trauma - 15,000 in hair removal - 75000 for facial surgery to try and undo what tesosterone did - losing my career because of conservative majority in my previous field that caused untold issues when trying to transition - continued issues with impossible things to fix because of puberty

So far 100k in costs at least all of which is not covered by any insurance or healthcare. Continued strss from governmental overreach into my personal freedoms and constantly seeing articles like this where governments think they know better because idiots dont understand anything.

[-]

sblahful@reddit

trans kids who have access to gender affirming care have bone density comparable to that of the kids experienced gender

That's fascinating, can you point out where in the review that's brought up? It seems quite incredible - what mechanism could be affecting bone density contrary to the expected effects of their native sex hormones?

[-]

Comprehensive_Crow_6@reddit

It’s in section 7 of the paper.

As for your question, I think you missed that these are kids who are on gender affirming care, so a trans girl would have decreased testosterone and have higher estrogen. And vice versa for trans boys. Which is why their bone density levels are comparable to cis girls and cis boys respectively. It’s “contrary to the expected effects of their native sex hormones” because they don’t have their original hormones anymore lol.

If you’re asking why it affects bone density at all, then I have a basic explanation. From my understanding, when you don’t have enough of either estrogen or testosterone in your body then that leads to decreased bone density. But it doesn’t really matter which one you have. I’m sure that’s a massive oversimplification but that’s the gist. That’s why women after going through menopause have decreased bone density, and it’s part of why it’s becoming more common for older cis women to be given HRT. It’s to counteract the effects low hormone levels have on bone density. So that’s why trans people who are on HRT have similar levels of bone density, they have the appropriate levels of hormones to keep their bones healthy.

I do find it really fascinating that trans kids have lower bone density before starting treatment though. That isn’t something I had heard about before, it’s pretty interesting.

[-]

sblahful@reddit

Your right, I mis-quoted you and meant to ask about their bone condition pre-treatment. Thanks for the detailed reply though.

[-]

re_carn@reddit

You know, I have no desire to check what exactly is written in this victorious article and how correct the claims presented in it are. I am just glad that at least in the UK common sense has prevailed.

[-]

ClearDark19@reddit

I have no desire to check what exactly is written in this victorious article and how correct the claims presented in it are.

You literally said you don't care about facts or reality. You are not worthy of conversation or consideration. You just admitted that you do not care about truth.

[-]

Comprehensive_Crow_6@reddit

You’re the one who wanted to talk about how easy it was to verify that the bone density problem is permanent, and now you don’t care about checking if you’re actually wrong?

And yeah let’s base complicated medical decisions on common sense. That’s how we do things.

I’m trans and a lot of my friends are trans. We have all done much better mentally after we accepted ourselves as trans and started puberty blockers and HRT. Our common sense is that these treatments should be allowed for minors so that they don’t have to go through the wrong puberty. So should we just allow trans kids to have puberty blockers because of that?

The whole point of the scientific method is to eliminate our personal biases. So many things that are “common sense” turn out to be completely wrong.

[-]

whyisthisnamesolong@reddit

Yes because common sense is the current rage-trend of the moment and not empirical evidence supported by basically every medical professional. You twat.

[-]

pandemicpunk@reddit

Of course you don't. You only give a fuck about your agenda and not what science actually says.

[-]

Ok_Builder_4225@reddit

"I don't care about evidence or truth, only that my own views are confirmed."

[-]

Decievedbythejometry@reddit

What happens when use of puberty blockers ceases?

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

If you literally open Wikipedia

When you go off puberty blockers you will go through puberty whether with hrt or “natural” if they realize they’re not trans

That’s literally what they said, it only applies while you temporarily are on puberty blockers

[-]

DickBlaster619@reddit

And how exactly do you build up bones via exercise?

[-]

pm-me-nothing-okay@reddit

I bet you thought you were being smart with this comment, but in fact today you can learn something new.

https://www.niams.nih.gov/health-topics/exercise-your-bone-health

Dr. Bowers is currently President of WPATH and one of the world's top experts on transgender healthcare and medical procedures. She's also one of the best surgeons in her field.

What happened to Jazz Jennings? Last I heard she was showing off her recent weight loss and doing some modeling on top of her activism work. Did something bad happen?

[-]

Instabanous@reddit

Did you read what I read? They know the blockers are leaving kids stuck with a micropenis, that can't be used for a neovagina. That's bad, right? Either way, its monstrous. They are stopping people from ever developing into a sexual adult, that's bad, right? How can you be too young to consent to sex but old enough to decide you will never want to experience sex with your own natural body, or become a parent? It's horrific, no child can possibly consent to any of those things. Jazz was exploited, on TV, for money and fame. There's a show called I am Jazz where it is so obvious that the Mum is driving all this. That kid never had a chance to live in their own body, never went through natural puberty or got to assess what they were losing when they were castrated. All this abuse was documented on TV with a clear momentum which would have been impossible for the poor kid to hold their hand up and say "stop, I don't want to." They had so much pressure on them. And Marci was right there, chopping that kid up. I think we will look back on this as the greatest medical scandal of all time.

[-]

JohnMLTX@reddit

When I talked with Jazz back in June she didn't say anything about any of that, weird. She seemed to be living her best life and excited/proud of the work we were doing in Texas for trans rights and community organising.

And I found the paper you're referring to. It involves kids who didn't get put back on hormone therapy properly after being on puberty blockers, with all cases due to parental refusal.

[-]

Instabanous@reddit

Well I'm glad if Jazz seems OK, sincerely. There is no excusing what the adults around her put her through though- they should all be in jail. I dont think any amount of hormones is growing that reproductive system back of children who missed their puberty. Gruesome.

It's not reversible. It's potentially reversible. It does not reverse in all cases. Which is why they advise anyone undergoing the treatment to freeze sperm.

[-]

DickBlaster619@reddit

Every day I wake up

There is another psyop

[-]

JohnMLTX@reddit

Every day I wake up as a trans person and have to defend myself online.

[-]

just-a-cnmmmmm@reddit

they're activists. they'll do anything to support the cause, whether or not it harms children & other individuals.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Eunuch is not a sexuality, nor do they make any discussions on sexuality whatsoever, as it's gender-confirming care, something entirely unrelated to sexuality.

True. The latest version of standards of care does contain a chapter on people identifying as eunuchs though.

Sorry for not wanting to dance around pretending you are anything but what you are.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

I know the stuff that you are referring to, but you must be aware that by providing inaccurate or exaggerated accounts you lose credibility.

WPATH the evil broken crazy organisation

There are controversies. Yes. This wording makes it sound absurd though.

that condones removing age limits on child gender surgeries

Pressure for that came from the US, not WPATH originally.

promoting Eunuchs as a sexuality

This is weirdly accurate but it sounds insane by itself. It goes better if you actually provide a source:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9553112/pdf/WIJT_23_2100644.pdf

And tell people to crtl+F for "eunuch".

[-]

Baderkadonk@reddit

The eunuch thing is even weirder. WPATH was taking advice from people who were involved with a website dedicated to their castration fetish.

https://notindenial.substack.com/p/on-wpath-and-the-eunuch-archives

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

This is weirdly accurate but it sounds insane by itself. It goes better if you actually provide a source:

the source talks about a completely different topic: how to provide care for someone in that scenario - and very telling that someone would fail to look at “only high risk individuals should be considered for surgery”

[-]

-MissNocturnal-@reddit

Wait, I don't have a bone in this fight because I'm from a real country.

To my knowledge, there are largely no age limits to ANY surgeries for children. Like kids can get implants/breast reductions RIGHT NOW if they can find a willing surgeon. And there are a lot of common sense reasons for why this should be allowed. There are a lot of boys who grow tits. If a girl has to have a mastectomy due to breast cancer, she could get implants etc.etc.

However, no surgeon is going to be willing to create a neovagina from a toothpic sized undeveloped dick, which is why SRS for trans kids is largely a myth. It's like trying to build a house with a single piece of 2x4.
Just like how a dentist would rather wait for a patients jawbone to be fully developed before they wanna put in a porcelain crown.

[-]

Luvke@reddit

WPATH advocates cutting the breasts off under 18s.

[-]

JohnMLTX@reddit

Not according to the text of the SOC8. Don't know where you heard that from.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

It's also pretty easy to understand why. Those issues are caused by a lack of either sex hormone in the system and the risks only exist for the brief period of time that the medication is usually prescribed (only a couple of years) and can be managed. The study talks about risks if you were taking them continuously for decades.

Everyone has to go through puberty.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

The fact you consider higher suicide rates to not be a problem is very telling of what your actual goal behind opposing gender affirming care is.

[-]

just a special occasion?

is when there's zero support from friends and family

Finish the sentence. Zero support from family and friends - for transitioning. There is literally no evidence that a huge percentage of trans people just get over it and are okay with not transitioning. It's not a phase that you can talk someone out of.

[-]

MangledJingleJangle@reddit

Eh, for kids it absolutely is a phase that can be talked out of. It took one conversation.

I love you and I will do my best to honor your request to call you by your chosen pronouns.

I have one thing to say, right now there a is a movement of people who are trying to push for Trans people rights, so the subject is very popular. Which is how I suspect you heard of this. The fact of the matter is, it is extremely rare for someone to by body dysmorphic. What is common, is for young girls and boys to be uncomfortable with their bodies while they grow into them. That’s a totally normal feeling and it will likely pass. I have one question for you, because I was there the day that you were born, why is it that you were born with the parts of a girl? Those were the natural parts you have on your body. Please give that thought some thought and remember that mama and I love you.

Did our best with pronouns but also stood firm on no chest binder. A few months later and she requested to be called she/her again, and has leaned further into her feminine over the years.

[-]

ClearDark19@reddit

Eh, for kids it absolutely is a phase that can be talked out of. It took one conversation.

There is no evidence that it's some commonplace thing for minors to identify as the opposite gender. Nor is there any body if evidence that most trans kids just stop. There are people who identify as trans for a time but then later (with therapy) conclude that they're nonbinary or experiencing some sort of other psychological condition (I personally know one person like that), but that percentage is in the low single digits. More than 93% of people who identify as trans continue to identify as trans their entire lives.

for kids

Are you under the impression that most people just become trans as adults?

I have one thing to say, right now there a is a movement of people who are trying to push for Trans people rights, so the subject is very popular. Which is how I suspect you heard of this.

Well, you're wrong about that. I've known about trans people since the mid or late 90s when I was a kid. I sided with trans people as legitimate back in 2006 or 2007 when I was in my early 20s. I've been a trans rights ally for about 17 or 18 years now. I've been a gay/lesbian/bi/pan rights ally since 2002 when I was a teenager. I joined the Gay-Straight Alliance in my high school my last two years of high school.

The fact of the matter is, it is extremely rare for someone to by body dysmorphic.

Which is part of why it's funny that the elites and the Right are so negatively obsessed with it. They're not even a large group of people. They're still valid, but the Right thinks 20% of the general population is trans (a poll last year showed that).

What is common, is for young girls and boys to be uncomfortable with their bodies while they grow into them.

Yes, but not in the form of identifying as the opposite gender. That's not common at all.

why is it that you were born with the parts of a girl?

Because birth defects happen. As modern science understands it, trans people have the brain and nervous system of the opposite sex. In order for your brain/nervous system and your physical body to match, a series of genetic triggers have to be pulled during gestation, abs certain hormones have to sequentially be released. Transgender people seem to be a result of gestational defects in the right hormones not being released correctly and fetal development not occurring correctly. Leading to a mismatch of the physical body and the brain. Pointing out that a trans person was born with genitals of the sex opposite of what they identify with doesn't cause their brains to align with their genitals as "correct". Think of being transgender as a sort of intersex (hermaphroditism) of the brain and nervous system rather than of the genitals.

The human body and human embryonic and fetal development os a pretty complex process and a lot can (and sometimes does) go wrong. Have you ever noticed or wondered why there are several times more trans women (MtF) than trans men (FtM)? The scientific theory is because creating a male takes more steps and there's more room for things to go wrong during development of a physical male. The same reason why a majority of natural miscarriages are of male embryos and fetuses.

I wonder what you think of intersex fetuses? Children aren't born with identifiably and unambiguously male or female genitals 100% of the time. Or what you think of Klenifelter Syndrome? Or Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome?

This is why I'm not angry or yelling at you either. The average adult citizen only understands Biology at an elementary or middle school level because the education system doesn't require people to learn more. Transgender and nonbinary people require a crash course in high school or collegiate level Biology to understand. They don't teach most people in school that not 100% of humans are XX or XY. 4-7% of humanity is XXY, XYY, XXYY, XXXY, XYYY, or single X (and most of these conditions cause ambiguous, androgynous genitalia in babies). Or that your chromosomes requires certain hormones and genetic triggers to be released in order for your brain to recognize the genitalia as "correct", or to have a brain that is the same sex as your body. Transgender and nonbinary people are more complicated than stuff we were taught in school as children or what our parents taught us as children and teenagers.

[-]

MangledJingleJangle@reddit

There is no evidence that it’s some commonplace >thing for minors to identify as the opposite >gender.

My point is that it is possible, and it is never brought up. It should be brought up every time this discussion comes up. I don’t believe people know that anymore. It has been even controversial to say in the past.

Are you under the impression that most people >just become trans as adults?

No, I under the belief that we know far less about the subject than people argue that we do, and that children are impressionable and do not have sufficient experience in life to know that what they are experiencing is a permanent pattern of thoughts or feelings.

That, because all of the science is inconclusive, regardless of which way the evidence is pointing, we ought to take caution with children.

We can treat our own children with compassion and love while telling them they will likely grow out of the feeling as they pass through puberty, and if they do not they can seek medical treatment as an adult.

Well, you’re wrong about that. I’ve known about >trans people since the mid or late 90s when I was >a kid.

I don’t doubt that, my point was that the idea has saturated the zeitgeist more recently in a way that is new.

Which is part of why it’s funny that the elites and >the Right are so negatively obsessed with it. >They’re not even a large group of people. They’re >still valid, but the Right thinks 20% of the general >population is trans (a poll last year showed that).

You are right that it has become a large focus, that seems like an over reaction when you look at the numbers. People are concerned about children and how they are raised. The idea of teachers and counselors at school using a student’s preferred name and pronouns without informing the parents is a complete over step. That actually creates a distance between parents and their children, in a way that legitimizes mental illness. I don’t blame republicans for looking at that as grooming. I know that’s how I would have felt.

Yes, but not in the form of identifying as the >opposite gender. That’s not common at all.

It’s still the appropriate story to tell the child.

As modern science understands it, trans people >have the brain and nervous system of the >opposite sex.

This is not settled science. I read the study. They are working with theory. I don’t support using unsettled science on children.

Transgender people seem to be a result of >gestational defects in the right hormones not >being released correctly and fetal development >not occurring correctly. Leading to a mismatch of >the physical body and the brain. Pointing out that >a trans person was born with genitals of the sex >opposite of what they identify with doesn’t cause >their brains to align with their genitals as >“correct”. Think of being transgender as a sort of >intersex (hermaphroditism) of the brain and >nervous system rather than of the genitals.

“Seem to”, very important part of that paragraph. I do think the science and studying is important, but until the science is 100% settled, no experimenting on kids.

<I wonder what you think of intersex fetuses?

Interesting mutations, but not really relevant to the discussion. Gender Dysphoria is a psychological phenomenon that is not understood well enough to be treating children.

This is why I’m not angry or yelling at you either. >The average adult citizen only understands >Biology at an elementary or middle school level >because the education system doesn’t require >people to learn more. Transgender and nonbinary >people require a crash course in high school or >collegiate level Biology to understand.

I’d argue, in addition to this problem, are people who have gone to college and think they know more than they actually do pushing ideas onto the public before they are ready.

Look, I am trying my best to flesh these ideas out. I appreciate that you are out there doing your best to support people who are struggling.

I am trying to learn how to better articulate my thoughts on the subject. It has been hard over the last few years to engage in these conversations because accusations of transphobia come quickly.

I still find myself getting triggered by certain rhetoric. I’m trying.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

You are like 5 years late in trans advocate lies and misinfo. Update yourself please.

[-]

Candle1ight@reddit

What a remarkable rebuttal with great supporting evidence! Only the best on this sub!

[-]

re_carn@reddit

Do you prefer them being dead? Because that's the alternative.

Really? Then there should be suicide statistics that should show a decrease in teen suicide rates since the Dutch Protocol was introduced?

Statistics have not shown this since 2010, when this protocol began to be used.

Oh wait, that's actually your goal in the first place isn't it. My bad.

No, my goal is for the child abusers to leave the kids alone.

[-]

melancholyfog@reddit

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2789423

"In this prospective cohort of 104 TNB youths aged 13 to 20 years, receipt of gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormones, was associated with 60% lower odds of moderate or severe depression and 73% lower odds of suicidality over a 12-month follow-up."

You are an idiot. applying general teen suicide statistics to try and show no decrease among a group making up less than 1% of the population will obviously show no meaningful change. look at research that actually matters before spewing your rhetoric which ruins the lives of innocent children.

[-]

Candle1ight@reddit

Trans people make up a low single digit percentage of the population, using general trends for teenagers isn't going to tell you anything.

[-]

Oatcake47@reddit

No chance me having/wanting kids. Nor my cis brother, he has a cis partner and are never having kids regardless.
Turns out abortion and trans care is all about taking away bodily autonomy and forcing women to be baby factories for McJesus.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

Do you have any sources for this being any major concern? No medication will be completely without sude effects in literally 100% of cases, but given that these medications don't have a blanket ban it's reasonable to say that they're safe when the harm outweighs the borderline negligible risks.

If you keep using puberty blockers well into adulthood you will have a higher chance of osteoporosis and fertility issues since you're essentially experiencing menopause (which leaves the person without enough estrogen or testosterone which are usually produced by the testicles or ovaries). However that's not what these medications are used for in this case. Instead, these are merely used for a few years until the person can choose to take hormones that will allow them to have the puberty they wish, or stop taking them and experience puberty after a delay. We're talking usually between the ages of 13-15 and age 16-18 depending on which part of the world you're in. The risks are very minimal and it saves lives, with no sign of these being over prescribed (again, extremely low regret rates)

It's easy to throw a list of 3 symptoms around when you have no idea what you're talking about or any context to back them up.

[-]

uselessscientist@reddit

I don't have a horse in this race, and am generally supportive of people doing whatever the fuck they want, but to answer your last question from a medical science lens:

If a new drug came out was being tested with a 3-4% rate of long term serious side effects, it almost certainly wouldn't get green lit unless it was for a terminal illness with zero alternatives. 3-4% side effect rate for an illness that improves quality of life? Zero chance that gets approved

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

If that were the case, antidepressants would be entirely banned, as they have serious side effects much more than 3-4% of the time and typically has a much lower rate of suicide prevention and treatment of depression than these puberty blockers have. The fact that these are recommended virtually across the board by pediatrics society and that these meds are already approved for othr uses should give you a hint as to their safety and reliability.

Besides, where are you getting that number saying 4% of people who take puberty blockers have serious long term side effects? That's fucking nuts.

[-]

uselessscientist@reddit

That number came from your comment lol. I was playing devils advocate

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

You mean the hypothetical where 100% of people who regret using them end up having a serious complication despite there being no evidence for it?

[-]

uselessscientist@reddit

It's literally your number mate, I do not understand why you're getting heated about this lol

[-]

re_carn@reddit

Do you have any sources for this being any major concern?

Should I? Do you deny the existence of these side effects?

it's reasonable to say that they're safe when the harm outweighs the borderline negligible risks.

Oh, and now I'm going to ask for proof of that claim, namely that the positive effects outweigh that risk.

It's easy to throw a list of 3 symptoms around when you have no idea what you're talking about or any context to back them up.

I have yet to see beyond your science-like text that you know what you're talking about.

The numbers just don't add up...

So you've already started evaluating lives and deciding who's more important? 👍

every teenager goes through that

Do you have a source on every teenager going through gender dysphoria?

Everybody gets sad sometimes, but there's a difference between being sad and clinical depression. Just because you don't understand gender dysphoria doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. That's why we have medical professionals who study this shit.

[-]

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

I'm not against them for medically necessary conditions like some cancers. I'm also not against transitioning. I'm against doing these things to kids.

Puberty blockers will only make you much more different by essentially becoming a teen in a child body will not stop bullying, it will only make it worse. It's not normal for a teen to look like child.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

Those are some cool opinions you have. Do you have any evidence to back them up?

Why should we trust you over medical professionals who have seen the data when it comes to the very real reduction in depression, anxiety and suicidality in these children? Because some redditor thinks that it might be worse for those kids on a theoretical level actually?

Transition will alleviate gender dysphoria which will allow a transgender person to better function in society. If they face bullying because of it, then it's the bullying that we should change. It's interfering with their medical care that needs to stop. In fact, speaking of passing, it's specifically things such as puberty blockers that would help one pass as it would avoid the permanent changes associated with going through the wrong puberty.

Why are you assuming that these kids are lying or are just transitioning to avoid bullying? The regret rates being so low for these treatments would indicate that to the contrary, gender dysphoria is accurately assessed. If anything, the low rates might indicate that the barriers to receiving this treatment should be reexamined.

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

Because for every n kids that you help you destroy the life some amount of kids. Fine if you choose this as an adult, you can go to hell in a handbasket. But it's not right to do this to someone as a teen or kid.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

According to the data about gender affirming care, for every 96-98 children you save, two to four children will get it wrong. And what's the consequence of getting it wrong? A delayed puberty, which WPATH says has a statistically insignificant chance of harmful physical effects. Is it worth making the future of 96+ kids much more difficult which will statistically lead to some of them committing suicide to save 2-4 kids from potential embarassment for a couple of years?

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

WPATH is a terribly biased source. Lifelong bone problems is nothing and it's disingenuous to suggest this.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

WPath aren't the only ones supporting the evidence that these treatments do much more good than harm.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7073269/

I've yet to see a single source at all though for your beliefs. It's almost like you're arguing in bad faith...

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

The study you talks about reducing suicidal ideation. Important to be sure. But it's not evidence these treatments do much more good than harm.

If there are so many studies, hundreds even as you claim. Why not send me one that directly concludes: Given puberty blockers to n dysphoric people led to p less suicides and q did not actually transition. Where q < p.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

Ah you got me, the link i provided only specifies that ot stopped trans people from wanting to kill themselves their whole life, which i'm sure has nothing to do with the high rates of attempted and successful suicides in transgender individuals, which is lessened when they have access to gender affirming care. I guess we can never actually know if any lives are saved, unless you're willing to put 2 and 2 together. Or you know, think about it for 5 seconds. As for more evidence, read the links in the References section to get started. I'm not gonna be your research monkey all night.

So let me get this straight. You can't assume that a lifetime of increased suicidality will result in suicides. Hell, you're not even going to accept that suicide attempts that resulted in medical interventions lead to increased suicides...

... but you'll assume that these 4 kids took hormone supplements despite puberty blockers literally being the alternative to hormone supplements, and assume that these 4 kids all received fucking scars or serious medical problems just because they said they regretted taking it and had stopped taking them?

Listen, i had a lot of fun with your trolling but i gotta move on with my life.

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

Like I said I'm not against someone transitioning and doing whatever they want once they are an adult. I'm not sure where the lifetime increased suicidality comes from.

I have been very clear in my words, which you seem to willfully twist.

> Hell, you're not even going to accept that suicide attempts that resulted in medical interventions lead to increased suicides...

I didn't say this. I said and I quote myself here

> What is the suicide rate among gender dysphoric children? I'd wager it's less than 4.1%.

That means I said NOTHING about it not increasing. I said that I'd wager the final number is less then 4.1%.

> ... but you'll assume that these 4 kids took hormone supplements despite puberty blockers literally being the alternative to hormone supplements, and assume that these 4 kids all received fucking scars or serious medical problems just because they said they regretted taking it and had stopped taking them?

Not 4 kids, 9 kids regretted their treatment. Not scars on their skin, but yes their bodies are scarred for life.

[-]

Flemlius@reddit

Medical reasons like... the very real issue called gender dysphoria?

"It's not normal for a teen to look like a child." is just not honest, or at the very least not well thought out. Some start experiencing puberty early, some late. Some immediately get a thick mustache, some never do at all. There's no "normal" look for a teen in the way you're describing it. Sure looking very young when you're around 16-18 may be a bit unusual, but certainly also happens plenty to cis people without medical intervention.

Lastly, judging normality by how "passing" someone is, is a very cis way of looking at this. The final goal of transitioning isn't to look the way others expect you to. It's to be able to feel good and yourself in your own body.

Verwarming1667@reddit

Anxiety is literally being consistently nervous. Chronic fatigue is literally you are consistently sleepy. You are just enumerating different words for the same things.

I don't refuse treating gender dysphoria. Just wait till the person is equipped to make that choice.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

That's exactly what puberty blockers are for though. It's the way to let them reach a more mature age before deciding if they want to start hormone therapy or not, since i'm sure plenty would love nothing more than to start hormone replacement therapy as soon as puberty hits.

What you're arguing for isn't letting them wait and make a decision. What you're advocating for is to force every trans child to go through permanent unwanted changes that will make it more difficult for them to pass as their gender and inflict mental harm for the rest of their lives, to save the near nonexistent percentage of children who will be inconvenienced by taking the medication unnecessarily. It's frankly monstrous. For any other medical condition that has recommended treatments for minors, you don't object. Or are you saying that if a kid has a tumor you should let it grow until the kid is old enough to decide if she wants it removed? Presumably not, in which case you're carving out a special double standard where you want politicians to interfere with the healthcare of children only for gender dysphoria.

I can't tell if you can't see the hypocrisy, or if you just actually want more children to suffer and in some cases die. As the data has proven.

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

You are pretending hormone blockers are free of charge for the body. They most certainly are not. Entering puberty at 18 leaves you with damage to your body.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

Where's your source for these meds causing significant amounts of harm? The risks aren't statistically significant according to the vast majority of research papers i mean, these meds had to have been safe enough to be approved for other treatments, after all. And again, let's do a bit of basic fucking math.

Let's pretend that everyone that takes puberty blockers and doesn't then switch to hormone therapy gets osteoporosis. That's as stupid as saying that every menopausal woman will develop it due to that same lack of sex hormones, but let's pretend for a second. Even in that insane make-believe scenario, given the ridiculously low regret rates for gender affirming care including puberty blockers, you are still suggesting that we throw the roughly 97% of kids taking them under the bus with increased rates of depression and suicide to save the 3% that get it wrong from having a manageable health issue.

Even when we stack the fucking deck your logic makes no sense whatsoever... unless you're arguing in bad faith and don't believe gender dysphoria is real.

[-]

Verwarming1667@reddit

How many people taking these meds end up permanently transitioning and how many do not?

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

Here's one source https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39432272/

ihvanhater420@reddit

You're describing what they want

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

Their body is not 'betraying' them. It does exactly what every body does. Grow into its biological, built in gender. This is not something anyone chose beforehand. The body is always the correct gender. It's the mind that's causing these people grief. A Lot of times said people also perceive the opposite gender to give them some farfetched edge or advantage. Which is obviously bollocks as both men and women have both shared and unique struggles. No one has it 'easier' than the other.

[-]

LinkinParkU4Lyf@reddit

Where are you getting this bullshit from? Gender is different from sex, gender as a word literally is derived from an older meaning that means genre or categories, thus categorising people. Sex and gender have a strong correlation, but sex is also as diverse as gender is. Very few people transition because they perceive the other gender/sex to have it easier, that is absolute rubbish.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

Sex is a binary. And no you can't change your sex. That's just reality. Being mad at reality does not change reality. Gender and sex are interchangeable words regardless of how progressives feel about it.

[-]

QuackingMonkey@reddit

This depends on how you define sex. If you define it by whether someone produces small gametes or big gametes, then yes, sex is binary. But that's not what we look at in society, that normally only comes up in the doctor's office if someone experiences fertility issues, and then we continue to call them by their perceived sex, not their gametes, because it's not how actual human beings define sex. People determine someone's sex/gender by what they superficially look like, and for that there is definitely a very broad scale with people ticking off every 'man' box on one end and people ticking off every 'woman' box on the other end but by far most people somewhere in between who socially clarify their sex/gender by the way they dress and behave.

As for your previous post, you're so close. Yes, these bodies are doing what they're programmed to do, and indeed no one gets to choose this beforehand, nor their perceived gender. Calling sex the correct one and gender the wrong one is very opinionated though, both just are what they are. It's not that either is 'wrong' persé, it's the mismatch that is wrong. For that we have the technology to change someone's looks, but not to change someone's mind at this level (without torture that causes even bigger issues), so for now there is only one way to correct the mismatch between the two.

Except the 'advantages' part, I think you (or someone before you) misheard stories from a lot of trans people who perceive a struggle because they are born as [sex], not because they consider [sex] itself to be worse as a whole, but because it's worse for them individually as it makes them experience distress to have to live as [sex]. And then, yes, transitioning to take that distress away should give a farfetched advantage, for that individual, no matter what direction they happen to transition in.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Sex and gender have a strong correlation, but sex is also as diverse as gender is.

Yes, it's binary.

[-]

C2H5OHNightSwimming@reddit

God, if this was 20 years ago you'd be arguing for conversion therapy to reverse the "mental illness" of same sex attraction and help children conform to the "correct", "natural" inclination of heterosexuality because it's what the body is designed for folks, don't let your stupid brain tell you otherwise, even if you've felt like that for your entire life. It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve people!

Good lord, it's like same fucking shit, different date. As someone who was gay in the 90s when this was how loads of people thought and the government weaponised fears around "unnatural" sexual attractions to be perceived as "keeping children safe from themselves" (section 28 anyone?) to play to right wing panic over changing social attitudes, respectfully just please stop with this. That didn't stop anyone being gay then, and limiting teenagers' access to something that can pause puberty for any of them unsure about their gender identity and give them more time to decide isn't going to stop trans kids being trans, it'll just make their life a bit harder or a lot harder down the line.

Also "a lot of times, people also perceive the opposite gender to give them some farfetched advantage"... God this is so much like the "we can't tell teenagers about gayness, then they'll all start thinking they're gay to be trendy!" anecdotal argument. It's also a weird culture war talking point endlessly repeated and based on no meaningful research. The ONE study that's commonly cited as coming to this conclusion was so poor that it wouldn't pass a peer review. Some lady put a call out to survey asking a bunch of parents of potentially trans kids who already concerned and uncomfortable, and a lot of them said they were sure their kid was only thinking like this because of their friends, it's the new trendy thing! By the same logic, you could put out a call for parents who were "concerned" their kid thought they might be gay, and if the majority of them had the opinion that it was because of the Deccline of Moral Values in Modern Society/hormones in the water/violent videogames/the influence of Satan, then you've just "proved" that's the reason. Orrrrr you recruited a self selecting sample and then reported the majority of the self selecting sample's subjective opinion on the conclusion you already came to as fact, one or the other! Furthermore, the numbers of transgender children and people are so infinetisimally small that it's apparently a very crappy form of social contagion... funny that.

You're probably not a bad person, there's so much shit floating around on the internet these days, it's hard to know what's what. But do you actually know any trans people? Or failing that (because they are very rare), have you made any effort to seek out the experiences of trans people themselves rather than just taking opinions from people who aren't transgender and have never known anyone who is? Because I would like to think you have but it isn't sounding like it.

There's a good episode of the Australian science podcast Science Vs that delves into a lot of the hysteria around trans kids and investigatives competing narratives using facts and evidence from different studies and research, comparing the scientific validity of different sources. As well as talking to transgender children and their parents. They also have dozens to hundreds of citations per episode. So maybe check that out.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

I was obviously not clear. So let me be clear in this comment.

I have absolutely no issue with adults getting these and other types of medication and getting any medical procedures they want including any type of bottom and top surgery. I may not agree with it, just like I don't like tattoos and piercings, but adults should be allowed and able to make those choices and calls for themselves regardless of how I feel about the subject. They should also be allowed to dress however they like, no matter how outlandish. Hell, I don't agree with pronouns at all, but I wouldn't go out of my way to pester someone else if they want to be called them.

The problem with the subject in the OP is that we are not talking about adults. We are talking about children and teenagers. A group of people that is extremely impressionable, cares a lot about the opinions of others and doesn't have the life experience nor the depth of knowledge that an adult has to make long term, difficult and complex decisions for themselves or others. Society reflects this too.

They are not allowed to drink alchohol, smoke cigarettes, drive vehicles, own firearms, vote, sign work contracts, enlist in the army or live by themselves(as in own a house and have only them live in it with no one else). By what reason would they be capable of making this lifechanging call, but not all the ones I named previously?

I know I come off as vindictive. Every time there is a discource around the subject either one side gets completely censored or it just devolves into namecalling. The very science on the subject is muddy, because like a lot of psychology reseach it relies on self reporting. It's not like mechanics or the like where you get clear cut awnsers 99.99% of the time. Part of me is tired of people on the pro-side pretending like everything is already set in stone and reaching for greater and greater extremes (what I consider extremes).

We'll probably not agree on this subject at all. But I hope my actual position is more clear atleast.

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

So you're just flat out disagreeing with the established science of gender dysphoria even existing.

Did you know that depression and anxiety issues also don't exist? Just like... Try to be happy and calm or whatever. Autism and ADHD? Have they tried just like, not doing that? This is literally how your argument sounds and it would be funny if it weren't so tragic.

Transgender people exist, even if you don't personally understand them. Fucking deal with it.

[-]

Lamballama@reddit

The science of gender dysphoria existing classifies it as a disorder caused by the distress between the mismatch of the mind and body. We simply find it easier to change the body than the mind, be it either removing the distress or removing the mismatch, but going after neurological (for the mismatch) or psychiatric (for the distress) solutions isn't denying gender dysphoria

[-]

CallMeClaire0080@reddit

Conversion therapy has been outlawed in various countries because it's not scientifically proven and almost always inflicts additional harm and stress. It's no different from trying to change someone's sexual orientation is what the data shows.

Thus far the only proven treatment to alleviate gender dysphoria is transition and the related gender affirming care. If you have revolutionary findings showing otherwise, i encourage you to submit that to an accredited peer reviewed journal. In the meantime, doctors will follow the evidence.

[-]

Lamballama@reddit

Conversion therapy to change gender, sure. Because that's a psychiatric practice trying to affect a neurological condition. Psychotherapy to manage the distress is not conversion therapy, and doing proper psychotherapy reveals a significant number of psychological comorbidities which cumulatively resemble gender dysphoria

[-]

PotsAndPandas@reddit

The body is always the correct gender. It's the mind that's causing these people grief.

The mind is not separate from the body. The body is not a person. A body with no person attached to it serves no one, it's just flesh and blood at that point. It exists to be a vessel and a tool for the mind.

So as the mind is a part of the body, its needs have a higher priority over the rest of the body which serves it, thus the idea that the non-mind/person part of the body is always correct is false. It may be correct 99% of the time, but that is not "always correct."

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

An exception does not make the rule. This is one of the most basic rules of science. If the body is correct 99.99% of the time its factually always correct. The 0.01% in science would be a rounding error.

[-]

PotsAndPandas@reddit

The 0.01% in science would be a rounding error.

False.

An exception does not make the rule.

In science, exceptions prove the rules are not accurate.

If the body is correct 99.99% of the time its factually always correct.

Again, false, on multiple accounts. Science does not brush over innacuracies. You also imply its 99.99%, which we both know you can't back up.

The puberty stage is literally encoded into the genes to happen at a certain time & physical developmental stage, and interfering with it with hormone interventions does not stop that timer.

It's like throwing a wrench into the gears of a clock and saying "Hey look, I made the timer stop". Only an idiot who doesn't understand how clocks work would think that's true. That idiot is you.

[-]

awesomeredditor777@reddit

Trust the doctors , if they’re recommending it who are we to within

[-]

Dixnorkel@reddit

People said the same thing during the opioid epidemic

[-]

Levitx@reddit

The thing about puberty blockers is that they're meant to be the compromise.

No. There is no compromise.

There is evidence based care, and the evidence for puberty blockers usage on gender dysphoric youth is lacking as evidenced by the Cass review. Full stop.

If the evidence shows it helps, it will be used. The evidence didn't show that, so it doesn't. Hell, if 99%+ of gender dysphoric youth are actually trans, I say just go straight to hormones, got nothing against that.

The idea of "compromise" as if this was something two sides agreed upon, though, is not real.

[-]

themanfromarkham@reddit

i think it should be the last resort option to medicate kids imo even for stuff like depression anxiety etc which can be caused by bad home circumstances but when a kid is being abused by their family the first thing is drug them up for being sad when they are sad for a reason i dont think it should be like that im speaking from personal experience i was on tons of meds for years when i would have been fine just my family was abusing me leading to the issues

[-]

UltimateInferno@reddit

Fair, but on the flip side queer kids are more likely to be abused, the stigma surrounding them and compelling them are not unlike abuse. Talk to any trans person and you'll find large swathes of those who despise their parents, in large part because of this.

At the very least, I'm of this opinion: puberty blockers and HRT has genuinely worked for many people. The exact amount can be debated on hours, but I personally know people where this sort of thing has saved their lives. Now, not every prescription or procedure will help every person—that's just how medicine is—but it does help many people in spite of that. That said, I do not think law makers making sweeping bans know what they're doing for any given teen. There's so much nuance in this situation that quite often we need a medical professional, with the training necessary, speaking face to face with their patient and trying to understand what's going on to make these calls.

They are humans and can make mistakes, but so are these lawmakers, and at least the doctors have more applicable training and are personally observing each individual situation they're involved in, which these legislators are not.

If you want, talk to trans people, and ask them their thoughts on their parents and family. There's plenty on here. Use this mutual background to understand where they're coming from. If you're afraid of being flamed in trans subreddits, some of them can be a little touchy due to their experiences. They're not bad people, but I do understand any potential apprehension. I can certainly ring up my trans friends and pass along their experiences to you.*

While you have had poor experience with medication, do you think all others should be denied? Not be given due diligence, cause that's not what's happening here. This is blanket bans.

*Here. I'll share this first-hand account on what one of my friends went through to transition as a teen, and this is with parents who were permissive:

Process to getting female to male HRT as a minor in New York State (one of the most permissive states), if your parents are supportive and consenting.

Begin socially transitioning (at least 6 months)

Find a therapist, attend regular sessions long enough to have them know you

Go to your primary care doctor, come out to them, and get a full physical exam including blood work.

Get a referral to an endocrinologist who handles HRT. This will probably take about 3 months to get an appointment if you're lucky.

Have your therapist and PCP write individual letters on official letterhead diagnosing gender dysphoria and recommending treatment.

Get a full physical and psychological exam from the endocrinologist. Maybe begin hormone blockers, which likely won't do a lot if you're older than 13.

(Optional) If other mental illnesses are present, wait until therapist and endocrinologist have determined you are stable enough for HRT. This will take several weeks.

Get another physical from the endocrinologist just to be sure.

Dig into your paternal medical history to ensure safety.

Wait a week for one final review of the paperwork.

Finally start HRT. It will take 3 more months for any noticeable changes.

This wasn't the easy fast and loose option people make it out to be.

[-]

horiami@reddit

and trans athletes

[-]

Flemlius@reddit

Just throwing words around at this point, but the trans athlete debate is more of a dog whistle than a wedge issue. I can honestly believe that people are seriously concerned about the well-being of children. Hell, who knew what my opinion would be if not for some very patient and understanding friends of mine with some first hand experience. Trans athletes are such an overblown topic that the general women's sports community already barely has experience with. Not to undermine the importance of women's sports though, but how many of the people complaining about trans people in sports have ever been interested in women's sports before?

[-]

horiami@reddit

i think people who care about sports get very invested in it for the fair play argument even if they don't care about the particular sport, i've seen it happen before were dudes who only watch soccer got super heated about a tennis player that got accused of cheating

plus professional sports open a lot of opportunities for young people but only the very few at the top so they view it as taking away opportunities from those that deserve it

[-]

Murica_Chan@reddit

As a professional myself (psychometrician) despite that i am one tier lower than psychologist and psychiatrist..fuck it I'll gice my piece of mind

There's a dilemma over the issue of gender incongruence (gender dysphoria for children) is if giving them hormonal treatment a moral thing to do. They are still sexually immature and may not understand the full implications on what they gonna face

I do think that psychology needed to revisit and debate about the best treatment or should I say the best way to deal with this.

But yeah, for now i dont have that much value over psychology community cause i am not the right person to speak about it but i do wish the psychologist and psychiatrist needed to consider ways to deal with this without the drugs until they reach the sexual maturity

[-]

poptix@reddit

You didn't shoot my point down, a single lobotomy 14 years ago isn't the same as thousands of them happening per year at its peak.

You attempted to use an overly broad "banned [all] trans healthcare" when they did not. Words have meaning, learn how to use them.

[-]

snuggiemclovin@reddit

You brought up lobotomies because you thought they’d support your argument for government meddling in healthcare without realizing that the government never banned them and the medical experts were able to create better practices on their own, because that’s how science works.

And you’re the only one who said “all” healthcare. You have to put words in my mouth to argue against because you’re wrong.

[-]

poptix@reddit

I brought up lobotomies because it was a trend. Diagnosing kids for ADD/ADHD in the 90s was another harmful trend. Overprescribing opiates was yet another harmful trend. That doesn't mean that lobotomies are inherently evil, or that ADD/ADHD isn't a legitimate medical diagnosis, or that opiates shouldn't be available when needed. It also doesn't mean doctors are bad.

However, you cannot blindly trust doctors. Doctors are people too, they have their own echo chambers. Some doctors are activists and think the government isn't moving fast enough. Some of those doctors treat children.

The simple fact is that there was a (single) study showing that puberty blockers helped children. Now there are multiple completed studies that cannot reproduce those results and the government has decided that it is not in the publics best interest to do these things to children.

There are more studies in progress which may have different methodologies and different results, time will tell. This is the scientific process.

[-]

snuggiemclovin@reddit

You’re right about one thing, which is that the scientific process will play out - provided it’s allowed to do so without the government stepping in.

[-]

volkswurm@reddit

Physician's used to commonly prescribe cigarettes to treat asthma. They railed against washing hands after barehanded autopsies before delivering babies, which at the time was causing an 18.4% mortality in a particular maternity ward and high mortality rates in general across the first world. And do you know what happened to the doctor who theorized that their hand washing practices were the cause of patient deaths? He was institutionalized by his peers! He was then badly beaten and died a few days later. Once doctors DID begin to wash their hands, the mortality rate in that ward dropped to 2.2%.

I only share that story to illustrate the fact that in accepted medical practices that are actually harmful, it takes a long time to build enough data, monitor long term effects, and break the chains of current mainstream thought before the connection of negative consequences to those practices are accepted. I am not arguing that the government knows best, just that that doctors do not positively know the long term effects of newer practices and it's all safe because they said so.

[-]

Ok_Departure_8243@reddit

I’ll believe that when liberals stop attacking doctors for pointing out obesity is unhealthy and that healthier any weight is complete bs.

[-]

snuggiemclovin@reddit

I must’ve missed the headlines where liberals are trying to ban healthcare that keeps you from being obese.

In fact, Michelle Obama’s whole thing was making school lunches healthier so kids wouldn’t be obese.

[-]

Ok_Departure_8243@reddit

A quick google search

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/doctor-trouble-calling-patient-obese-flna1c9441118

“As doctors warn more patients that they should lose weight, the advice has backfired on one doctor with a woman filing a complaint with the state saying he was hurtful, not helpful.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/aug/10/obese-patients-weight-shamed-doctors-nurses

“The problem is so widespread around the world that health professionals need to be taught as students that excess weight is almost guaranteed in modern society and not the fault of individuals,“

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8690829/amp/Doctors-not-call-overweight-patients-chubby-plus-size-upsets-them.html

“Obese patients should be able to pick what language doctors use to refer to their excess weight, experts have said.

Many people find words such as ‘fat’ ‘chubby’ or ‘plus-size’ upsetting or offensive, a British study found.“

Do you know what the most successful thing there was to stop people from smoking in their car or driving or drinking? It was shame. Shame is the strongest social motivator there is. It DOES work if it is paired with resources to make change.

Will it make you feel like shit if you choose to wallow in the shame and do nothing about it? Absolutely.

FibroBitch97@reddit

suicide and self harm prevention

No, that’s exactly what the right wing wants. To them it’s two bird, one stone.

Those that aren’t too stupid to understand that it helps them are often still malicious about it because it directly hurts then people they want to hurt.

[-]

LazyRockMan@reddit

The right wing 😭😭

Literally done by the left. You’re confused.

[-]

FibroBitch97@reddit

Oh, I’m sorry, let me be explicitly clear this time.

By right wing, I mean the neofascists who want to see every queer person dead in the street are super fucking pumped that taking away puberty blockers will not only kill a lot of trans people, but make another large amount of them very fucking miserable.

[-]

LazyRockMan@reddit

How many of these people do you think there are in the U.K.?

[-]

Special-Remove-3294@reddit

Fascism isn't when thee does not like non straight people.

Fascism is the merging of corporate and state power + ultra nationalism and militarism + totalitarianism.

[-]

LazyRockMan@reddit

Fascism is anyone that doesn’t agree with OP

[-]

salazafromagraba@reddit

Just call them authoritarians then. Being emotional isn't cause for American fascist rhetoric like 'the right' or 'the left'.

[-]

Lunaris_Von_Sunrip@reddit

Labor haven't been left wing for many years

[-]

gnocchiGuili@reddit

They were under Corbyn.

[-]

rf-elaine@reddit

these kinds of hormonal treatments are suicide and self harm prevention

I'm curious if this is a real, clinical argument? This is something an addict would say when they can't get a script for painkillers from a walk-in clinic. Or something an abusive spouse would say to prevent their partner from leaving them.

[-]

ile141@reddit

I'm curious if this is a real, clinical argument? Like, from the medical community?

Yes, and it is not difficult to find literature supporting this argument. On a quick glance:

Among transgender adults in the United States who have wanted pubertal suppression, access to this treatment is associated with lower odds of lifetime suicidal ideation.

[...] access to PBs or GAHs in a multidisciplinary gender-affirming setting was associated with mental health improvements among TNB youths over a relatively short time frame of 1 year.

Adolescents showed fewer behavioral and emotional problems, reported fewer depressive symptoms, feelings of anxiety and anger remained stable, and their general functioning improved.

The present study, together with this previous research [2], indicate that both psychological support and puberty suppression enable young GD individuals to reach a psychosocial functioning comparable with peers.

[-]

GayStraightIsBest@reddit

Wow, crazy how none of the people screaming bloody murder about how there is no scientific basis to giving trans kids puberty blockers have responded to the guy showing the well defined scientific basis.

Just crazy.

[-]

ile141@reddit

That is a problem with the general sentiment against trans-related issues.

A lot of the opinions are either based on grossly outdated information, or just talking points from Facebook experts or the like. Any clinical data to the contrary is conveniently ignored.

For instance, the points expressed against puberty blockers even use detransition as an argument against the medication (I will ignore the issue of generalization on limited cohorts, and relevancy to modern diagnostic criteria). While conveniently ignoring the use-case of blockers - giving time to the adolescents to figure out what to do. So even that point does not stand.

Relevancy to modern definitions, or even to the issues discussed, among disinformation and baseless populist opinions, are certainly an issue not to be ignored. Unfortunately it is the adolescents who will suffer from this.

[-]

GayStraightIsBest@reddit

Very well put

[-]

Levitz@reddit

That’s dumb as shit. Anyone who works in healthcare knows that these kinds of hormonal treatments are suicide and self harm prevention.

Dang you should tell the guys who spent 4 years reviewing the evidence and didn't find that.

Downvote me to hell you ideological shits, but I am and always will be right.

Who is the ideologically motivated person here? Think about it for a moment.

[-]

snowlynx133@reddit

Which guys who spent 4 years reviewing the evidence? Do you mean the Cass review which basically every scientific organization has rejected for being the most unscientific load of bullshit ever written?

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Do you mean the Cass review which basically every scientific organization has rejected for being the most unscientific load of bullshit ever written?

And yet not a single one peer review by an expert exists that contradicts it. Bizarre. I mean you would think they would flock to it right?

It's almost as if a whole lot of people are really pissed that science doesn't say what they want it to say. It's even funnier when the French says about the same stuff but they love it because they ended up acting in a different way.

The vast majority of the opposition to the Cass review is ideological and to be ignored as such.

[-]

You're a special kind of stupid if you unironically bring up homeopathy.

[-]

You didn't defend the validity of the Cass review lol what? What's your defense against hundreds of authorities and independent scientists pointing out systematic errors in the review that are common sense to basically any undergraduate student?

[-]

Levitz@reddit

That there has never, to date, been peer reviewed critique of the Cass review by relevant experts.

There is a whole lot of hogwash and that's it. It's the same thing antivaxxers do, the same thing homeopaths do, the same thing flat-earthers do and now, in an utterly disappointing way, what trans activists do.

[-]

snowlynx133@reddit

I love how you're saying "relevant" experts in a "decent" journal just so in case I provide examples you have an easy way out by claiming that they aren't relevant or decent based off your own arbitrary criteria .

There are a few critical papers from the International Journal of Transgender Health, which IS a peer reviewed journal, but from your wording I can already predict that you're going to dismiss it just because it has the word transgender in it.

Also, an analysis from other scholars pointing out systematic errors is essentially what a peer review is lol. It's not raising any new claims, it's criticizing the rigor of a paper, which is exactly what a board of peers does

[-]

dedicated-pedestrian@reddit

But they made the accusation first! No copying!

[-]

ONLY_SAYS_ONLY@reddit

Scientists are also pointing out that homeopathy works

Bullshit.

[-]

WeerDeWegKwijt@reddit

I think it's because if you believe homeopathic medicine will help you, your body will actually give a positive response (placebo effect). I feel like research on how puberty blockers are received by patients are not trustworthy for this exact reason.

[-]

ONLY_SAYS_ONLY@reddit

The placebo effect is accommodated for in the likes of drug efficacy studies through blinding, but none of that is relevant for studies into using puberty blockers for gender affirming care. It’s certainly not a reason for studies into such care being “untrustworthy” unless you fundamentally misunderstand the subject.

[-]

WeerDeWegKwijt@reddit

I've seen one study that did not take the placebo effect into consideration at all. So if you can show me a study that proves puberty blockers help young kids dealing with gender dysphoria, I'll change my mind.

[-]

ONLY_SAYS_ONLY@reddit

Again, you are misunderstanding the placebo effect and appropriate study design. You also evidently do not have a grasp of the scientific method if you’re asking for “proof” (this is not mathematics).

So if you can show me a study that proves puberty blockers help young kids dealing with gender dysphoria

Here is an actual body of clinical experts, not general clinicians like for the Cass review, arriving at a consensus for France’s national policy the matter that conclude exactly that:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929693X24001763#tbl0001

I'll change my mind.

I’m expecting the goalposts to be moved but I’m happy to be wrong.

[-]

WeerDeWegKwijt@reddit

I'll give it a read tomorrow and let you know what I think.

[-]

sblahful@reddit

Hey, don't mean to wade in, but I think the person you're replying to is referring to the distinction in critiques of Cass made here:

https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2024/10/15/archdischild-2024-327994

I've not read the article in full so can't opine on whether it's arguments are strong or not, but it looks at the critiques made to date and seems to contextualise them and highlight misconceptions.

[-]

AramushaIsLove@reddit

Just gotta say that the amount of "lol" and "lmao" that you use does not equate to the quality of your argument. Might wanna use it less, it doesn't help.

[-]

snowlynx133@reddit

Not sure if you're being genuinely well meaning or trying to insult me. But this is reddit, I use lol and lmao as tone indicators. I'm capable of writing graduate level responses but this is neither the time nor place for it.

cass herself is a known terf

As ascertained by a bunch of lunatics right after they learned of her, in response to science not saying what they want.

[-]

Toomastaliesin@reddit

Cass review was conducted by people with no expertise in the area, is not peer-reviewed, it applies extremely rigorous standards (which are generally not used in medicine) to those studies that show the benefit of puberty blockers but those extremely strict standards fly out of the window when looking for studies to find any downsides - they cited the ROGD paper as legitimate for crying out loud! And even Cass herself has not suggested steps as extreme as this law proposes. But yeah, of course the Cass report is still somehow valid.

[-]

sblahful@reddit

You appear to be referencing a couple of arguments made by the Yale Law firm. There's quite a good rebuttal of these in a recent BMJ paper, which argues that each of these points are based on a lack of undershorts of how independent reviews are structured (i.e., conducted by people with no expertise in the area) or simply factually incorrect (i.e., applies extremely rigorous standards (which are generally not used in medicine).

https://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2024/10/15/archdischild-2024-327994

[-]

Levitz@reddit

made by the Yale Law firm.

It's not even from Yale. It's an activist group. They were even forced to add the line:

[-]

ONLY_SAYS_ONLY@reddit

And yet not a single one peer review by an expert exists that contradicts it.

Why does the criticism of the review have to be peer reviewed but not the review itself?

[-]

Levitz@reddit

The studies of the review itself were peer reviewed by the BMJ.

And again, it would be completely fine for any gender specialist to write a critique and have it peer reviewed, it would be great even. But it hasn't happened.

[-]

ONLY_SAYS_ONLY@reddit

You clearly do not understand what peer review is.

This review was not peer-reviewed for publication. The fact that studies cited were does not change this basic fact for reasons that should be painfully apparent.

But peer review is more that just peer review for publication. The feedback and criticism of the review by relevant subject matter experts is, by definition, peer review. That’s literally what the peer review process is, and peer review for publication is but one aspect of that process.

The fact that you mistake peer review for publication with the broader process of peer review, and the fact that you think citing peer reviewed publications counts as your material being peer reviewed (by any definition), demonstrates that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

[-]

deetyneedy@reddit

He's talking about the systematic reviews Cass commissioned. They are peer reviewed.

[-]

deetyneedy@reddit

He's talking about the systematic reviews Cass commissioned, moron.

[-]

I mean the cass review itself concluded that there was evidence that puberty blockers helped children and no evidence that puberty blockers harmed children.

The review is not nearly as contrary to puberty blockers as most people believe (which happens when the most people haven't even read the darn thing, but I digress) but I don't think this is quite an accurate assertion either. Without getting too extensive, page 32 points 80 and onward explain the position of some clear benefits but unknown risks: https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/CassReview_Final.pdf

It recomended that further studies were made over a larger cohort to get more insights but even the cass review doesn't justify a complete ban.

Yes I agree. I've even stated as much like three times in this very thread already. This whole thing is not what the Cass review recommended and I take special issue with that because I reckon "You guys asked for a medical review of experts and then ignored it"is a way more coherent and strong point for advocacy than pretending that the whole thing is bunk.

I don't like it when someone argues that an adult transitioning is some satanic cult stuff that does nothing either. I'm just a blue haired libcuck or a nazi transphobe depending on the subject, apparently.

[-]

underdabridge@reddit

Principled centrists unite!

[-]

Ornery-Concern4104@reddit

A peer review is done on a study, not a review of the study you donut

Did you go to uni?

[-]

Prize-Trouble-7705@reddit

You made a false and misleading claim. I provided the ACLUs actual position on this topic.

Suicide and suicidal thoughts are not the same.

Making an equivalence would be a, funny enough, false and misleading claim

You are pushing misinformation. Full stop. Remember that next time someone dismisses arguments from trans activists.

[-]

I fucking did lol. Read the thread?

[-]

WeerDeWegKwijt@reddit

In your last reply you just said that it's misinformation. Why?? Is it ok to conflate suicide and suicidal thought?

[-]

Oatcake47@reddit

Nah man, that bit where you showed me all the evidence of keeping water out your airway stops drowning?
I decided that thinking of inhaling water and actually inhaling water are two DIFFERENT things.
There for there is no way that keeping water out my airways would ever stop me drowning!
I am SO smart, better luck next time hippy!

[-]

SilencedGamer@reddit

Suicide is directly preceded by suicidal thoughts, in fact, if one was not suicidal and died by their own hand without the intention to harm themselves then it’s not a suicide but an accident.

[-]

sutree1@reddit

Hey look, the person sporting "Vatican city" flair is pointing out ideological biases.

Selfawarewolf.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Consistently amazed that people really believe I'm anywhere near the Vatican. Overstimating people I guess.

[-]

sutree1@reddit

You: puts "Vatican City" in print next to their name.

Also you: how could anyone draw the OUTRAGEOUS conclusion that I'm in any way associated with the Vatican City????

Yeah, you're the genius and the world is stupid. Nice one.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

You know what, you are right.

Next thing I'll make another Reddit account called something like "Vlad-The-Putin" and everybody should surely believe I'm in control of Russia. It'll be hilarious

[-]

Candle1ight@reddit

Yeah dude, everybody knows nobody lives in the Vatican and it's totally unreasonable to believe anybody is from there.

[-]

Hyndis@reddit

The Vatican has a population of about 700 people. Thats the entire population of the entire country.

I didn't imply anything bud.. that's what you're trying to do it seems...

You are motivated by your hatred of lgbt people

[-]

ChristianBen@reddit

“Didn’t find sufficient evidence” in this context basically means there aren’t large-size double blind experiment or something with similar rigor like those trials for COVID vaccine to conclusively prove the effectiveness of these treatments.

Well Duh.

She also highlighted qualified personnel to handle reported gender dysphoria is so understaffed basically kids who reported it had to wait 5-7 years to get looked at for it. That’s definitely pointing to “rampant hormone blocker prescribed is no. 1 thing on our priority” lol /s

[-]

bloodmonarch@reddit

You are ideologically motivated to let people suffer and die.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

There's not strong evidence that puberty blockers or HRT reduces suicide rates or suicidal ideation.

Also, sterilizing children based on the false belief they will kill themselves if you don't is fucked up.

Downvote me to hell you ideological shits, but I am and always will be right.

Have you considered that maybe you're the ideologue then?

[-]

Netblock@reddit

Please stop spreading disinformation. There's a lot of positive evidence that puberty-blocking is helpful. Puberty blockers are widely known to have reversible side effects (check out the research papers linked in the article; also BMD).

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

This is totally misleading. The vast majority (98% according to U.K studies) of children put on puberty blockers go onto HRT, a combination that causes sterility.

There's a lot of positive evidence that puberty-blocking is helpful.

Except there isn't as is made clear from the Cass review and the Karolinska review of the available literature on the topic. It's easy to cherry pick small sample size studies with sketchy follow up and questionable methodology. That's why literature reviews and meta-analyses exist.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

This is totally misleading. The vast majority (98% according to U.K studies) of children put on puberty blockers go onto HRT, a combination that causes sterility.

Hormone replacement therapy does cause permanent infertility.

Puberty blockers cause recoverable infertility. We know this from studies looking at precocious puberty.

Cass review

Cass is shaky and flawed (eg, requesting blind studies on care that cause obvious growths and changes). This goes over flaws.

Karolinska review

Unfortunately, I have not come across peer critique of this.

That's why literature reviews and meta-analyses exist.

We should also include WPATH CAS

It's easy to cherry pick small sample size studies with sketchy follow up and questionable methodology. That's why literature reviews and meta-analyses exist.

(Sample sizes are small because the population is small to begin with.) Interestingly, the vast majority of studies talking about trans healthcare, both for children and adults, either conclude to 'more research needed' or 'it seems to be good'; it's very rare to find anything that says it's a bad idea.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Puberty blockers cause recoverable infertility. We know this from studies looking at precocious puberty.

You can't conclude much of anything about the impacts of permanently interrupting puberty or delaying it well into the teen years from giving pre-pubescent children puberty blockers until they reach the normal age of puberty and then cease use and allow puberty to proceed. Those are very different use cases.

Unfortunately, I have not come across peer critique of this.

And? It's not up to me to make my argument with only information you personally are already aware of. It's been peer reviewed and published. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37069492/

Sweden now requires these treatments be done only within experimental trials to insure data collection and follow up.

We should also include WPATH CAS

That's not a meta-analysis or literature review, it's a policy statement more than anything else.

This is also the same organization that suppressed science it commissioned from John's Hopkins when it didn't like the conclusions and removed age restrictions from its guidelines due to political pressure rather than evidence.

Also, in case anyone doubts how fucking out to lunch WPATH is, read chapter 9 of their SOC-8 guidelines where they advocated for castration and "genital nullification" for people who identify as "eunuchs".

(Sample sizes are small because the population is small to begin with.) Interestingly, the vast majority of studies talking about trans healthcare, both for children and adults, either conclude to 'more research needed' or 'it seems to be good'; it's very rare to find anything that says it's a bad idea.

This is simply false. A huge amount of research in this area has massive problems with follow up and high rates of patients dropping out of the studies, and doesn't show improvements in key areas like suicidal ideation, self-harm and depression or anxiety. If you're going to permanently alter someone's body and render them sterile and unable to have sexual function, you had better have positive results.

Furthermore, there are decades of much more carefully conducted studies showing that 65-85% of childhood gender dysphoria cases resolve after the onset of puberty without medical intervention. When there is intervention, the desistence rate drops to 2% using even looser diagnostic criteria.

It sucks that the UK (and US) government is getting in the way of science and healthcare.

Following the recommendations of a large scale scientific literature review isn't getting in the way of science and health care, quite the opposite. Also, what's actually happening in most of the European countries that have largely prohibited these treatments, is that they're limiting them to clinical trials rather than just willy nilly handing out experimental drugs and treatment without collecting any data on outcomes. That's anti-science in your view?

[-]

Netblock@reddit

You can't conclude much of anything about the impacts of permanently interrupting puberty or delaying it well into the teen years from giving pre-pubescent children puberty blockers until they reach the normal age of puberty and then cease use and allow puberty to proceed. Those are very different use cases.

Sure, it is a technical unknown, but the evidence we have suggests that it's probably not a problem; also the victim demographic is absurdly small.

All forms of healthcare (not just trans) have a regret rate, misdiagnosis rate, and complication rate. While I have not consumed any scientific comparison, I feel like this infertility problem is far below average.

Also, in case anyone doubts how fucking out to lunch WPATH is, read chapter 9 of their SOC-8 guidelines where they advocated for castration and "genital nullification" for people who identify as "eunuchs".

I'm a little lost. Many people seek to serilise themselves over the simple fact that they don't want children; why reject a concept of identity? What is the purpose in telling a fully-informed adult what they can and can't do?

If you're going to permanently alter someone's body

Puberty blockers don't permanently alter; it's basically fully recoverable.

Furthermore, there are decades of much more carefully conducted studies showing that 65-85% of childhood gender dysphoria cases resolve after the onset of puberty without medical intervention. When there is intervention, the desistence rate drops to 2% using even looser diagnostic criteria.

(source for that number please)

Good thing that puberty blockers don't permanently alter.

Following the recommendations of a large scale scientific literature review isn't getting in the way of science and health care, quite the opposite.

We're talking about laws completely blacklists a specific kind of healthcare for a specific diagnosis, with no room for nuance. It's unprecidented.

We feed actual literal poison to children with cancer, but we're not upset at that.

That's anti-science in your view?

Yes. Blanket banning is overreach.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

You're seriously going to argue that getting a vasectomy is comparable to castration or the total removal of one's genitals? Have a nice day.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

I mean have you actually read chapter 9?

If the adult is fully informed about the consequences of the actions, and there's science backing it directly (and adjacent topics) saying that they seem to be happier and safer, why not? What is the purpose of ignoring informed consent?

To completely ignore the nuance is to build a nanny state.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Should doctors also lop off limbs if a patient wants them to? Where is the evidence for castration or genital nullification (let's call it what it is, the total removal of the genitals, which by the way can cause serious complications) as an efficacious treatment for anything shy of the infection of those organs with disease?

Doctors don't exist to carry out whatever treatment you want them to.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

Where is the evidence for castration or genital nullification (let's call it what it is, the total removal of the genitals, which by the way can cause serious complications) as an efficacious treatment for anything shy of the infection of those organs with disease?

I think you should read chapter 9.

Doctors don't exist to carry out whatever treatment you want them to.

A problem understood by WPATH SOC is the opportunity cost of safety. By rejecting the nuance, you risk the individual performing the operation themself; unclean environment, improper tools, unskilled labour.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

I have read it. I don't know why you think not having read it is the reason I would have an issue with it. As if there's some wondrous morsel contained within that would make castration and removal of genitals all fine and dandy as a treatment for what is clearly a psychological illness.

And the very minute risk that someone may self mutilate is not a compelling reason to have medical professionals mutilate on their behalf instead.

What you're trying to argue for is pure malpractice and completely unsupported by any meaningful evidence. It's beyond the pale.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

I have read it.
completely unsupported by any meaningful evidence.

You saying this, you asking for evidence, makes me think you didn't read chapter 9. There is an array of evidence that shows that informed consent should apply.

Do you have counter evidence that you're using to reject the evidence it sources?

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

There is an array of evidence that shows that informed consent should apply

Informed consent always applies to medical treatment.

Informed consent isn't a carte blanche for doctors to do whatever they want or whatever you ask them to. I'm not sure why you seem to think that.

Do you have counter evidence that you're using to reject the evidence it sources?

The burden isn't on me. Nowhere in any of the citations in that chapter is any evidence for the efficacy of these practices provided. The only argument they make for this kind of practice is that these people may otherwise do it themselves, and that's largely based on a self selected survey posted to "eunuch.com". This could also be said of any self harm or self mutilation. We don't therefore have doctors do it instead, nor should we. Should teen girls who like to cut have their physician do it? Would that be ethical? No.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

The burden isn't on me.

I have given you proof, via WPATH SOC chapter 9, that it's a good idea. You're the one rejecting the evidence. Why do you reject the evidence?

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

You didn't read those sources then. Because none of them are studies of the efficacy of these kinds of treatments. Most of them aren't even about eunuchs. The only argument they even make for efficacy of this extreme treatment is that not doing it will result in people doing it themselves or having someone other than a doctor do it. That's not evidence of efficacy. That's a harm reduction argument based on an online survey and it doesn't justify having doctors mutilate the bodies of patients with a profound mental illness that requires psychological treatment, not cutting off their genitals.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

9.0 shows that the people exist and have varying degrees of motivation.

9.1 shows that eunuchs exhibit patterns similar to GD but request a conclusion that isn't of the classic binary.

9.2 is the aforementioned opportunity cost of safety.

9.3 talks about a skilled labour shortage.

9.4 talks about happiness regarding sex life.

Are you disagreeing with 9.0 and 9.1, that says these people exist and call for a non-binary division of GD?

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Thank you for proving my point for me.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

I don't quite understand your point; I don't understand why you think WPATH SOC8 chapter 9 is bad.

[-]

drhead@reddit

If you're going to permanently alter someone's body and render them sterile

Why are you so obsessed with fertility? Also with your framing of a "fear tactic against parents" in another chain -- worried that you won't get grandkids?

and render them sterile and unable to have sexual function

Almost all of the trans people I know have much better and more interesting sex lives than you probably have. I don't think that's a realistic concern.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

This is just two glaring fallacies. Do you have an actual retort?

[-]

drhead@reddit

Both of my points are incredibly snarky (and I know you're engaging in bad faith so I feel no obligation to put any more effort than that in when I know it won't be reciprocated), but both I think are valid. The first one is absolutely a set of valid questions (why you are prioritizing fertility when a main point of contention is suicidality, and also what your personal stake is in dictating the medical procedures available to a group which you yourself are not a part of), and the second one is a completely valid argument against your point of trans people being "unable to have sexual function".

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

and I know you're engaging in bad faith

Not sure you know what that means.

but both I think are valid.

They're not. One is an accusation that I'm "obsessed" with fertility, as if making kids sterile is a completely ridiculous thing to worry about. It's not like we vaccinate the entire western population against mumps for only that reason or anything.

why you are prioritizing fertility when a main point of contention is suicidality

Suicidality isn't the only concern that exists. It's not even clear that kids with GD are at higher risk of suicide. We also have like 25 years of data on former treatments for GD that mostly involved talk therapy, and didn't result in rampant suicide. This is mostly fear mongering based on very bad studies with small sample groups or just self reported survey data.

Other risks matter. Fertility is one of them. Whether puberty blockers work or not, the risk of the treatment should be well understood and patients and parents should be informed.

nd also what your personal stake is in dictating the medical procedures available to a group which you yourself are not a part of

I'm not dictating anything so it's irrelevant really. But since when has anyone had to have a personal stake in something to want to see it handled ethically and carefully and be evidence based?

and the second one is a completely valid argument against your point of trans people being "unable to have sexual function".

Making a totally baseless claim that trans people all have amazing sex lives isn't a valid argument. If you go on puberty blockers and then cross sex hormones, you're unlikely to have proper sexual function. Your desire to have a sex life let alone an actual sex life will be next to zero. This is something that you can't really expect young kids to understand and be able to consent to when they go on puberty blockers. Do you like having functioning genitals and a libido? Presumably yes. I don't think we should be denying that to anyone or asking them before they've got any point of reference whether they'd be willing to forgo it.

[-]

drhead@reddit

It’s not like we vaccinate the entire western population against mumps for only that reason or anything.

I would think that the viral meningitis is one of the bigger reasons for that, sterility is a fairly rare effect of mumps. We vaccinate against it because we have an effective vaccine for it and not doing so would be allowing pointless suffering and doing so helps prevent the disease from circulating to even people who can't get the vaccine.

Making a totally baseless claim that trans people all have amazing sex lives isn’t a valid argument.

When your claim is as strong as "unable to have sexual function", noting that I know shitloads of trans people and that I don't even know a single one who reports that they are having broad issues with their sexual function is in fact a valid refutation. From trying to search for where this actually does happen, I hear that a lot of people who had some issues had them mostly resolved when they went on progesterone. I also don't see any reason to look for any more specific info on prevalence until you present whatever the fuck it is that has you convinced that HRT will destroy your libido.

I’m not dictating anything so it’s irrelevant really.

If you support this ban, then yes, you are.

If you go on puberty blockers and then cross sex hormones, you’re unlikely to have proper sexual function. Your desire to have a sex life let alone an actual sex life will be next to zero. This is something that you can’t really expect young kids to understand and be able to consent to when they go on puberty blockers.

Since when are young kids signing a contract committing themselves to following through with HRT when they turn 18? If you're including HRT, then this is no longer looking at the risks of puberty blockers on their own, and it's leaving the domain of pediatric medicine. You're able to give informed consent for HRT by the time it is available to you as an option. They are not making the decision to go on HRT as a child, they are making it as an adult. I am really struggling to wrap my head around how this point actually ever made sense in your head, or if you actually just think people reading this thread are stupid enough to not notice you lumping in HRT that you only decide to go on as an adult into your evaluation of the risks of puberty blockers.

You're also forgetting an important rule for medical ethics here -- especially for things like libido, a mental health condition actually has to cause the patient distress or prevent them from doing something they want to do in order to be considered clinically significant. Lower than average libido, or even no libido, is something that tons of people live with and are perfectly fine with.

[-]

Aryore@reddit

HRT does not cause irrecoverable infertility. Recent studies have found that trans men on testosterone can go off it for a while and their fertility recovers to the point it was before. The evidence is less clear for trans women on oestrogen but the effect on fertility appears to be at least less than what was previously thought. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11930-023-00355-0

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

There's not strong evidence that puberty blockers or HRT reduces suicide rates or suicidal ideation.

There literally is.

Also, sterilizing children based on the false belief they will kill themselves if you don't is fucked up.

Puberty blockers don't sterilise you, anti trans wackjobs like you demand trans people be sterilised.

[-]

heyitjoshua@reddit

Affirming the serious delusions of a child is not health care. There is no evidence that transitioning reduces suicide rates.

If someone believes they have a glass piano in their belly, and that any sudden movement would shatter the piano and kill them, is wrapping them in bubble wrap and prescribing that they don’t move too quickly considered health care? Continuing to feed and support the delusion in order to “reduce suicide risk”, is that good health care? No. It is not.

Anyone who affirms a serious delusion and helps transform that person INTO their delusions, as opposed to helping them actualise their self, is an abuser.

Anyone who gives children hormonal therapy to treat gender dysphoria, or any kind of delusion affirming therapy, is a child abuser.

[-]

WinteryBudz@reddit

Affirmative healthcare saves lives. Trans healthcare is healthcare and it greatly reduces depression and suicide rates and improves the quality of life for the vast majority of people who transition. There absolutely is a great deal of evidence that supports this and you're making ridiculous claims without evidence.

https://sph.washington.edu/news-events/sph-blog/benefits-gender-affirming-care

https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/gender-affirming-care-saves-lives

https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/doctors-agree-gender-affirming-care-is-life-saving-care

https://cps.ca/en/documents/position/an-affirming-approach-to-caring-for-transgender-and-gender-diverse-youth

[-]

Levitz@reddit

https://sph.washington.edu/news-events/sph-blog/benefits-gender-affirming-care

Suicidal thoughts, irrelevant.

https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/gender-affirming-care-saves-lives

Same shit.

https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/doctors-agree-gender-affirming-care-is-life-saving-care

More of the same and even their co-director couldn't point to suicide when explicitly asked about it. You are working against your case here.

https://cps.ca/en/documents/position/an-affirming-approach-to-caring-for-transgender-and-gender-diverse-youth

This one misquotes one study to be found here:

https://transpulseproject.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Impacts-of-Strong-Parental-Support-for-Trans-Youth-vFINAL.pdf

and also the other to be found here:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5976555/

Neither of them actually looking at any figure regarding suicide.

[-]

Ropetrick6@reddit

Considering your refusal to provide even a single shred of evidence, it would appear you can't.

Transsexual people who struggle with a strong sense of gender dysphoria struggle with feeling like they don't belong their body and leads to self harm and in worst case suicide.

But I don't believe in allowing a child to transition just like that. We're I live before you're allowed to do any permanent gender affirming medical care you receive a lot of therapy, consultation and information to make sure that an informed decision with no regret is made.

I think telling a child with gender dysphoria that they are delusional and there's nothing wrong with them and try to "fix" them is more abusive. As you're refusing to listen and understand the child, making sure they have no form of support and evenntually resorting to suicide to end the pain.

Children should be educated about transsexuality and gender dysphoria, what it entails and be given therapy, support and information so when they become and adult they can make an informed decision.

[-]

ej_21@reddit

puberty blockers are explicitly not for transitioning; they are for delaying the choice until the child is older

[-]

Ensoface@reddit

“Positive outcomes were decreased suicidality in adulthood, improved affect and psychological functioning, and improved social life.”

There seems to be a 2021 meta-analysis that disputes your claim. Which of the quoted studies do you consider invalid? Is it all of them?

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Suicide and suicidality are not the same thing.

[-]

Ensoface@reddit

One is the risk of the other. You have said nothing.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

No. Suicidality in this context is consistently ideation, wholly psychological stuff.

If we could look at actual figures by god they would be spread all over the place.

[-]

Ensoface@reddit

So despite suicidality being a measure that includes but is not limited to successful attempts, you’re questioning the data. Did you look at the dataset before dis missing it?

[-]

AmusingMusing7@reddit

There is no evidence that transitioning reduces suicide rates.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10027312/#:~:text=Prior%20to%20initiating%20unspecified%20gender,initiation%20of%20gender%2Daffirming%20treatment.

Prior to initiating unspecified gender-affirming treatment(s), 73.3% of the sample reported a history of suicidal ideation; this percentage dropped to 43.4% following the initiation of gender-affirming treatment. Prior to treatment initiation, 35.8% of the sample reported a history of suicide attempt(s), and 9.4% reported a history of suicide attempt(s) after initiation of gender-affirming treatment.

https://www.hcplive.com/view/suicide-risk-reduces-73-transgender-nonbinary-youths-gender-affirming-care

Puberty blockers administered during puberty can actually reduce suicide risk in this population. A decreased lifetime incidence of suicidal ideation was also found among adults who received access to puberty blockers during adolescence.

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/press/ga-trans-suicide-press-release/

Respondents to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey (USTS) who reported unequal treatment in services or public places due to anti-transgender bias had more than double the prevalence of past-year suicide attempts than those who had not experienced such treatment (13% compared to 6%).

USTS respondents who received the gender-affirming hormone therapy or surgical care they needed had lower prevalence of past-year suicide attempts than those who had not received the care they needed (5% vs. 9%).

Maybe do just five minutes of research before talking about important subjects.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

None of your links even support what you are saying. The first is about the general population and the latter two are random articles.

[-]

AmusingMusing7@reddit

Umm… try re-reading it? I can’t help you if you’re this clueless about what you just read.

[-]

Cu_Chulainn__@reddit

Affirming the serious delusions of a child is not health care.

It isnt delusions.

There is no evidence that transitioning reduces suicide rates

There is. Literally dozens of peer reviewed papers on this very thing

If someone believes they have a glass piano in their belly, and that any sudden movement would shatter the piano and kill them, is wrapping them in bubble wrap and prescribing that they don’t move too quickly considered health care?

What a weird analogy that in no way is related.

Continuing to feed and support the delusion in order to “reduce suicide risk”, is that good health care?

Yes. It isnt delusion and it literally is good healthcare to prevent suicide.

Anyone who affirms a serious delusion and helps transform that person INTO their delusions, as opposed to helping them actualise their self, is an abuser.

It isnt delusions. You are arguing against the vast wealth of scientific and medical evidence of the existence of transgender people. Your delusions do not mean they are.

Anyone who gives children hormonal therapy to treat gender dysphoria, or any kind of delusion affirming therapy, is a child abuser.

Utter nonsense.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

There is. Literally dozens of peer reviewed papers on this very thing

And then you link something that doesn't point to it. Amazing.

[-]

gnolex@reddit

Do you know what's the difference between puberty blockers and HRT or do you think they're the same thing?

The whole point of puberty blockers is to halt natural puberty until a child grows into an adult, then they can make an informed decision whether to continue transition or abort it. If they choose to abort transition, they simply stop taking puberty blockers and they go through puberty as they normally would.

There are minor side effects of puberty blockers but they are heavily outweighted by positives for those who need it and don't cause any major health problems for individuals who abort transition. So even if a child is actually delusional and is incorrectly prescribed puberty blockers by medical professionals, they're not going to be severely harmed by the mistake.

Compared with the alternative where a trans individual goes through wrong puberty (which is largely irreversible) and might as a result suffer from serious gender dysphoria, this is a morally acceptable option.

[-]

Elman89@reddit

Puberty blockers don't affirm anything, the whole point of them is to delay the choice until the kid is capable of making it.

As with most medical or sports related trans issues is, my opinion is do the studies and make decisions based on the actual outcomes. And I am not clued in to what results exist, at this point, on this topic.

On the other hand, we're not Gilead either, and I don't think puberty blockers were the intended antagonist of that story

[-]

Content-Ad3780@reddit

Seems like you’re trying to change “their skin” then teaching them to accept themselves.

[-]

Content-Ad3780@reddit

I’m not against parents making the decision to do that but then you would have to allow parents the decision to circumcise their kid and not be against. Doesn’t make sense to be okay with one and not the other.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

Your body does not mutilate itself. It grows in what it was biologically designed to grow. Your body is not an antagonist.

[-]

me pointing out the inconsistencies in your argument doesn't make me the hypocrit. I am in favor of allowing medical interventions for children when the medical community has deemed intervention safer than doing nothing.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

Please stop spreading disinformation. Puberty blockers are widely known to have reversible side effects (check out the research papers linked in the article; also BMD).

[-]

mixalotl@reddit

In what ways do treatment with puberty blockers cause irreparable changes? I'm mostly familiar with treatment for kids with early puberty (tho I'm no medical expert so I have no idea how it actually works), and in those cases when they go off the puberty blockers, they have a normal puberty as far as I know

[-]

dakta@reddit

Because that treatment is for precocious puberty, which is caused by the early onset of puberty-inducing hormone production. It works by suppressing the effects of puberty hormones directly, not by somehow magically pausing the production of those hormones. Patients suffering from precocious puberty are generally still producing puberty hormones at the time they would normally start puberty, so the blockers can be stopped and the process can continue unimpeded.

Because of how precocious puberty works, biologically, the premature and excess production of puberty hormones means that there is still a typical full course of hormones available. There's just also more and too early. So temporarily suppressing the effects doesn't have as much risk or any real negative impact. It's also suppressing the puberty only during a period when puberty isn't developmentally and physiologically appropriate and would actually be physiologically damaging.

Suppressing a portion of puberty for an otherwise-healthy patient is not the same. It affects a physiologically important part of the process, and reduces the total duration and hormone uptake. It's not at all clear whether this can be effectively supplemented with additional hormones, since the delayed onset affects essential processes during the early developmental stage. There's no "extra puberty" to reuse later, since it's not being "blocked" but simply suppressed.

[-]

mixalotl@reddit

Thank you for explaining! What does that mean in terms of actual effects on the person who takes the puberty blockers?

[-]

David French was one of the few conservatives who lost their entire clout for opposing Trump.

When First Things Published a defense of the forced conversion and kidnapping of a Jewish child by the Vatican (1), French was among the voices that stood quietly. Sadly, First Things went after him a year later (2).

He has as of 2022 come around to accept gay marriage, but only because he feels the damage is greater now if it was removed (3).

What endears people to him, is that he is able to explain why he changes his mind. Sadly he too can’t bring himself to use the words “I was wrong”.

https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/02/non-possumus
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/05/against-david-french-ism
https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/frenchpress/why-i-changed-my-mind-about-law-and-marriage-again/

[-]

Light_Error@reddit

The thing I have never been able to quite understand is why these puberty blockers are used at all if these are supposed to be so dangerous? Why is the carve out always for trans children and no one else? A drug can’t be so dangerous that you need to ban it for one group while simultaneously having no restrictions on all other groups.

[-]

AniTaneen@reddit

Oh it’s not hard to understand.

They aren’t that dangerous. And we use them for a plethora of other issues.

Precocious puberty - Early onset puberty, the main goal of treatment is to preserve children's adult height potential. Puberty blockers work by stabilizing puberty symptoms, decreasing growth velocity, and slowing skeletal maturation. The most pronounced effects on height have been seen in children experiencing the onset of puberty before 6 years of age; often reaching an average or slightly below average height by the end of puberty.
Progestogens can be used as puberty blockers, but are mainly used in a variety of different forms of hormonal birth control for females. They are also used to used to treat menstrual disorders such as secondary amenorrhea and dysfunctional uterine bleeding.
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists (GnRH antagonists) are used to provide fast suppression of testosterone. They are also used to stop the growth of many prostate tumors. Their use includes in fertility treatments and in severe endometriosis pain and for the treatment of uterine fibroids.
Antiandrogens are provided for men in the treatment of prostate cancer, enlarged prostate, scalp hair loss, overly high sex drive, unusual and problematic sexual urges, and early puberty. In women, antiandrogens are used to treat acne, seborrhea, excessive hair growth, scalp hair loss, and high androgen levels, such as those that occur in polycystic ovary syndrome
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH agonist) is used to stop ovulation. From cancer, fertility treatments, early onset puberty, to hormone deceases.

If you are a 14 year old boy, you can get puberty blockers to help with early onset hair loss, or Gynecomastia (male breast growth), or hypersexuality, maybe a tumor or accident left you with Klüver–Bucy syndrome, l maybe you have Obsessive–compulsive disorder with intrusive pedophilia, or you truly lost the genetic lottery and are one of the handful of pediatric cases to have carcinoma of the prostate (congratulations to your oncologist, cause they are publishing your story in medical journals).

Maybe you started puberty at age 4 and are now being weaned off the puberty blockers.

But if you are a 14 year old boy who wants to be a girl… now we think that’s dangerous.

It’s not the medicine that is dangerous. It’s the idea that you can change your body. Maybe it’s the idea that you want to change your body that is most dangerous

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

This has always been a very divisive issue. There was not some secret trans golden age 20 years ago that we are just not talking about. No it's not TikToc and Facebooks fault. Nor is the majority of the people on earth secretly super pro-trans. That is just coping with reality.

[-]

Light_Error@reddit

Who ever said it was a trams golden age 20 years ago, and I think most people have no opinion on the issue. I said the guidelines built up over time were now considered not good enough due to pressure. These guidelines were not plucked from the ether.

[-]

Appropriate-Dream388@reddit

Indulging in the delusions of the underdeveloped.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

At least you went mask off in admitting that puberty blockers can cause sterility. Appreciate the honesty. To answer your question, yes preventing that is much more important than feel good nonsense. Good that you also admit that this condition is a mental illness that you need to treat to prevent self harm and not a 'normal' healthy state of being. You and your ilk used to lie about that all the time just a mere 2-3 years ago. Can't insult the people into silence forever. Had you been honest from the getgo things would have probably been much more in your favor. Take this as a lesson about arrogance.

[-]

snuggiemclovin@reddit

Had you been honest from the getgo things would probably have been much more in your favor

“‘this isn’t helping your cause’ - a guy who hates you and your cause”

[-]

You're right in that they need compassion and help.

Im not denying that the trans route may be better for certain individuals on the long term.

But shouldn't we first teach them how to love and accept their bodies how they are? To accept oneself?

And if in your opinion affirming how they feel is the way to go, should we affirm all instances of body dysmorphia?

Bulemics and anorexic kids. Or transabled folks (the people who firmly believe they need to be disabled, and actively try to amputate body parts).

At its core it's the same issue (I feel my body should not be like this).

How do you reconcile dealing with all of this? When is affirming ok, and when isn't it ok?

And again-- maybe modification will be the best way for certain individuals.

But for minors it's still our responsibility to protect them from actions that have lifelong effects. It's not an unreasonable or bigotted stance.

[-]

kronosdev@reddit

So you’re admittedly advocating to ban a treatment that, in your own words, “may be better for certain individuals on the long term”? That’s a good reason not to ban care.

It’s unfortunate. Most of these fantastical outcomes and sensationalist coverage of a rare few clinics come from the severe underfunding of GB’s NHS. By the time most patients work their way through the labyrinthine system and wait for month on months (sometimes years) the mental and emotional work has already been done and the only thing left to do is prescribe the pills. If the NHS had more competently trained doctors with fewer ideological hangups and you all had more mental health practitioners the conditions mentioned in those clinic hit pieces would have looked more tame and the backlash would be less severe.

If we can give bulemic and anorexic kids meds to help reduce their anxiety about food so they can transition to a healthy weight while working on their self image and relationship to food we do. Do you think we don’t do the same thing for these kids? Honestly, some of the side effects for mainline psych meds are worse than we currently know puberty blockers to be. People don’t know how barbaric elements of psychopharmacology are outside of the gender dysphoria issue. Seizures in children due to overprescription are not uncommon, and depending on when and how they happen it can easily lead to loss of life.

There’s no silver bullet for mental healthcare, but don’t take the few bullets we have away from us.

[-]

Fuzzy-Wrongdoer1356@reddit

Trans people is a very small percentage of the population but suddenly it spiked, you are ok apparently with leaving a greater number of kids sterile for these individuals. You don’t see that you can cause more harm than good? And that you can treat these people later in life, because a kid is a kid and can say all kind of things?

[-]

Ornery-Concern4104@reddit

I don't want to be calling you transphobic because it seems like you genuinely mean well, but the way you're framing this isn't the way it's understood by the people in question

While there is an argument to be made about being trans and just loving what you look like without anything (I for one, am transgender but seek nor want treatment), it's about managing someone's decision making agency with the right context

The core issue isn't that they feel like their body shouldn't not be like it currently is, but that their body doesn't reflect their understanding of their own identity. That is a small difference but a critical one, as gender is tied up with coding dramatically, it's not about thin or fat but it's about the interpersonal relationship between themselves and something nebulous and personal

The other important thing is that detransition isn't that bad, it's rather easy if you've had either hormone blockers or HRT, even stuff like Top surgery or boob jobs are somewhat reversal too

You can't reattach a fucking limb tho. Interestingly, someone can in the UK choose to get a limb removed for medical reasons. My favourite paralypian Alice Thai recently chose to have her leg amputated last year when she could've kept it if she wanted to because she had a medical reason to, same for Comedian Adam Hills when he was younger. There is precedent in the UK for PERMANENT (remember puberty blockers aren't permanent how medical science understands the concept) body modification that isn't necessary to someone's survival (even for children), meaning that by the UK's own admission, puberty blockers for kids should be allowed as they are reversible body modifications to treat acute mental episodes

And anorexia and Bulimia obviously can kill you, as can people who want to cleave off their limbs for no medical reasons. Puberty blockers won't kill you, not treating people with them can tho

As the current state of the UK medical ethics is concerned, there is no reason why Puberty blockers should be banned considering the other kinds of body modification they allow for within the current situation which is far far far more dire and permanent consequences

As your argument is around permanence, I imagine that you'd be against kids deciding to have limbs removed if it decreased their overall quality of life

I personally in terms of trans affirming care, as a trans person disagree with Gender Reassignment Surgery below the age of 18 as THAT is permanent as either way, so much material is lost in either way the first go around, but the UK doesn't offer that for minors and not many trans people are fighting to change that either. You mainly just don't understand the effects of Puberty blockers because education surrounding detransition isnt very good for the average reader. Which of course, isn't your fault and I'm not begrudging you for it either

[-]

WeerDeWegKwijt@reddit

Such a close-minded and one dimensional take, makes me wonder if you truly know what it's like to work as a youth healthcare worker.

[-]

ThePortalsOfFrenzy@reddit

with ~~literal~~ children who have [literally] scratched themselves down to the tendons

FTGFY*

*Fixed the grammar for you. You presumably wanted to emphasize that they are really scratching themselves that severely, as opposed to highlighting that they are actually children.

[-]

kronosdev@reddit

Not really. People scratching themselves down to the tendons is unusual, but not completely rare among the severely mentally ill, drug addicted, homeless, etc. when you get that kind of health outcome from a child in a seemingly normal home you perk up rather quickly.

Just like cigarette's you wouldn't give cold medicine to a child. Parents who give cold medicine to their child need to be put in a mental asylum and the child into protective services, and the doctors put into jail.

[-]

hotsinglewaifu@reddit

Interesting.

It’s a law passed in UK but has Americans and other nationals getting angry over it acting like they live in UK and bring their own countries conspiracies into it.

[-]

karatekid430@reddit

Gender dysphoria results in deaths of those suffering the condition by suicide and homicide. If you want to pretend this is not the case then you are ignorant, and if you don't care then you're a fucking fascist.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Honestly? Good. I'm a detrasitioner. The regret rate is only climbing, and a decision that's this permanent shouldn't be allowed for children. They can't drink, vote, or get tattoos because consent is a tricky thing as a minor. There's a lot of reports of kids growing out of dysphoria/what is perceived to be dysphoria. I know I'm going to get downvoted, but kids shouldn't have any medical intervention for dysphoria until they are of legal age.

[-]

Wischiwaschbaer@reddit

The regret rate is tiny. Basically no other medical intervention has a regret rate that small. Where is your evidence that it is climbing significantly?

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Well again, I'm a detransitioner. I worked with a man who began transitioning middle age, and regretted it after getting surgery, he now has to live life with breasts. The detrans subreddit has over 50k members. Any person who medically transitions as a child is one person too many when there are other ways of managing gender dysphoria. it's extremely easy to confused other mental disorders and illnesses with gender dysphoria, it happened to me specifically.

[-]

Wischiwaschbaer@reddit

Well again, I'm a detransitioner.

Well again, there is no way to verify that, so do you have a source that this is a widespread and/or rising thing or not?

[-]

qutronix@reddit

Harmful treatments like puberty blockers should be banned when it comes to treating mental disorders.

[-]

DogeGroomer@reddit

where is the evidence it’s harmful, there’s plenty of evidence that going through normal puberty is harmful for trans teens

[-]

Special-Remove-3294@reddit

Cass review. That is what this whole thing is based on and why the UK is doing it.

Also physical issues of wrecking your puberty are more important then mental issues.

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

Honestly? Good. I'm a detrasitioner.

If you say so, 2 year old account with no activity before 6 days ago

Literally can't see any, but maybe reddit is bugging out.

Just saying, can't help but be skeptical of the "trans rights are wrong, as a former trans person..." claim.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

You're more than welcome to be skeptical, you shouldn't believe everything you see online. All I can do is talk about my past in the hopes that it gives some different perspectives. I started identifying as bi when I was 14, then went to lesbian, then asexual, then just the blanket term queer, until I discovered transgenderism. I played around with the concept of non-binary, then full trans, back to non-binary... before I realized I was constantly just trying to find a place I fit in. I've always struggled feeling different, and had a hard time understanding my emotions. I was a very vulnerable and lost kid and young adult, and extremely easily influenced. I eventually learned that all these labels and ideas of how and what to be were harming me even more, and I went through (still am going through) the painstaking process of just being myself, and forming a spot of my own in the world instead of trying to force myself into one. Honestly these conversations are much easier in person, as I can better explain and deep dive into it all, but I don't want to write. Novel. All I'm glad for is being born in the 90s, because I so badly hated being a girl growing up due to unfortunate circumstances with men in my life and again always feeling different, especially from other girls. A lot of young kids feel this way and access to transition before they are given the chance to mature and grow is a very dangerous thing, not to mention that medically transitioning (yes even blockers) does have permanent effects and essentially medicalizes people for the rest of their lives. To be clear, I'm not anti trans rights in the slightest. I just think that physical and medical transition should wait until a person is old enough, at very minimum 18. There should be therapy available to talk about every different possibility and thought without pressure towards one outcome or another. And I didn't didn't adults should have freedom and rights over themselves and their bodies, but that there should be some safeguarding in place. I worked with a man who went through transition mid-life, and figured out it wasn't actually right, and now he is stuck being a man with large breasts due to hormones and surgery. There should have been more therapy involved for him before any sort of medicalization. In an ideal world, not a single person should regret transitioning. One detransitioner is too many.

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

So you think your experience should dictate other people's lives? Is that what you're saying?

A lot of young kids feel this way and access to transition before they are given the chance to mature and grow is a very dangerous thing

You know what's also dangerous? Withholding critical medical support for trans people. Do you have any idea how many people could die because of this?

You want there to be additional restrictions on puberty blockers? Fine. It is a major decision and should be heavily regulated.

But banning them entirely for trans people? That is disgusting. That is literally, objectively opposing trans rights.

You do not get to decide how other people live their lives, or what they do with their bodies, because of your own experiences.

End of fucking story.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Banning for MINORS. The human brain doesn't fully develop until your early 20s. Stop pushing the narrative that people have to commit suicide if they don't immediately get to use hormones or have surgery. This is akin to manipulation tactics saying "if you don't do this I'm going to off myself!" Proper support from family, friends, and therapists should provide enough for a child to navigate their feelings and live happily, even with gender dysphoria. I'm all for letting kids dress and act however they wish. But children are not able to comprehend the full lifetime effects of medical transition. Just like they are not able to comprehend the lifetime effects of heavy drinking, smoking, getting tattoos, or voting. That's why you have to be of legal age for such things, when you have more experience and maturity under your belt. I've spoken to several women who, like me, grew up as tomboys and HATED being female. If they had the opportunity to take hormones and be male, they absolutely would've taken it. But after growing up and maturing, they no longer feel this way. I'll state again, gender dysphoria is complex and wildly understudied, and I don't believe it's being approached safely for the benefit of ANYONE. Minors transitioning medically almost guarantees a pharmaceutical patient for LIFE. Children. Can. Not. Consent.

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

No offence buddy, but I think I'll let the doctors decide that. Not transphobic politicians or random redditors trying to enforce their opinions on how other people live their lives.

I'll state again, gender dysphoria is complex and wildly understudied, and I don't believe it's being approached safely for the benefit of ANYONE.

Well, good thing it doesn't matter what you believe.

You do not get to control what trans people do with their lives. Understood? Good.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

So what about if doctors world wide start agreeing that HRT for kids is unhealthy and bad, would you trust the doctors then, or only when they fit the narrative you agree with? Because there are doctors with conflicting opinions and beliefs about this. Anyway, I don't want to waste any more energy on conversing with someone that just throws insults as soon as someone disagrees, I'm sick of being called a bigot or transphobe by someone who doesn't understand my heart, mind, and motivations.

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

So what about if doctors world wide start agreeing that HRT for kids is unhealthy and bad, would you trust the doctors then

Has this happened?

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

https://acpeds.org/transgender-interventions-harm-children

"Puberty blockers may actually cause depression and other emotional disturbances related to suicide. In fact, the package insert for Lupron, the number one prescribed puberty blocker in America, lists “emotional instability” as a side effect and warns prescribers to “Monitor for development or worsening of psychiatric symptoms during treatment.” "

"Temporary use of Lupron has also been associated with and may be the cause of many serious permanent side effects including osteoporosis, mood disorders, seizures, cognitive impairment and, when combined with cross-sex hormones, sterility."

"Many medical organizations around the world, including the Australian College of Physicians, the Royal College of General Practitioners in the United Kingdom, and the Swedish National Council for Medical Ethics have characterized these interventions in children as experimental and dangerous. World renowned Swedish psychiatrist Dr. Christopher Gillberg has said that pediatric transition is “possibly one of the greatest scandals in medical history” and called for “an immediate moratorium on the use of puberty blocker drugs because of their unknown long-term effects.” "

https://torontosun.com/news/world/pediatrician-group-condemns-medical-associations-for-pushing-child-gender-transition

“We have serious concerns about the physical and mental-health effects of the current protocols promoted for the care of children and adolescents in the United States who express discomfort with their biological sex,” Dr. Jill Simons, pediatrician and executive director of the ACP, said in one of many statements given by members of the group.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11930-023-00358-x

"There has never been a dispute about whether medical and surgical interventions can feminize or masculinize secondary and some primary sex characteristics. For children and adolescents, the debate is not whether such transformations are possible, but “at what age can youth meaningfully consent,” “upon fulfilling which criteria,” and perhaps most importantly, “just because we can – should we?”

Disagreement About the Scientific Evidence While several European countries recognized deficiencies in the evidence supporting the highly medicalized “gender-affirming” approach to treating gender-dysphoric youth [1•, 33••, 34••, 35, 36], in North America, the narrative that “gender-affirmative care has been scientifically proven” has been remarkably resilient [23••]. Its justification rests on several key assumptions misrepresented as proven facts [15, 24]: • 1. The emergence of a trans identity is the result of reaching a higher level of self-awareness. • 2. Whether the trans-identity emerges in very young children, older children, teens, or mature adults, it is authentic and will be lifelong. • 3. All gender identity variations are biologically determined and inherently healthy. • 4. The frequently co-occurring psychiatric symptoms are a direct result of gender incongruence (the so-called “minority distress” model). • 5. The only way to relieve, or prevent, psychiatric problems is to alter the body at the earliest signs of puberty. • 6. Psychological evaluations and attempts to address psychiatric comorbidities should only be used to support transition. • 7. Attempts to resolve gender dysphoria with psychotherapy range from ineffective to harmful. • 8. Gender-dysphoric youth must have unquestioning social, hormonal, and surgical support for their current gender identities and desired physical appearance. • 9. All individual embodiment goals, even those that do not occur in nature, must be fulfilled to the full extent technically possible. • 10. Science has proven the benefits of early gender transition, and low rates of regret and detransition further validate the practice. These unproven or disproven assumptions [24] have created a narrative that has misled physicians, parents, and patients to conclude that meeting a young gender dysphoric individual’s desired body modification goals provides the only chance for a full, successful, happy life. It has positioned invasive medical interventions for children and adolescents as a civil right, rather than as medical interventions. The most fundamental of these assumptions are that a teenager’s transgender identity, once expressed, is permanent; that it will cause lifelong suffering if no medical interventions are offered; and that “gender-affirming” interventions are safe and effective at improving short-term and long-term psychological outcomes. All three premises are deeply flawed

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

ACPeds? Interesting source you have there!

Hold on, let's check their background a bit:

ACPeds has been listed as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center for pushing "anti-LGBTQ junk science".[3] A number of mainstream researchers, including the director of the US National Institutes of Health, have accused ACPeds of misusing or mischaracterizing their work to advance their own political agenda.[7][8]

ACPeds has also been criticized for their professional sounding name which some have said is intended to mislead people into thinking they are a professional medical organization or mistake them for the similar sounding American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).[9]

ACPeds strongly opposes gay marriage, gay adoption and gay parenting and has submitted several Amicus Briefs opposing them.[15][16][17] They also support conversion therapy for gay youth and have linked homosexuality to pedophilia.[18][9][7][5][4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_College_of_Pediatricians

Whoops.

You just outed yourself, little alt-righter. Looks like I was right about you hahahahaha

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

I will own up to that, I was not familiar with this group and I did in fact fall for the professional sounding name. I'm not in fact in favour of conversion therapy or abstinence only sexual education, or banning gay marriage, any of that garbage. Regardless, they are still in fact doctors that do oppose child transition, so they do exist? Not the best source, I'll admit.

Still, there are doctors and professionals out there who question, but it's a dangerous game because there is a narrative that if you don't follow it, could lose your job. We'll see in the years to come with new research what will happen, maybe I'll be wrong, maybe you'll be wrong.

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

I don't care.

You just promoted a literal hate group. You have proven your stance on this matter.

I don't waste time on bigots and transphobes.

Go back to your Trump rally, kid.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Because I mistakenly quoted a group which sounds like an American medical group? I'm Canadian first of all and I honestly didn't think to fact check a site called "American association of pediatricians". It doesn't exactly sound like a hate group up front. Now I know. You really are completely incapable of having an adult discussion or have any grace for someone who makes a very easy mistake, I'm sorry to see that, and again, conversations like this are why people are pushing back against a lot of LGBT narratives right now.

[-]

thegreatvortigaunt@reddit

Because I mistakenly quoted a group which sounds like an American medical group?

But that just proves that you have no point.

You ended up using a literal hate group because you had no argument of your own, and it just proves how bigoted your stance is.

It doesn't exactly sound like a hate group up front.

When you read the transphobic garbage they promote, it absolutely does. You agreed with and posted that garbage.

conversations like this are why people are pushing back against a lot of LGBT narratives right now.

"How dare you criticise me for promoting a literal hate group! LGBTQ+ people are oppressing me!!!!"

Get bent, Nazi. Blocked.

[-]

JC090@reddit

Like this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/yoga/comments/1guugh4/dissecting_diluting_and_secularisation_of_yoga/lxx1661/

or this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/mapporncirclejerk/comments/1gnzny0/babe_wake_up_new_canadian_border_just_dropped/lwhpgkk/

HerbalSpirals@reddit

I appreciate that, thank you!

[-]

Doesnt_Trust_You@reddit

No worries, the orange cat in your photo looks so cute and lovely.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

He's my baby <3 thank you :)

[-]

PerunVult@reddit

If you don't see "next" at the bottom of profile comment list, try opening that person's profile in incognito mode.

It's some kind of very rare and "esoteric" bug. I have no idea what could possibly cause it, and it only seems to affect you and only while viewing some specific account(s?) while logged in (I didn't check if it's device specific, as in, if it's related just to account you are logged in, or requires both being logged in and something in your browser setting/history/cookies/whateverelsecoulditbe). I encountered it only once previously. It's really, really strange.

That aside, I do agree with your general sentiment.

[-]

nick_mullah@reddit

Not surprised you played the Reddit hall monitor card

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Huh? That's actually really weird my account comes up like that, it's 2 years old yes, and I've been using it sporadically since I started it.

I'm sorry but how is "cishetero norms" unnatural? 99% of all humans came from a man and a woman having sex. Without "cishetero" people we all cease to exist.

[-]

LawfulLeah@reddit

there it is! the mask comes off

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

he is completely right, normal heterosexual people are the norm, the 99%, and those that get to define the rules.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

???What are you talking about? I technically don't even live a ""cisheteronorm""" life, but I can recognize that if the majority of people on the planet made my choices, human beings would slowly cease to exist because hey, I'm not procreating. If 99% of people stopped being in heterosexual relationships/stopped having kids, the human race would die off.

[-]

drhead@reddit

cishetero norms as the only valid way of life

It sure helps to be able to read, doesn't it?

Forcing people to live only one way is unnatural. It is natural for some people to be homosexual or gender non-conforming.

[-]

Levitx@reddit

Ah, the mask off advocate who actually despises the inconvent existence of some people.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Ah, the classic liberal move of insult and degrade someone the second they disagree/don't fit the right narrative.

[-]

Smorgsborg@reddit

The regret rate is lower than just about any medical procedure.

[-]

k0rm@reddit

This is an insane statement. Just about any medical procedure??

There's more people regretting getting their wisdom teeth pulled or doing a routine blood test? I'm gonna need a source.

[-]

Archangel004@reddit

I couldn’t find anything about regret rate involving wisdom teeth removal but I did find an article on how there is no high quality evidence which says that people should get their wisdom teeth removed:

https://www.sciencealert.com/no-you-probably-don-t-need-to-get-your-wisdom-teeth-removed-ever

@UKGov when are you banning wisdom teeth removal for non emergency conditions?

As for routine blood tests, I don’t think this really falls under the “medical procedure” they were referring to, but how about

People scared of needles
People who got HIV/AIDS or other diseases as a result of contaminated needles
People who can’t afford those blood tests but were forced to get them for whatever reason (eg. Americans)

[-]

ShepardLuna@reddit

~1% regret for gender affirming surgery.

~15% regret for surgeries in people with cancer.

Potentially lifesaving cancer intervention surgeries have a 15x higher regret rate than gender affirming care.

[-]

lol_noob@reddit

Keep lying until no one takes any of you idiots seriously anymore, please.

[-]

Anura83@reddit

It's not only questional to get consent, it doesn't even work. Mental health doesn't went up and there are serious side effects.

[-]

fatbob42@reddit

Going through your natural puberty is also a decision and also has permanent effects.

[-]

Murica_Chan@reddit

Any experts here in psychology ( psychiatrist and psychologist) could clear this to me

So as a professional in the same line (license psychometrician), is the diagnosis for gender dysphoria at that age (like 10 - 15) is kinda a but young?

Cause these kids is still developing sexually at this age and hasnt reach a sexual maturity

[-]

marshu7@reddit

When it comes down to it, no amount of lengthy arguments about vague and rare devlopmental issues that 'might' occur can disguise that the UK government is enforcing this on some of the most vulnerable members of their society, causing them harm that will disadvantage them for years down the line. For many of them the end result will be growing up experiencing a puberty that deforms them in ways that cause them severe emotional distress and increases their chances of discrimination and endangerment later in life. All at the cost of British tax dollars.

For the people defending this, I hope for the sake of your children that they never have to grow up experiencing the pain you have forced upon thousands of kids, all for the sake of some hysterical hate campaign.

[-]

textandstage@reddit

This is horrendous.

Countless trans kids will die because of this insanely backward legislation, and their blood will be on the hands of every single parliamentarian who voted for it.

[-]

Roosterdude23@reddit

I can't wait until this trend is over.

What happened to just wearing all black

[-]

textandstage@reddit

What trend are you referring to?

[-]

Roosterdude23@reddit

Trans

[-]

https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2024/09/25/nx-s1-5127347/more-trans-teens-attempted-suicide-after-states-passed-anti-trans-laws-a-study-shows

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna172906

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32345113/

[-]

Levitx@reddit

Why would you post links that don't address the question

I must have opened like 40 links in the last week from advocates and not a single one time it has been worth it. I don't know at which point I'm supposed to dismiss them altogether but it can't be much more than this

[-]

textandstage@reddit

Willful ignorance is ignorance nonetheless

[-]

For God's sake man you are so close...I am begging you to just listen to the established science on climate change, our future as a species will not allow us to keep this infighting up for any longer.

[-]

harpnyarp@reddit

It seems Europe will be leading the charge on rolling back this regrettable social experiment. Enthusiasm does seem to be waning here in the US, but time will tell.

[-]

Special-Remove-3294@reddit

Yeah the cultural trends have swung back in favour of conservatism, after decades of very progressive times, starting with the 1990's.

Your tight, far more children die every year from circumcision every year, where as others end up completely maimed in botch circumcisions, I was being unfair to puberty blockers.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

Your tight

His tight what?

[-]

omegaphallic@reddit

Fucking spell check, it was supposed to he right not tight

[-]

Meiie@reddit

You’re sick.

[-]

Levitz@reddit

If every major psychological and medical organization in the world says gender affirming care is good for a child. Then we should do it for those childern who need it.

lady_ninane@reddit

None is actually pretty accurate given the length blockers are typically prescribed for, not to mention the level of risk to a patient's well-being that denying treatment poses to youth when they're forced to go through a puberty that does not align with their gender identity.

[-]

babylonsisters@reddit

None means zero percent, which is crazy. You could do some internet searches if you want, cause its not “none”. I know at least one point of data, but there are papers on this. Do you want links or do you not want to look at it/acknowledge it?

[-]

LPolder@reddit

Wow I didn't know.

Is there no negative consequence to a delayed puberty?

You can't delay it forever, right?

[-]

MostCat2899@reddit

There is no consequence to a delayed puberty. A lot of children experience it naturally (source: I was one). There is however a consequence of having no primary sex hormone for too long (causes bone density issues), but that is generally not a consideration because trans children only need to be on puberty blockers for a few years max.

[-]

DrButeo@reddit

You can't delay it forever, no. Many kids start puberty at 10-12, with some as young as 7-8, but a normal puberty can start as late as 14 and delayed puberty as late as 15-16 (failure to start puberty by 17 can be a sign of various issues). So using blockers to delay a child from starting puberty at a young age can give them years to mature mentally and emotionally. But once off blockers, if a child decides they're cisgender they should develop just like any of their peers that don't start puberty until they were on the older side of normal.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

On top of this, puberty used to start way later in the past than it does now. Nowadays puberty hits around 10,5 years old for girls and 11,5 years old for boys (first period, voice breaks, first ejaculation, that kind of stuff), in the late 19th century those numbers used to be 15 and 16 respectively. It's only getting earlier and earlier too. We now consider a puberty delayed if it hits by age 15 when that used to be the norm.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/oct/21/puberty-adolescence-childhood-onset

[-]

Rus_Shackleford_@reddit

Sterilization and loss of bone density.

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

that sounds like bullshit, have you got a source for that?

[-]

Rus_Shackleford_@reddit

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/14/health/puberty-blockers-transgender.html#:~:text=Infertility%20is%20among%20other%20lasting,proceed%20to%20hormones%20and%20surgery.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9578106/#:~:text=Results%20consistently%20indicate%20a%20negative,boys%20for%20compromised%20bone%20health.

Do you guys not know how to use google?

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

paywalled but it's pretty hilarious you consider the NY times an actual source.

[-]

Rus_Shackleford_@reddit

It was the first thing I found.

I can say whatever you need

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

If "playing with hormones" was a genuine concern then why're we still using them on cis children? In fact, clearly if children can't be trusted to make any decisions, we should blanket ban all gender affirming treatment that children receive, cis or trans.

> Which guarantees they aren't making a mistake?

My sibling under Christ no medical procedure is without risk of a mistake. You're holding this specific branch of medicine and care to a standard of scrutiny that literally no other branch has to withstand.

[-]

Im_eating_that@reddit

Because the start of the process is based on the opinion of a child lol. It's really not that complicated.

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

All treatment ultimately has to start with someone’s opinion that they need help. If a child thinks they’ve got a cold, do we ignore that opinion too? What about if a child is depressed, or has anxiety?

[-]

Im_eating_that@reddit

You seem far to erudite to make such specious comparisons. Are you debating for the sake of debate, being disingenuous, or just another person with an opinion about something they have no experience with? Kids are not qualified to make a decision of this nature. Which you'd know if you had any.

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

Part debating for the sake of debate (it’s not like social media is good for much else to be honest) and part genuinely trying to get people to think about what they’re saying in more depth.

So once again: if a child isn’t qualified to be able to speak on if they’re trans or not, should we also dismiss a child that believes they’re depressed or clinically anxious? Should we deny cis children gender affirming treatments and hormones (like androgen blockers to young girls?)

snowlynx133@reddit

Yes, cancer and gender dysmorphia are both illnesses that can cause death...but if you're going to insist that mental illnesses have less of an impact, do you also argue against using antidepressants that can cause permanent side effects for a depressed child if that treatment is deemed necessary

[-]

Cu_Chulainn__@reddit

It doesn't mess with hormones. Hence why it's been used for precocious puberty for decades with no issues

[-]

CocoNefertitty@reddit

You seriously can’t be comparing giving puberty blockers to children to fix a hormonal issue which allows their bodies to return to a normal hormonal range appropriate for their age to prolonged pubertal suppression on otherwise healthy children?

Unbelievable.

[-]

Drab_Majesty@reddit

What are the negative consequences though we are worried about exactly? Did the Child's parents or Doctors not have a say?

[-]

Im_eating_that@reddit

The amount of kids that have been allowed to do so are miniscule, I don't think there's much data to determine that. If you look at the numbers virtually all the operations have been intersex. Considering how poorly we understand hormone interactions in general there's no way I'd risk it on a kids opinion.

[-]

ThePortalsOfFrenzy@reddit

there's no way I'd risk it on a kids opinion.

Greeley9000@reddit

98%

20-60% of participants in those studies never return or fail their follow-ups. That statistic is bullshit you know it, I know it, we can’t confidently say that since up to 60% of people don’t stick around to give us the truth.

I’m not sure what it is, but it’s way lower than 98%

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

I love how you're claiming random things that the link you give backs up in no way shape or form.

[-]

Michelangelor@reddit

Every single study ever done has found that post-transition regret is practically unheard of, so no, I do not “know” the nonsense you’re spewing lol and here’s the reason why: literally NO ONE without acute gender dysphoria has a deep, life long desire to surgically transition to the other gender. It’s wild to assume people are doing this on some kind of whim.

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

Puberty blockers have been used since at least the 90s, but sure, 'experimental treatment' it is, I guess.

[-]

Greeley9000@reddit

Length of time never equates to it being good. Thats a horrible fallacy. We also could buy porn at Walmart. Modifying food since the 90s (FlavrSavr Tomato anyone?)

When we tried to get rid of smoking in restaurants literally all the smokers said “but we’ve always been able to smoke in restaurants.”

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

That's not actually the point I'm making. Describing a form of treatment used since the 90s as 'experimental' is fucking laughable, and it's only ever pulled out by people who are unaware of the long, long use of hormone blockers in the medical field while also wanting to paint them as these new, poorly understood treatments.

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

It's not laughable when the outcomes of that treatment haven't been tracked. In fact, calling it "experimental" is way too generous. Experimental use would mean clinical trials and data collection. What's actually going on is just reckless, not experimental. This is a drug that's been used off label for quite some time, without keeping good records or doing rigorous patient follow up or doing so within the confines of trials. That's how you get to where we are where literature reviews from multiple countries conclude "we don't have enough evidence to be using this drug the way we are".

[-]

Greeley9000@reddit

And what would you call off-label prescriptions.

Currently no GnRHa has market authorization for puberty suppression in gender diverse children in the UK.

And instead they off label use GnRHas on the market in the UK with market authorisations for the treatment of prostate cancer, uterine fibroids, endometriosis, and as part of the ovulation induction regime used in the context of assisted reproduction.

[-]

TearOpenTheVault@reddit

You mean when you make it difficult or illegal for people to access drugs that they'll acquire them through sketchy or straight up illegal methods? And that legal and decriminalised substances can be better controlled, better prescribed and better understood?

[-]

Ensoface@reddit

How long before it’s no longer experimental? 20 years?

[-]

Juryofyourpeeps@reddit

Could be 100 years if nobody ever actually conducts the clinical trials. If you just prescribe things off label and then don't track patients and outcomes, no amount of time doing that would be sufficient to know whether a treatment was effective. This is why all the the literature reviews are urging that these drugs are only used inside of clinical trials. So that we have the evidence we need to decide whether they're safe and effective or not.

[-]

Cu_Chulainn__@reddit

No more experimental treatment for people that cannot understand the longterm consequences of said treatment.

You mean the same treatment that has been used for precocious puberty for literal decades?

Never understood the neverending push for this

Empathy. You should try it some time.

General labour W. May more W's be collected this and next year.

Labour L. Examinationprime L

[-]

Levitz@reddit

Don't you think it would have been better to actually follow through with what the Cass review said and keep their usage in a research setting?

The one thing nobody can really debate about this whole ordeal is that we need more information. Even the French, who decided to go the other way around, mention in their report that the research is lacking.

[-]

asingleshakerofsalt@reddit

Like what exactly? Could you elaborate as to why puberty blockers, which are medicine which have a temporary effect (as evidenced by their use for children with early onset puberty), are bad for potentially trans kids who want to delay the effects of puberty until an age where they can properly figure out their gender identity?

[-]

waynee1304@reddit

Perfect, lets not help trans kids and cause severe suffering because a very tiny percentage might regret that treatmrnt later, while the vast majority would benefit a lot. To me this is denying essential help to kids because we are irritated and feel uncomfortable about what they are.

[-]

loggy_sci@reddit

Transphobe Island, where the Labour government will throw marginalized people under the bus in order to avoid difficult political problems. Shame on them.

[-]

Keir Starmer, famous and recent loser of elections

[-]

Salted_cod@reddit

Labor only won because tons of Tories switched to Reform. 34% vote share, lowest of any majority in the history of Parliament. 500,000 fewer total votes than 2019 - an election they lost. Labor swung right and sold out trans people and lost voters.

Is that what a strong party with competent leadership looks like?

[-]

nick_mullah@reddit

loses anyway

[-]

Delicious_Door_3421@reddit

If even the British government is transphobe then what about literally every other government outside of north America and western Europe

[-]

bbb_net@reddit

If a right-wing government was ignoring the advice of a lengthy government requested scientific review into the effects of trans medicine would that be good or bad?

[-]

drhead@reddit

If major flaws in the review become known which call into question whether its conclusions are scientifically valid, and it also isn't even following the same standards that all other pediatric medicine follows, then yes, it should be ignored. That's how science works.

[-]

Paradoxjjw@reddit

A scientific review that wasn't peer reviewed and has been called into question by damn near every medical organisation that relates to the subject for being a sham? The one that was called out for intentionally leaving out damn near every study that didn't agree with the aim of the writer? The one that excluded a bunch of research for not being "high quality" enough and then had almost all the research it did take into account not live up to that "high quality" standard either?

[-]

Levitx@reddit

You do realize that all of that amounts to "Nuh-uh!" right?

If the review never happened and UK authorities simply dismissed, say, WPATH recommendations, would you care? My guess is no. That this is ideology and nothing else.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

It would be great. As long as NGO's and other parties with direct interests into trans medicine being marketable don't have any say or input in the research. As they'll try to pull the reaseach's conclusions in their favor.

[-]

esperind@reddit

most of Europe is going to follow suit. Norway, Finland, and Sweden have already limited it too before the UK.

[-]

PotsAndPandas@reddit

most of Europe is probably going to follow suit.

That's old news, France is confidently doing the opposite which will heavily influence the others.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929693X24001763#tbl0001

[-]

Levitx@reddit

France took decisions by consensus, agreeing with the UK on a whole lot of stuff, to note, the lack of evidence.

[-]

PotsAndPandas@reddit

the lack of evidence.

Regardless of if I agree or not, determining there is not enough high quality evidence is not a lack of evidence.

[-]

Content-Avocado2925@reddit

More of the worst continent doing worthless, waste of time legislation? What's next they hang on the coattails of NATO for 80 years!!

[-]

solnyshka@reddit

We're #1 😎

[-]

MrTopHatMan90@reddit

Kier will throw anyone under the bus to be popular. Kier doesn't stand for anything, sure he's better then the previous government bur that doesn't make him into a man with a spine

[-]

khazixian@reddit

Time flies, I remember reading "That isn't happening!"

Now all I see is "Don't worry about it!"

It's always the same shit. Deny it happens, then 4 years later when it becomes a problem, tell the other side to ignore it.

[-]

Consoftserveative@reddit

I agree with this law. Puberty blockers should only be used for medical reasons when children have disorders that mean puberty starts too early (eg under 10) for their body to cope.

I believe the extreme rise in trans cases shows it as much social as physiological, and the response should reflect that. Children should not be able to make life altering medical intervention decisions.

[-]

SomeDumRedditor@reddit

Puberty blocker effects are reversible unless you take them for decades and did you ever consider that the “extreme rise in trans cases” isn’t social contagion but the fact it’s been barely 10 years with a western society that doesn’t completely shun trans people?

Like no shit you’re seeing more trans people, hearing more trans stories. There’s been a social movement to let them join regular society as visible equals and not live as unemployable “dangerous” freaks.

There was the exact same panic in the 90s when gay men started becoming “out and proud” in “normal” society. “Whole nation is turning gay, they’re recruiting our young men and women!” Turns out, no, Kinsey stays winning. The rates of homosexuality etc in the general population are around the same as they were in the 50s. You just don’t have to hide it.

[-]

Super_Duper_Shy@reddit

Exactly.

It's like how there was an increase of people admitting that they were left-handed when schools stopped trying to force everyone to be right-handed.

[-]

Consoftserveative@reddit

Self-reported LGBT has been stable for decades, even going back to when the stigma was still significant. (I know it still is in many places).

Trans not so. It’s literally rising with the tide of wokeness of the last decade. It’s part of the whole DEI cluster—— package, affirmative action above equal opportunity, self-hating Westerners apologising for civilisation.

[-]

justdotice@reddit

You lost me at 'tide of wokeness'

[-]

fletch44@reddit

It's a term that means "being kind and considerate of others," so we can see exactly what kindf of person u/Consoftserveative is.

[-]

Yes, its definitely easy to judge without making a point.

[-]

NumerousBug9075@reddit

Puberty blockers are irreversible when taken for long periods of time (precocious puberty is temporary and the dosage is different) . It's healthier to wait until adulthood, (bottom surgery is more successful and more likely to be functional).

Issues with brain development, bone density, infantile genitalia, hormonal imbalance and permanent sterility have been reported as side effects. I understand passability is easier if puberty is skipped, but it's not worth the health issues, it's unethical to place that decision on a kid.

What if the kid regrets it as an adult? They were too young to consent and will have to live with it.

Puberty isn't just necessary for reproductive development, it's also responsible in other areas such as brain development.

An adult can skip puberty blockers altogether (avoiding some side effects as a result) and go straight to HRT. Surgeries are safer and more successful, more money is available to fund the transition, you have the chance to freeze eggs/sperm + you've had time to think about it.

[-]

GKT0077@reddit

How can you just block something that is essential for human growth? Surely the long term side effects outweigh the short term gain? Im talking about brain development, bone density, organ health etc.

[-]

McFuzzyChipmunk@reddit

Repeat after me everyone, politicians should not be deciding what is right for you medically. Seriously the medical evidence on this issue shows that they should be used and that they are no less safe than other medicines we routinely prescribe. I don't know when we entered the age where politics trumps medical science but I want to go back.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

No.

[-]

rinrinstrikes@reddit

As shitty as this, and as someone who transitioned at like 13, all this is gonna do is make criminals, which is what's wanted.

This is effectively targeting 1% of 1% of the population yet many countries are going out of their way to do so, which, whether you agree or not, is a level of pettiness that is egregious.

Most people literally do or die for this kind of stuff, and hormones and puberty blockers aren't medicine just developed for the sole purpose of blocking puberty, while also being an easily accessible pharmacy only medication that is over the counter in literally any other country that isn't doing this (ive ordered them off Uber Eats before). You can go "oh but I read this non peer reviewed paper that reviewed a study that implied the regret rate is 240%" but that doesn't change the fact that the people who won't regret it are going to go out of their way to break this law and will be labeled as such, and that you're okay with because of a culture war.

[-]

Arandom_personn@reddit

the only people i've heard of who medically transitioned as a minor were ones at serious risk of suicide if they didn't. people can and will do DIY if they're desperate enough, and that's much more dangerous than any consequences of puberty blockers.

[-]

Glaedr122@reddit

Should we let the threat of suicide be the deciding factor in irreversible medical interventions, especially for minors? In any other context, threatening suicide to get a desired outcome is manipulative to the extreme.

[-]

Arandom_personn@reddit

is it a manipulative threat if they can and will go through with it?

[-]

Glaedr122@reddit

Yes, the threat of putting their death on someone else's hands is what makes it manipulative, and is also what makes it effective against the people who love them most. Especially when so many doctors and therapists are going to say "would you rather have a dead daughter or a living son" as if those are the only two options.

The threat of suicide is not a bargaining chip to be used to get ones way.

[-]

grower-lenses@reddit

When Trump got elected the first time people were saying not to worry. The Overton window is baseless, fake etc etc.

What is this if not exactly that.

Why is labour red Tories ???

[-]

Levitx@reddit

Right wing is when commissioning an independent report and following its recommendations? I guess?

[-]

grower-lenses@reddit

Yeah, when you have trans people with real lived experience who went through this. And none of them regret using puberty blockers. Hell even folks who ended up not taking hormones. They’re also grateful they had puberty blockers.

[-]

Levitx@reddit

Shame that science doesn't work that way.

"look man all I know is that I took ivermectin and I've never felt better" is literally the same argument you are using.

[-]

grower-lenses@reddit

What about that is science? Politicians first run a campaign on hating trans people. Then, once in power, they select a bunch of organisations to ask if there is a risk to taking a medication. 40% of those respond. Some of those say that there is a risk.

Lol. Of course there is a risk. There is a risk in taking the pill. But it’s a whole lot lower then the risks related to carrying out a pregnancy.

That’s science.

[-]

Fadingwalker@reddit

Their popularity is constantly tanking because they refuse to stop kissing the boots of every rich donor who comes there way so they are constantly looking for someone new to exploit.

Problem for this is that the UK before was no-where near as Transphobic as it is now so not only are the Tories and Labour both waging a culture war but they are waging one as they accuse the other side of not being anti-woke enough for the people of the UK, even though they had to cultivate an "anti-woke" anti-trans atmosphere in this country to begin with.

[-]

grower-lenses@reddit

That’s what I’m saying. How can the progressive party end up more conservative then the conservatives in the past?

Who are they trying to appeal to?

[-]

Fadingwalker@reddit

That's the thing: they aren't trying to appeal to anyone. They know that once they leave power, the Tories will just cock everything up again and then the Labour government can waltz right back into power.

The people they want to please are the big money donors who just give money to whoever is in power and doing their bidding.

Labour gave up progressive politics back during the Blair administration and every crisis of rich greed has just made people more angry and the government more eager to find scapegoats to deflect to.

[-]

grower-lenses@reddit

If they not trying to appeal to anyone then why are they so obsessed with ruining the lives of trans kids.

Why would those supposed donor care about what happens to trans kids.

[-]

TinyTiger1234@reddit

Donors need constant problems to distract people from the fact that they are controlling everything so they choose a minority to blame every problem on and get people mad about

[-]

grower-lenses@reddit

I kind of agree with this. But there are no big donors in my country (It’s pretty limited how much one person or company can donate to combat corruption and lobbies). And they’re still inventing enemies.

Imo, people are angry and tired (inflation, global warming, war nearby causes general sense of unrest). So it’s easy to manipulate them using this. And targeting that anger towards undesirable groups (ex immigrants).

But why trans kids. Why children. Sigh

[-]

Fadingwalker@reddit

Children are easy targets since they personally cannot fight back and the Labour-Tory system wants to attack someone they think most people will hard a hard time defending without feeling embarrassed due to how people perceive the topic as being sensitive.

[-]

StrangeFilmNegatives@reddit

Thank god. Experimenting on kids who just yesterday wanted to be superman was always very screwed up. The trans version of 14 year old kids getting boob jobs. Let them become adults then decide if they want to damage their body in that way children cannot properly make informed and well understood decisions.

[-]

corbynista2029@reddit

Experimenting on kids who just yesterday wanted to be superman was always very screwed up.

The medical process for prescribing puberty blockers for gender dysphoria is much more rigorous than that. No doctor has prescribed puberty blockers to kids who say "I am boy/girl/otherwise", they give them out after a number of evaluation looking at a whole bunch of behavioural patterns, which obviously include listening the kid's own experience.

[-]

ThePortalsOfFrenzy@reddit

It's pretty clear from that user's choice of words that they aren't interested in an honest discussion of this matter.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

You and your buddies don't get to decide how others speak. Enjoy your L.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

If they were intending to have a good faith discussion, they would realise literally ALL pediatric care was experiemental before it became commonplace. They would also realise that the concept of blocking puberty is about delaying the choice into adulthood; to ban puberty blockers is to cause irreversable damage.

[-]

HatesAvgRedditors@reddit

to ban puberty blockers is to cause irreversible damage

You have that backwards, to let 11 year olds guess whether they want to be a boy or girl will cause irreversible damage.

Imagine thinking that anyone anywhere knows who the fuck they are at 11 years old 😂 when I was 11 I wanted to be a rapper. 6 years later I was in a competitive engineering program. Puberty is part of life. Imagine if I had to make a final decision at 11? I can’t rap to safe my life

[-]

lady_ninane@reddit

You have that backwards, to let 11 year olds guess whether they want to be a boy or girl will cause irreversible damage.

Imagine thinking that anyone anywhere knows who the fuck they are at 11 years old 😂 when I was 11 I wanted to be a rapper. 6 years later I was in a competitive engineering program. Puberty is part of life. Imagine if I had to make a final decision at 11? I can’t rap to safe my life

That isn't an analogous comparison, nor is it an accurate understanding of how one develops their relationship to their identity (including their gender identity) at an early age or even an accurate representation of who receives puberty blockers and why.

[-]

Netblock@reddit

Please stop spreading disinformation. Puberty blockers are widely known to have reversible side effects (check out the research papers linked in the article; also BMD).

Also the kid isn't making the decision by themself; there is a trained medical professional informing the kid and parents.

[-]

HatesAvgRedditors@reddit

Hahaha if you take those meds and become a girl and then stop you’re gonna have c cups as a man.

Or become a guy and end up with broad shoulders and a deep ass voice when you stop.

Some of the stuff is reversible not all.

We’re all perfect the way we are. Stop trying to gender bend kids. If you wanna take that shit and become a fallout 3 super mutant go ahead but kids are not cannon fodder

[-]

fxmldr@reddit

Do you have dementia? Do you know where you are? What do you think puberty blockers are, or what they're used for?

It has become common place recently.

Yeah because we figured out a way to treat youth with this type of profile in an ethical way which lessened outcomes of things like suicide, self harm, etc.

This isn't "ideological." This is medicine. This is how we develop treatment protocols. Your ignorance of how this process works doesn't mean it's wrong, nor does it mean those who disagree with you are ideologically driven.

[-]

Normal children do not get puberty blockers unless in abnormal circumstances. Puberty blockers have never been used in the was that we are using them now. Wouldn't expect a liberal to understand but hey, thats why you lost the election. As is fair and just.

[-]

Yeah… for chemically castration

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

Its completely experimental.

[-]

No-Bad-463@reddit

damage their body

It's clear you have zero bias

[-]

Chapstick_Yuzu@reddit

A consistent application of your standards would prevent any medical intervention that carries a risk of bodily damage, which is pretty much all of them. Of course you aren't interested in consistently applying any standards. Sorry Billy, you might have started developing breasts at age 7 but you are a child and cant consent to medical procedures. Sorry Heileigh, your Bi-Polar Disorder cannot be treated with medications because some freak out there is really "concerned" about whether you can pump out a baby in 20 years.

[-]

spikus93@reddit

I see that the UK is not concerned about being labeled TERF Island. My heart goes out to the trans community and children there who have to live among ignorant adults who wish they didn't exist.

You do exist, you do matter, you are valid. They're just old and wrong.

[-]

Artistic-Action-2423@reddit

And if you wanna go smoke a pack of cigs a day, get a face tattoo, and slam a fifth of vodka, don't listen to those dumb adults that say you're not allowed to!

[-]

spikus93@reddit

So to be clear, you think children are making this decision and doing it without parental knowledge, psychiatric care, and consulting their doctors first?

FadedFracture@reddit

You’re wrongly assuming that every kid with gender dysphoria gets puberty blockers. They don’t. It’s determined by the parents and doctors, not some 10 year old kid.
The regret rate for puberty blockers is less than 2%. Link

In other words, those who truly need it, do not regret it in the slightest.

Even if the study you’re hinting at gets reproduced: 20% is a lot of people. Not providing them with care because 80% had other issues or were wrongly disgnosed is an insane argument.

The correct response isn’t to ban puberty blockers, but rather make the requirements stricter so it’s given to those who truly have persistent gender dysphoria.

[-]

ExaminatorPrime@reddit

No, the wellbeing of 80% of the people overwrites the wants of 20% of the people. Any society that does the opposite gets destroyed without exception. Most recent one being Syria where the alawite minority (about 10% of the population) ruled for 60+ years and opressed the majority.

Good thing the UK has the backs of 80% of the people instead of harming them for the sake of 20% of the people.

[-]

RydderRichards@reddit

I didn't assume anything.

Even if 20% is a lot we probably agree that 80% is four times a lot. What's insane is Drugging four people to help one.

The correct response isn’t to ban puberty blockers, but rather make the requirements stricter so it’s given to those who truly have persistent gender dysphoria.

I fully support that, I don't know how realistic it is to expect a diagnostic that's that specific.

[-]

There are eleven studies in the link. I am not sure what you are looking for.

[-]

Decievedbythejometry@reddit

I'm looking for you to cite a peer reviewed study that supports your argument. That is s blog post.

[-]

RydderRichards@reddit

Is it that you are missing a link? Because there are eleven studies cited. Is there something wrong with them?

Your link is to a c. 100 word blog post by a bigot who cites a study about 'the sissy boy syndrome' from the 1980s to support his claim, but you think being asked for a link to an actual study is too high a standard

You didn't just as for a link but also basically a short summary for you. Yes, that is too much. You have your studies. Eleven of them. You are free to disagree.

The blog post you link to does not link out to the studies it refers to. Can you provide a link to a peer reviewed study that supports the claim you have made here?

[-]

xXJaniPetteriXx@reddit

Human body produces tens of millions of potentially cancerous cells, but can take care of most of them. Does that mean we shouldn't treat the ones that body doesn't take care of?

[-]

RydderRichards@reddit

While a body is composed of billions of cells it isn't the same as a body.

Juat like an excel sheet isn't the same as a cell.

[-]

Yes, let's force children with gender dysphoria to go through traumatic and irreversible changes to their body that severely affect their mental health for no reason. Thanks labor!

Good news these things are harmful.

[-]

UltimateInferno@reddit

This is certainly a very complicated matter. On the one hand, there are some risks, but on the other hand, the practice has [had documented successes](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3114100/#:~:text=In%201998%2C%20a%20case%20study,disorder%20(GID)%20was%20made.) and every medical procedure has some side effects. The information pamphlet on my anti-depressants says that there is a risk of death with taking them, and I've certainly had some scares with it starting out. I think rather than rejecting procedures outright, we should have someone approve it on a case by case basis, allowing it for those who experience the most success. Maybe someone with a medical degree and even specialization with this kind of Healthcare, and has an opportunity to get to know the patients on a personal level, just be sure on whether it would work or not.

[-]

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Glad there are other rational people, I wish people saw how wrong it is to let children make these decisions. They say the regret rate is low but we haven't done this to kids long enough to know... I'm a detransitioner. I'm lucky enough I only socially transitioned and stopped before medical intervention, but I was confused for a lot of years as a teen and young adult. If this was more normalized when I was in high school, I would've transitioned medically and completely regretted it.

[-]

Enigmatic-Koan@reddit

The fact that it takes months/years to get things like puberty blockers/medically transition doesnt seem to factor in for you, does it? If you were on puberty blockers and decided to go with puberty you could simply stop since you socially detransitioned.

People like you are why so many stupid legal decisions are made that fuck over so many people. Children dont make the decision alone. A decision is made with the doctor and parents giving informed opinions and full details about what everything entails. You think a kid just goes to a doctor, says I want puberty blockers and they just get them, which is not how anything works. And theres an even more glaring fact that I'll use your own example for since people only understand things when it includes them: if puberty blockers are available and youre not sure enough on your gender identity, you can simply not take them. As you only socially transitioned, no one would have forced you to do medical transitioning as well while you were figuring things out. There's no obligation to medicallly transition for anyone.

HerbalSpirals@reddit

Look I don't have time to address all this but yeah, at least in Canada, you can just walk into a doctors office and ask and it's given. I did it. My younger sister when she was 14 was on blockers less than 2 weeks after saying she was trans. it happens quick with no therapy or safeguarding in a lot of places. That's an issue.

[-]

KissingerFan@reddit

Good, puberty blockers for kids is the lobotomy of the 21 century

[-]

Amilektrevitrioelis@reddit

Oh, I wasn't paying attention to the argument, I was just browsing through, and saw the typo.

Square-Compote-8125@reddit

Oh great so now we are regressing back to the old conservative belief that men and women have different brains? This is the 21st century. Leave that quackery back in the middle ages where it belongs.

[-]

ForPeace27@reddit

Why do you think it's quackery?

"On average, males and females showed greater volume in different areas of the cortex, the outer brain layer that controls thinking and voluntary movements. Females had greater volume in the prefrontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, superior temporal cortex, lateral parietal cortex, and insula. Males, on average, had greater volume in the ventral temporal and occipital regions. Each of these regions is responsible for processing different types of information."

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/sex-differences-brain-anatomy

[-]

ForPeace27@reddit

Brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender. When MRI scans of 160 transgender youths were analyzed using a technique called diffusion tensor imaging, the brains of transgender boys’ resembled that of cisgender boys’, while the brains of transgender girls’ brains resembled the brains of cisgender girls’.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180524112351.htm

Studies in sheep and primates have clearly demonstrated that sexual differentiation of the genitals takes places earlier in development and is separate from sexual differentiation of the brain and behaviour. In humans, the genitals differentiate in the first trimester of pregnancy, whereas brain differentiation is considered to start in the second trimester.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3235069/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21447635/

there is a genetic component to gender identity and sexual orientation at least in some individuals.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/#!po=6.92308

that in the case of an ambiguous gender at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the same degree of masculinization of the brain. Differences in brain structures and brain functions have been found that are related to sexual orientation and gender.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17875490/

Findings from neuroimaging studies provide evidence suggesting that the structure of the brains of trans-women and trans-men differs in a variety of ways from cis-men and cis-women, respectively,

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7415463/

The studies and research that have been conducted allow us to confirm that masculinization or feminization of the gonads does not always proceed in alignment with that of the brain development and function. There is a distinction between the sex (visible in the body’s anatomical features or defined genetically) and the gender of an individual (the way that people perceive themselves).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7415463/

For this study, they looked at the DNA of 13 transgender males, individuals born female and transitioning to male, and 17 transgender females, born male and transitioning to female. The extensive whole exome analysis, which sequences all the protein-coding regions of a gene (protein expression determines gene and cell function) was performed at the Yale Center for Genome Analysis. The analysis was confirmed by Sanger sequencing, another method used for detecting gene variants. The variants they found were not present in a group of 88 control exome studies in nontransgender individuals also done at Yale. They also were rare or absent in large control DNA databases.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/02/200205084203.htm

MtF (natal men with a female gender identity) had a total intracranial volume between those of male and female controls

https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/25/10/3527/387406?login=false

MtF showed higher cortical thickness compared to men in the control group in sensorimotor areas in the left hemisphere and right orbital, temporal and parietal areas

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23724358/

A Spanish cortical thickness (CTh) study that included a male and a female control group found similar CTh in androphilic MtF and female controls, and increased CTh compared with male controls in the orbito-frontal, insular and medial occipital regions of the right hemisphere (Zubiaurre-Elorza et al., 2013). The CTh of FtM was similar to control women, but FtM, unlike control women, showed (1) increased CTh compared with control men in the left parieto-temporal cortex, and (2) no difference from male controls in the prefrontal orbital region.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22941717/

Before hormonal intervention, androphilic MtF with feelings of gender incongruence that began in childhood appeared to have a white matter microstructure pattern that differs statistically from male as well as female controls.

FtM FA values are significantly greater in several fascicles than those belonging to female controls, but similar to those of male controls, thereby showing a masculinized pattern. However, their corticospinal tract is defeminized; that is, their FA values lie between those of male and female controls, and are significantly different from each of these two groups.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21195418/

[-]

get_a_pet_duck@reddit

I'd do everything in my power

etarletons@reddit

I see a lot of discussion about the long-term consequences for children who undergo these treatments and end up cisgender. It's also relevant to ask what the long-term consequences are of no treatment, to a child who is trans and will stay trans.

Undergoing female puberty gives trans men breasts - which many men will opt to surgically remove - wide hips, short height, patchier facial hair, higher and brassier voices. Male puberty is even worse for trans women, giving them big foreheads, chins, jaws, noses, deep voices, big hands and feet, tall height. It's harder to live a quiet and normal life, if you look like that. Getting the hormones they want in the first place makes it much easier and cheaper for trans people to live undisturbed.

I get that if a cisgender child got confused, thought they were trans, and received cross sex hormones, they would then be in (at worst) as unfortunate a position as trans people already are. But centering the entire discussion of trans healthcare on "what if a cis kid did this by accident?" seems wrong.

[-]

fletch44@reddit

It's also relevant to ask what the long-term consequences are of no treatment, to a child who is trans and will stay trans.

Clearly not

[-]

DrivenByTheStars51@reddit

Forget the broad international consensus of medical professionals around standards of care for trans minors y'all, they found one doctor to combat it.

By this logic let's halt all overseas travel until we get to the bottom of this flat earth debate.

[-]

jamany@reddit

I think you are the flat earther here, since you are anti data driven medicine and anti scientific consensus. All you have is an ideology.

[-]

DrivenByTheStars51@reddit

Literally what the fuck are you talking about lmao.

https://sociology.cornell.edu/news/analysis-finds-strong-consensus-gender-transition-treatment-effectiveness#:~:text=The%20analysis%20concluded%20that%2093,well%2Dbeing%20of%20transgender%20individuals.

Seriously, anyone can just buy this junk off the internet easily if they wanted to.

Yes, I'm proud of my country.

Even as it commits genocide?

Now my turn, do you feel sorry for children in Israel?

Yes, and not just the children. I don't blame the people for the actions of its government or the IDF. It must be incredibly frustrating for many of its citizens, especially given how it wasn't too long ago that Jewish people were the victims of genocide themselves.

[-]

azure_beauty@reddit

Yes

See? It's not so hard after all. Trust me, 95% of Israelis don't want to see Palestinians dying. A decent amount of Palestinians also wants peace.

I don't blame the people for the actions of its government or the IDF

Well you sure do seem to have an issue with people being proud of their country

P.S. the actions of the IDF are the actions of Israelis. The war crimes you see are the actions of a small minority who the government does not do enough to punish.

And no, we're not commiting genocide, if you want to be on good terms with Israelis (pretty useful for influencing somebody) you're going to want to stop us accusing of things we aren't doing.

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

Well you sure do seem to have an issue with people being proud of their country

Well, yeah. I find it hard to understand why someone would be proud of their country when it's committing genocide. That's not something to be proud of.

P.S. the actions of the IDF are the actions of Israelis. The war crimes you see are the actions of a small minority who the government does not do enough to punish.

It's the government intentionally committing the war crimes.

And no, we're not commiting genocide

Israel is definitely committing genocide.

[-]

azure_beauty@reddit

Israel is definitely committing genocide.

And there go your chances of ever meaningfully impacting an Israeli's actions. Guess blood libels are more important to you than actually saving lives.

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

Are you saying that we shouldn't have called Germany's actions a genocide because it risked not having meaningful action?

It's important that we tell the truth about Israel's actions. Hopefully the world wakes up and punishes Israel's government for what it's doing.

[-]

azure_beauty@reddit

I'm saying that accusing Israel of doing something they are not doing delegitimizes actual criticisms. Your rhetoric is harming Palestinians who are being unjustly hurt.

If you really cared, you'd be working towards peace, not showing lies which result in Israel using less accurate weapons because of libels, meaning they kill even more innocent Palestinians who could have lived

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

But they are doing it.

[-]

Artistic-Action-2423@reddit

Yeah, sorry that they were born to parents that sacrificed their lives and futures to kill a few Jews

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

Ah, so it's their parents' to blame for Israel's genocide that killed them?

[-]

They're a war mongering people.

??? The people are just as much to blame for these wars as Israel's people are to blame for the genocide in Gaza.

Yep, October 7th marked the 4th time that Palestine has started a war

So you're going to ignore the things that Israel does, like stealing Palestinian land, destroying their homes and building "settlements" for Israelis?

[-]

Artistic-Action-2423@reddit

Continually chanting the word genocide doesn't make it true.

And idk, the streets of Gaza filled with people cheering, dancing, and spitting on the corpse of a naked Israeli concert goer seems like a good majority of them supported Hamas throughout. There are polls that support this as well.

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

Continually chanting the word genocide doesn't make it true.

Correct, but the genocide that Israel is committing does.

There are polls that support this as well.

Ah yes, because polls are extremely accurate in countries run by terrorists and without democracies. Kinda hard to disagree with the person pointing a gun at you.

[-]

Artistic-Action-2423@reddit

Hamas: openly genocidal doctrine

October 7th: Hamas attempts to put that doctrine into action.

In Hamas' perfect world in which the Israeli military wasn't able to push them back, when do you think they would stop? Thats when we would see a real genocide

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

Newsflash: Hamas fucking sucks too. Both the IDF and Hamas are more than willing to genocide the other side. This does not justify either side's actions.

How is what Israel is doing not a "real" genocide... it clearly meets the definition.

[-]

Artistic-Action-2423@reddit

So why did mentioning the word Hamas even slightly in a negative light at protests get you harassed/assaulted/called a Zionist?

Nah it's called urban warfare. Was it genocide when the allies bombed German and Japanese cities? Israel showed incredible restraint after getting attacked on a weekly basis for nearly 20 years. What other country would do that?

[-]

AstraLover69@reddit

So why did mentioning the word Hamas even slightly in a negative light at protests get you harassed/assaulted/called a Zionist?

It did? Says who?

Nah it's called urban warfare.

It's a genocide.

Was it genocide when the allies bombed German and Japanese cities? The bombing of Dresden killed more German civilians in a single day than Palestinians since October 7th.

Did the actions of those governments meet the criteria for genocide?

Israel showed incredible restraint after getting attacked on a weekly basis for nearly 20 years. What other country would do that?

Again, I will remind you that Israel did plenty to Palestine in that 20 years. Don't frame it like this is one sided.

Poor little Israel doing nothing wrong and getting attacked without them doing anything for 20 years. Don't make me laugh.

[-]

Pandepon@reddit

Wait? Weren’t those the findings that tested a small sample of trans youth and said puberty blockers didn’t improve mental health? When you’re testing a group of trans youth who have been receiving gender affirming care and probably wouldn’t see much improvement in their already improved mental health in a treatment that doesn’t show results of anything, just prevents you from experiencing something that’s going to make trans youth feel shittier? No improvement doesn’t mean “does harm”….

[-]

CultCombatant@reddit

"UK Labour government sentences trans children to death. " Let's just be honest about what the end results of such monstrous acts are. If you deny gender-affirming care, you get dead trans kids.

[-]

Flavaflavius@reddit

Don't be so dramatic. It's puberty, not a fucking chestburster.

And don't hit me with that emotionally abusive "we'll kill ourselves if you disagree!" line either.

The reality is these medications are £1000 a year per patient and I can’t help but feel this is a major decision in not providing meaningful support to these two groups of people.

Both of our groups would also benefit from being g able to access an endocrinologist however most of us are stuck with a shoddily trained GP

[-]

Refflet@reddit

This is the report from the CHM: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-changes-to-the-availability-of-puberty-blockers-for-under-18s/proposed-changes-to-the-availability-of-puberty-blockers

[-]

MissLisaMarie86@reddit

Omg 😳 the comments I am reading. What happened to this world…

[-]

empleadoEstatalBot@reddit

Puberty blockers for children with gender dysphoria to be banned indefinitely

The UK Government has said that, following official advice from medical experts, existing emergency measures banning the sale and supply of puberty blockers will be made indefinite.

The Department of Health and Social Care said the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM) had published independent expert advice that there is “currently an unacceptable safety risk in the continued prescription of puberty blockers to children”.

The department said the commission had recommended indefinite restrictions while work is done to ensure the safety of children and young people.

New prescriptions of puberty-blocking medicines and gender-affirming hormones were paused in the wake of Dr Hilary Cass’s review into gender identity services for young people in April.

NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, which runs Scotland’s only gender clinic for under-18s, announced it had stopped starting new patients on the treatments in mid-March.

That decision came after NHS England effectively banned puberty blockers on the basis of preliminary findings by Dr Cass.

Across Scotland, England and Wales, the were then banned temporarily with emergency legislation in May. On Wednesday, this will be updated to make the ban indefinite and set a review for 2027.

Professor Steve Cunningham, vice-chair for the Commission for Human Medicines, said: “CHM has advised that a statutory indefinite ban is placed on the use of GnRH agonists for puberty suppression until our three recommended structures are in place to support safe UK prescribing, with a first review date of 2027.

“The indefinite ban is made in the context of a significant waiting list for gender specialist services in the UK. In making this decision, CHM considered the safety, actual and potential, of using GnRH agonists to suppress puberty, and also risks to children and young people associated with accessing GnRH agonists via alternative routes.”

What are puberty blockers?

Puberty blockers are medicines that prevent puberty from happening. They work by blocking the hormones — testosterone and estrogen — that lead to puberty-related changes in your body.

That stops things like periods and breast growth, or voice-deepening and facial hair growth.

Who would seek to use them?

Treatment for gender dysphoria aims to help people live the way they want to, in their preferred gender identity or as non-binary.

Some young trans, intersex, and gender non-binary people may decide to take puberty blockers after talking about it with their parents or guardian and a nurse or doctor.

The Cass review warned giving such hormones to 16-year-olds should be an approach taken with “extreme caution”.

STV News is now on WhatsApp

Get all the latest news from around the country

Follow STV News

Follow STV News on WhatsApp

Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country

WhatsApp channel QR Code

Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot

[-]

stuaxo@reddit

This won't be enough to make bigots happy, they are never happy.

[-]

coverageanalysisbot@reddit

Hi empleadoEstatalBot,

We've found 8 sources (so far) that are covering this story including:

The Telegraph (Right): "Puberty blockers for under-18s banned after warning of ‘unacceptable risk’ to children"
Sky News UK (Center): "Puberty blockers for under-18s to be banned indefinitely"
Metro News (Leans Left): "Puberty blockers banned for under-18s with gender dysphoria 'indefinitely'"

Of all the sources reporting on this story, 40% are left-leaning, 40% are right-leaning, and 20% are in the center. Read the full coverage analysis and compare how 8+ sources from across the political spectrum are covering this story.

I’m a bot. Read here to learn how it works or message us with any feedback so we can improve the bot for you.

[-]

Eledridan@reddit

Further social regression on terf island.