So puberty blockers are not legal until puberty is over? Makes complete sense /s
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
252 points (98.1% liked)
World News
39446 readers
2233 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Puberty blockers to be banned indefinitely for under-18s with gender dysphoria across UK
I fixed the title. Of course, they're still available for other medical conditions, they're just singling out gender dysphoria.
"Medical Experts"
I don't know about the issue enough for me to comment on if she is biased or not, but I found this NYT interview (archive.org link) and she really seems to try to be playing both sides to me. Her main arguement seems to be don't treat this as an issue to resolve gender, that makes you ignore mental health/depression/other things, but with there not being the best care of that nature available for trans individuals, what avenue is left for them?
It sounds like she wants to go on about a lack of enough proof for her to stop treatment, but it also doesn't sound like she has enough proof to say it's harmful, but that doesn't seem to discourage her helping eliminate it.
Well her position doesn't seem to be that she wants to eliminate it at all. She says the evidence is too weak for a general green light. She supports it being offered but as research:
There are young people who absolutely benefit from a medical pathway, and we need to make sure that those young people have access — under a research protocol, because we need to improve the research — but not assume that that’s the right pathway for everyone.
Also:
I think there is an appreciation that we are not about closing down health care for children. But there is fearfulness — about health care being shut down, and also about the report being weaponized to suggest that trans people don’t exist. And that’s really disappointing to me that that happens, because that’s absolutely not what we’re saying.
She makes it hard to feel out what her actual position is, which in a way is probably what she should do, but is also very frustrating because being on neither side feels disingenuous as a default these days. I don't know enough about her to really feel I know for sure.
We had decades (centuries?) of people not getting this care. There were definitely negatives to that. We've had maybe now a couple decades of increasing HRT/puberty blocker stuff. I've heard positive stories. Everything makes it sound reversible should the need arise. Everything against it seems to not be evenly distributed across the political spectrum so walking it back feels political based on what I've heard cumulatively.
Keeping it as research seems it would greatly reduce its availability, and if it causes people to suffer or die, that's not something that can be taken back, unlike stopping hormone treatment or puberty blockers seems to be. That's the part that concerns me.
I don't know much about the issues, but I try to stay informed, so I don't want to go trashing this lady's report. From all I've read though, a lot of doctors already have to sign off on patients before it comes to these treatments, so canceling that now seems to overrule a wide range of medical and mental doctors for a dubious position.
Keeping it as research seems it would greatly reduce its availability, and if it causes people to suffer or die, that's not something that can be taken back, unlike stopping hormone treatment or puberty blockers seems to be. That's the part that concerns me.
Well I can certainly recommend reading the interview then. One of the things mentioned is that she considers, after her research, this hormone treatment as having irreversible effects.
That's something I always see people dancing around, sometimes saying 'mostly' reversible or something... Being ('mostly') irreversible has an enormous ethical impact. She also mentions having taken into consideration the long term psychological effects but that the research on that just isn't strong enough to give a clear-cut advice
I read the interview as a 380 page paper on a subject I don't really understand seemed a bit ambitious. I linked it, as I didnt know who did the report, and I wanted to hear her summary in her own words.
The comments here are full of people defending one side or the other, but no one seems to be providing any sources. This seems to be a difficult subject to approach if one isn't seeking to affirm an existing stance. Both sides just seem to say "show me the proof" back and forth because neither will acknowledge the other.
You seem to be at least leaning in favor of the report. If you have any noob appropriate links to supporting info, I'd look at them.
Full-fledged hormone blocking + replacement certainly is about as much reversible as puberty, that is, not really. E.g. once boobs grow having tons of testosterone in your system won't make them go away, only surgery will (did you know that the most common cosmetic surgery for cis men is breast reduction, btw?). Some stuff self-medicating enbies are doing should be reversible, like not blocking testosterone and taking oestrogen for smoother skin.
Anyhow the earliest anyone is going to get hormone treatment is 16, and that's in Germany for clear cases with a judge having a second look at everything. Generally it's 18. Puberty blockers don't even need to be reversed you just stop taking them and the puberty comes, side-effects from late puberty are benign and/or manageable. Like, in a risk weighting we're talking about being 2cm smaller than you could have been vs. suicide, it's not even a competition.
Wes Streeting is pro child self-harm, at least as long as those children are trans. Fucking scum
Unacceptable safety risk in trans kids feeling comfortable with who they are as human beings.
WTF puberty blockers aren't used for only trans kids. They are also used to treat precocious puberty.
That's still legal. Only banned for gender dysmorphia.
*dysphoria
different word, common mistake
That is messed up as heck.
These monsters just hate trans kids so much. TERF island strikes again.
Next they're gonna make Harry Potter mandatory reading.
Care to elaborate on the safety risks there, Wes?
While I don't agree with it's findings, there is a 388-page report this decision is based on.
that was debunked numerous times
What was the debunked? That a report exists?
The report exists, but it has so many errors, misinterpreting its own data to bend to the conclusions its authors decided they wanted to find, lots of cherry picking, and ignoring any fact inconvenient to its conclusions.
Imagine a paper that concludes that dowsing or homeopathy is good science. It's about that accurate.
If you manipulate the data, a lie will sell itself.
Also it was commissioned by the Tories, to be done by a woman who before even starting her research for the report, was clearly biased against trans people.
the entire points of the report were debunked.. like a lot
K...I started my original comment with, "While I don’t agree with it’s findings," and was responding to a comment asking for elaboration on the safety risks. I was just providing context, not stating the report was gospel-truth or anything.
Wait... are you saying you are a messenger? GET HIM!!!1111
Can you highlight the main errors of the report?
well considering the author, herself, backpeddled
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/dr-cass-backpedals-from-review-hrt
link the debunking pls
A review of the infamous CASS report:
Results from 5 uncontrolled, observational studies suggest that, in children and adolescents with gender dysphoria, gender-affirming hormones are likely to improve symptoms of gender dysphoria, and may also improve depression, anxiety, quality of life, suicidality, and psychosocial functioning. The impact of treatment on body image is unclear. All results were of very low certainty using modified GRADE
Safety outcomes were reported in 5 observational studies. Statistically significant increases in some measures of bone density were seen following treatment with gender-affirming hormones, although results varied by bone region (lumber spine versus femoral neck) and by population (transfemales versus transmales). However, z-scores suggest that bone density remained lower in transfemales and transmales compared with an equivalent cisgender population. Results from 1 study of gender-affirming hormones started during adolescence reported statistically significant increases in blood pressure and body mass index, and worsening of the lipid profile (in transmales) at age 22 years, although longer term studies that report on cardiovascular event rates are required. Adverse events and discontinuation rates associated with gender-affirming hormones were only reported in 1 study, and no conclusions can be made on these outcomes.
This document was prepared in October 2020
Evidence review (.PDF): Gender-affirming hormones for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria https://cass.independent-review.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/20220726_Evidence-review_Gender-affirming-hormones_For-upload_Final.pdf
Other reading:
Fact Check: New York Times Publishes Misleading Story On Puberty Blocker Study
Watching:
Exposing the Dangers of Anti-Trans Fascism | RE: The Cass Review & Labour's Downfall
What do they think puberty blockers do?
think
I'm gonna stop you right there, no useful thought process was involved here at all.
evil fucking bastards
Ouch.
That's not for them to decide, they're not the experts.
They are acting upon the recommendation of the largest systematic review of the evidence in the UK to date.
The plan is " to set up a clinical trial into the use of puberty blockers next year and to recruit the first patients by spring. Streeting said the study would help “establish a clear evidence base for the use of this medicine”."
Essentially, the research on this has been so polarized, the results so conflicting and the science riddled with terrible methodology etc that the government is saying "fuck it, we'll establish our own gigantic study."