NHS England Prohibits Access to Puberty Blockers at Gender-Identity Clinics, Limits Them to Research Settings

[icehorse]

Do you accept that there are some kids who do suffer from gender dysphoria even if some may only be "confused," or do you believe that no kid could be genuinely gender-dysphoric?

I absolutely agree that GD is a very real and often extremely serious condition.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I absolutely agree that GD is a very real and often extremely serious condition.

Okay, we agree on that.

Since we both accept that some kids suffer from this serious condition that may result in depression, suicidal thoughts, and other major complications for some of them, do you think the decision of which treatment to pursue should ultimately be decided by doctors or by politicians who enact blanket policies with little to no room for exceptions?

 

[icehorse]

The link you provided is from anti-trans ideologues, though. I have made it clear that my own position on this is ambivalent due to the clear disagreement among experts regarding what constitutes an optimal approach, but that's because I believe that expert opinions carry much more weight than the axe-grinding politics of unqualified commentators like many of those who claim that the issue is so simple and has one clear answer.

I provided two links. The first link documents the internal workings of WPATH officials. They are captured on video and their internal written communications are also captured. WPATH has been contacted and they have not denied the authenticity of these documents and video.

The second link is to a report commissioned by the NHS.

==

I don't think anyone is saying that the issue is simple. The overarching claim is that GAC is based on bad science. So GOOD science ought to happen, and it mostly has NOT happened yet.

 

[libre]

I care about what's happening to confused kids with GD, so I watched the long video and I skimmed thru the WPATH documents.

Shouldn't be difficult for you to find the exact quote or timestamps and provide it then, given that you do care about these kids.
I did a control+f and typed 'consent' through the transcript and found nothing that lines up with the allegation you have chosen to repeat.

 

[icehorse]

Okay, we agree on that.

Since we both accept that some kids suffer from this serious condition that may result in depression, suicidal thoughts, and other major complications for some of them, do you think the decision of which treatment to pursue should ultimately be decided by doctors or by politicians who enact blanket policies with little to no room for exceptions?

I think treatments should come from scientists, researchers and doctors. Using GOOD science. Sadly, WPATH is largely an advocacy group. And whether or not you agree with that claim, what's been exposed is that they do not do good science.

 

[icehorse]

Shouldn't be difficult for you to find the exact quote or timestamps and provide it then, given that you do care about these kids.
I did a control+f and typed 'consent' through the transcript and found nothing that lines up with the allegation you have chosen to repeat.

If you care about these kids, get yourself informed. WATCH THE VIDEO!!

 

[Altfish]

NHS England has prohibited the use of puberty blockers at gender-identity clinics, limited it to research settings:



New clinics will open to offer care for minors with gender dysphoria:

NHS says children to no longer receive puberty blockers at gender identity clinics

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials

www.independent.co.uk

Multiple other European countries strictly control minors' access to puberty blockers, although most of them don't have a ban similar to England's. Other countries in the UK also haven't adopted this policy.

What are your thoughts on the decision of NHS England?

In the UK...
Until you are 17, you cannot drive.
Until you are 18, you cannot drink alcohol.
Until you are 18, you cannot vote.
Until you are 18, you cannot get married without your parent's permission.
I could go on.

I don't see a problem putting an age limit on gender issues.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I provided two links. The first link documents the internal workings of WPATH officials. They are captured on video and their internal written communications are also captured. WPATH has been contacted and they have not denied the authenticity of these documents and video.

The second link is to a report commissioned by the NHS.

I see significant differences between a report based on the interpretation of an ideologue like Mia Hughes and a professional medical report like that of the NHS. I believe the latter is essential to take into account, while the former mostly reflects the increasing politicization of the issue.

As I previously said in this thread, WPATH is one of many authoritative medical bodies. Unless one believes that it somehow controls the decisions of all of the countries that have not banned puberty blockers as NHS England has done, I don't see the relevance of the WPATH report here.

==

I don't think anyone is saying that the issue is simple. The overarching claim is that GAC is based on bad science. So GOOD science ought to happen, and it mostly has NOT happened yet.

I think treatments should come from scientists, researchers and doctors. Using GOOD science. Sadly, WPATH is largely an advocacy group. And whether or not you agree with that claim, what's been exposed is that they do not do good science.

Neither of us is qualified enough to judge whether "GOOD science" exists in this specific case, so I'm deferring to experts, who, as I have pointed out, don't have uniform views at this time. Some of them clearly believe that current science doesn't justify banning puberty blockers for gender care, while some don't. Personally, I prefer to leave room for ambivalence and uncertainty until more research has been done.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

NHS England has prohibited the use of puberty blockers at gender-identity clinics, limited it to research settings:



New clinics will open to offer care for minors with gender dysphoria:

NHS says children to no longer receive puberty blockers at gender identity clinics

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials

www.independent.co.uk

Multiple other European countries strictly control minors' access to puberty blockers, although most of them don't have a ban similar to England's. Other countries in the UK also haven't adopted this policy.

What are your thoughts on the decision of NHS England?

Bravo. Leave the kids alone. A child cannot consent to medical transition. They are incapable of fully understanding the ramifications, such as permanent sterility and loss of sexual function. This idea that puberty should be a choice is really disgusting and evil. No, puberty is just part of life and you need to go through it to be healthy.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Bravo. Leave the kids alone. A child cannot consent to medical transition. They are incapable of fully understanding the ramifications, such as permanent sterility and loss of sexual function. This idea that puberty should be a choice is really disgusting and evil. No, puberty is just part of life and you need to go through it to be healthy.

A child also can't consent to many other treatments with potentially major and long-term side effects, such as antipsychotic medications, bone surgeries, brain surgeries, and ADHD medications. Should any of those be banned rather than tightly controlled? If we specifically focus on the mental-health examples given that they can't be diagnosed through X-rays or other physical tests, why should or shouldn't they also be banned?

I have no definitive position on this, but I think a lot of the views around it single it out as if it were unique in this regard even though it isn't. (I'm talking in general rather than about any one individual, especially when it comes to some politicians and policymakers.)

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

A child also can't consent to many other treatments with potentially major and long-term side effects, such as antipsychotic medications, bone surgeries, brain surgeries, and ADHD medications. Should any of those be banned rather than tightly controlled? If we specifically focus on the mental-health examples given that they can't be diagnosed through X-rays or other physical tests, why should or shouldn't they also be banned?

None of those break or disrupt the functioning of healthy body systems and parts. At least when you start hormones after puberty, there's still a chance your reproductive function can return. But not if you just go from blockers straight to cross sex hormones. You will be permanently sterilized then. The males also have no sexual function basically at all because none of their sexual organs, including their prostate, ever develops.

A child cannot understand those things. Hell, adults don't really understand what hormones do, and many think they can pick and choose the effects of it! Many of these children end up growing out of their distress after puberty, anyway. That's why so many are detransitioning.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, the link you provided regarding WPATH is a report by anti-trans activist Mia Hughes which only includes highly distorted explanations of WPATH's practices. She's got a reputation as a TERF activist involved with anti-trans organizations and is not accurately reporting on WPATH.

But you knew that. Near all of the links you provide regarding WPATH are from transphobic organizations which masquerade as being capable of meaningful analysis of the established medical standards.

Challenge: provide any direct quote, video or any other medium of a WPATH official stating they 'often do not have informed consent from the kids'.
I'll hold my breath.

Those files don't contain anything that hasn't already been known about WPATH and how they've failed trans people by focusing more on ideology than evidence based medicine. If anyone is "transphobic" it's Marci Bowers and the rest of the radical activists who have caused this scandal in the first place by running experiments on children and unfit adults. I transitioned over 15 years ago and I've seen all the fallout from this mess, myself. But I guess I'm "transphobic". Lol.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Link to the WPATH files, if anyone wants to see:

Proton Drive

Securely store, share, and access your important files and photos. Anytime, anywhere.

drive.proton.me

 

[Debater Slayer]

None of those break or disrupt the functioning of healthy body systems and parts.

Oh, they could. Antipsychotics in particular can cause issues with metabolism, blood sugar, heart rate, and a plethora of other bodily functions. Eli Lilly, the manufacturer of the antipsychotic medication Zyprexa, even had to settle a class-action lawsuit because the drug caused many people to get diabetes. It's just that doctors weigh the potential benefits and risks with the parents when prescribing antipsychotics to children, unless a doctor is grossly irresponsible and doesn't inform the parents of the potential side effects.

At least when you start hormones after puberty, there's still a chance your reproductive function can return. But not if you just go from blockers straight to cross sex hormones. You will be permanently sterilized then. The males also have no sexual function basically at all because none of their sexual organs, including their prostate, ever develops.

A child cannot understand those things. Hell, adults don't really understand what hormones do, and many think they can pick and choose the effects of it!

I agree that a child can't understand those long-term effects, and I think highly stringent care should be taken with any procedures or treatments that have such effects, whether the procedures are related to gender or not. Where I'm less sure is the question of whether a blanket ban is the answer even though many medical organizations disagree with it. So far, it looks like there's no definitive expert answer to that question.

Many of these children end up growing out of their distress after puberty, anyway. That's why so many are detransitioning.

Are there reliable sources documenting 1) that many children grow out of the distress, and 2) numbers of detransitioners, demonstrating that large numbers of people are detransitioning?

 

[icehorse]

Neither of us is qualified enough to judge whether "GOOD science" exists in this specific case, so I'm deferring to experts, who, as I have pointed out, don't have uniform views at this time. Some of them clearly believe that current science doesn't justify banning puberty blockers for gender care, while some don't. Personally, I prefer to leave room for ambivalence and uncertainty until more research has been done.

The Cass report was done by experts, it found NO HIGH QUALITY EVIDENCE that GAC improves mental health outcomes when compared to talk therapy alone.

So if what the Cass report is saying is true, then allowing GAC to continue, and waiting for more research, is putting real kids in harms way right ****ing now, today.

 

[icehorse]

Are there reliable sources documenting 1) that many children grow out of the distress, and 2) numbers of detransitioners, demonstrating that large numbers of people are detransitioning?

This one is handy:

‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh, they could. Antipsychotics in particular can cause issues with metabolism, blood sugar, heart rate, and a plethora of other bodily functions. Eli Lilly, the manufacturer of the antipsychotic medication Zyprexa, even had to settle a class-action lawsuit because the drug caused many people to get diabetes. It's just that doctors weigh the potential benefits and risks with the parents when prescribing antipsychotics to children, unless a doctor is grossly irresponsible and doesn't inform the parents of the potential side effects.

Sorry, but those side effects aren't on the same level as not going through puberty. There's even now people who don't want to go off the puberty blockers and stay on them indefinitely! There's been at least one documented case of that, with a person called "Phoenix".

I agree that a child can't understand those long-term effects, and I think highly stringent care should be taken with any procedures or treatments that have such effects, whether the procedures are related to gender or not. Where I'm less sure is the question of whether a blanket ban is the answer even though many medical organizations disagree with it. So far, it looks like there's no definitive expert answer to that question.

We know enough to know it's too risky to continue with it.

Are there reliable sources documenting 1) that many children grow out of the distress, and 2) numbers of detransitioners, demonstrating that large numbers of people are detransitioning?

I do believe that that was part of the reason why the NHS made this decision, because of the amount of regret with it. It was in the findings they released last year, I think it was.

Also, I can just see it for myself. There's been an explosion of detransitioners speaking out online over the last 5 years or so. That was not the case before. I've been online for a long time and involved in the trans community since the 2000s, and this didn't exist. Now there's detransition groups with tens of thousands of people in it, dozens and dozens of different people making videos announcing and talking about detransitioning. The vast majority of these people are young, usually in their 20s and started medical transition as kids/teens. They usually realize they are either really gay/lesbian or dealing with some other mental health problem or even a sexual fetish. (Older detransitioners do exist, but are a lot rarer.) They're being misdiagnosed and pressured to transition. Sometimes it's even peer pressure, which is a big problem with kids and teens, especially for girls.

It's all out there to see. It didn't exist until recently.

 

[Ignatius A]

NHS England has prohibited the use of puberty blockers at gender-identity clinics, limited it to research settings:



New clinics will open to offer care for minors with gender dysphoria:

NHS says children to no longer receive puberty blockers at gender identity clinics

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials

www.independent.co.uk

Multiple other European countries strictly control minors' access to puberty blockers, although most of them don't have a ban similar to England's. Other countries in the UK also haven't adopted this policy.

What are your thoughts on the decision of NHS England?

It's a FANTASTIC idea chock full of common sense and real compassion.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The Cass report was done by experts, it found NO HIGH QUALITY EVIDENCE that GAC improves mental health outcomes when compared to talk therapy alone.

So if what the Cass report is saying is true, then allowing GAC to continue, and waiting for more research, is putting real kids in harms way right ****ing now, today.

I don't think the above is an accurate summary of the Cass report. Nowhere have I seen it dismiss gender-affirming care wholesale as opposed to replacing or limiting certain practices.

Not all children and young people who are exploring their gender identity require clinical support from the NHS. However, some young people whose gender identity differs from their gender assigned at birth can experience extreme distress; this is referred to by clinicians as gender dysphoria. These children and young people need clinical support to help them understand the options available to them and to provide appropriate treatment.

The aim of the Cass Review is to ensure that children and young people who are questioning their gender identity or experiencing gender dysphoria, and who need support from the NHS, receive a high standard of care that meets their needs and is safe, holistic and effective.

About the Review – Cass Review

cass.independent-review.uk

Gender-affirming care includes many aspects that have nothing to do with puberty blockers, hormone therapy, or any other physical interventions.

And like I said, multiple medical organizations have positions that don't align with NHS England's recent ban. If they didn't see a reason to have different policies, I don't think they would. That medical bodies disagree on such a core point seems to me enough reason not to be certain about one's views on this, regardless of which position one supports.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This one is handy:

‘Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.’

This is one story. It doesn't list any reliable, authoritative sources for numbers on detransitioning, nor does it cite peer-reviewed studies or medical organizations on such numbers. I don't see how it demonstrates anything other than one account.