Parents of ”trans kids”: Puberty Blockers. Part 5

Featured

This is part six of a series looking at parents who all, bar one, believe they have a “transgender” child. Details of the funding are in part one. Oxford University is one sponsor. Mermaids are an advisor. Link to the series is here:

Parents of “Trans” kids: Series 2

This research is published on a website called healthtalk.org. You can find the link to this section here: 👇

Parents views on Puberty Blockers

What you will not find on the page about puberty blockers are the detailed, critical comments of one of the parents “Elijah”. This matters because anyone accessing this page will not see a parent detailing why he opposes puberty blockers or cross sex hormones, for under 18’s. I will insert his comments, in full, at the end.

Note that the web-site uses opposite sex pronouns throughout. I will not be doing so.

First up is repetition of the lie that puberty blockers merely ”pause” puberty and are reversible. The NHS, eventually, had to revise their guidance to explain that we are not clear of all the impacts of using puberty blockers. Sex hormones play a crucial role in brain maturation which continues to around the age of 25. Some known impacts, of puberty blockers, are lowering of IQ scores and negative impact on bone density.

It is also worth noting that some leading figures at WPATH have broken ranks, to sound a note of caution, over their use. You can read about this here:

Sloppy Care

Here is a clip from that piece. Taken from an interview with Abigail Shrier, author of Irreversible Damage.

Yes, you read that correctly “permanent sexual dysfunction”

Richard shares his thought processes about blocking puberty for his son.

Here he talks about the importance of timing of the intervention in relation to penis size. This is because the standard method of creating what is called a ”neo-vagina” which requires sufficient ”material” to invert for the surgery. {Anyone familiar with the poster child for puberty blockers, Jazz Jennings, will be familiar with the surgicalcomplications that followed because of his micro penis}. We start puberty blockers as young as age 10 in the U.K. It is estimated a penis reaches adult size between the ages of 18 and 21. The main pre-occupation in starting puberty blockers seems to be aesthetic, for males. For females early interventions seem less desirable, even adopting a ”trans-narrative” stance since they will stunt growth. Given that testosterone packs one hell of a punch on female bodies, even if taken later, it seems counter-intuitive to push early intervention in females, for reasons of ”passing”.

The parents all seem to believe they are simply giving their children time to think without the pressure of pubertal development. Unfortunately many clinicians believe it is the process of puberty that may resolve ”gender identity issues”. Blocking puberty may also be denying these children/teens any chance of a life without medical dependence. Also worth pointing out, to these parents, that at least 98% proceed to take cross sex hormones which suggests they don’t provide space for exploration but commence them on an irreversible trajectory.

One argument put forward for blocking puberty is to stop breast growth and thus avoid an unnecessary double mastectomy. Breast growth typically starts between the ages of 9-11 but it is not unusual for growth to start earlier. Here Georgina makes that argument. It is worth noting that many, maybe most, teenage girls struggle with their developing breasts and feeling “down” is not rare.

Oonagh is the one who introduces the idea to her son, who is pre-pubertal. Leigh is very certain that her son won’t change his mind but again peddles the myth that they merely provide “breathing space”. As I said earlier, at least 98% will progress to cross-sex hormones and will be sterile. Not infertile. Sterile. Children as young as 10 are taking this step, in the U.K, it is even earlier in the United States. Oonagh’s son seems unable to even utter the words ”penis” or ”testicles” using language which suggests a lack of maturity.

Here there is a short section on the consent process. Both parent and child signal their agreement to this process. This child has accessed blockers less than a year since “coming out”. 👇

The parents are, in this way, made complicit with the process. In an earlier piece I covered a Tavistock employee who explained why family involvement was important, from the perspective of the clinic. This is Dr. Aiden Kelly speaking publicly about why they involve parents in decisions about puberty blockers. Its because they don’t ”know” which ones will benefit, with any certainty.

Here Dr Kelly also admits they just do not have the evidence base and points out we don’t have any long term follow up.

You can read my full piece on Dr Kelly here:

Dr Adrian Kelly

Here is Leigh talking about her foster daughter, Now on hormone blockers. She describes the process for accessing them ”surprisingly smooth”. Later we will learn that the Social Worker colluded with this decision.

Ali is not happy at the amount of time it took to get her son on blockers.

Richard had some concerns about puberty blockers and the lack of long term data, his son, however, has now been approved to take them. He hopes the increase in “transgender” children will lead to more research. {Call me old-fashioned but should we not have the research before we massively increase the young people we medicate?}.

Elijah thinks the administration of puberty blockers is based on “bad science”. {Where’s Ben Goldacre when you need him?}?

Conversely, Mel felt the NHS were not ”trans-positive” enough. She feels the psychologists take a too questioning approach. Mel, however, is finding it necessary to develop strategies to cooe with the side-effects of the hormones.

I will leave you with Elijah’s critique of hormone blockers.

If you want to read more on puberty blockers, I did a series. You can access this here:

Puberty Blockers

You can support my work here. All donations gratefully received.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s rights, gay rights and the harms of the Gender medico-industrial complex.

£10.00

Bob Withers: Medicalising distress.

This is part 3 on an excellent paper by Bob Withers.

You can read parts one and two here:

Bob Withers: Series.

Why are we treating distress by blocking puberty, prescribing cross-sex hormones and surgeries? Not only are we ignoring the underlying issues we are creating new, medical, issues for this vulnerable group. Below are the kind of co-morbidities which exist within this group now labelled as ”transgender”. Underlying issues are left untreated by this rush to label these kids as “trans” and medicalise their distress. We have had medical fads before and are now, uncritically, assuming these psychological problems as the state of being ”transgender”. This is a label of convenience, which just happens to make pharmaceutical companies a lot of money.

This diagnosis is encouraged by trans-activists who believe they are supporting a new civil rights issue. Children are also being bombarded by trans-ideology by broadcasters, like the BBC and purported children’s charities like the NSPCC, via ChildLine. Our kids follow YouTube influencers and can easily find out how to access drugs by learning a script. The script may include invented childhood histories, real or claimed self-harming and suicide threats. These stories are replete with reinterpretations of the past and may include the phrase ”authentic self” accompanied by unverifiable claims to feel like the opposite sex. Using these phrases it is all too easy to obtain drugs from a credulous, or cowed, medical profession. These drug pushers have either imbibed the propaganda, or are operating a profitable sideline. A decade long campaign has removed any meaningful ”gatekeeping” , exposing our kids to having their bodies mined, for profit, by an unscrupulous industry. Finding a therapist who does not ”affirm” your child is nigh on impossible.

Big Pharma!

This is where it starts to get sinister. In the previous blog Pfizer pharmaceuticals were funding a conference hosted at the Tavistock gender clinic. Here we discover that Ferrings Pharmaceuticals are funding studies on the drugs they are making massive profits from!

I did a bit of digging on the Electoral Commission’s superb database. Heres the headline figure from donations made, by Ferring pharmaceuticals to the Liberal Democrats.

Here’s a screen shot of the list. That entire sum went to the LibDems!

Denton’s Document

Withers is referring to the Denton’s document, below, which outlines the strategy for making sure laws are passed to embed gender identity ideology in legislation. This document was a collaboration between a trans lobby group (IGLYO), the Thomson Reuters Foundation and the worlds largest law firm. I blogged about that, sinister, document here:

That Denton’s Document

Follow the money

He is not wrong about the profits to be made. This is just for puberty blockers. Note also that the courts shut down one profitable market, for corruption! Are our kids the new market? You, bet they are.

Consider the profits to be made by lifelong dependence on cross-sex hormones? Throw in the surgeries and look at the predictions from GM Insights. This tells investors where to head to make big money. You can read the preview of their report here: 👇

It’s an Industry


Here they project the compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of these surgeries. Anything above 15% is regarded as a good return. Government policy is integral to the growth of this “market”. We are fostering a bodily disassociative disorder for profit!

Here they are estimating the market. They are leveraging the distress of our youth for billion dollar returns.

They do bury this information in the footnotes.

A stark warning.

I will end with this blog with a chilling prediction from the author. My next piece will stay with this paper but cover the section on detransition.

 

I do this full-time and unwaged. If you are able to support my work you can do so here. All donations gratefully received. I am due a bill of £240 to renew this site.

Researching gender identity ideology and it’s harms to women’s rights and gay rights.

£10.00

Bob Withers. Puberty Blockers. 2

Featured

Part two looking at the work of Bob Withers.

You can read part one here:

Bob Withers: Autogynephilia. 1

This part of the paper deals with blocking puberty in children who we have decided are “transgender”. These are powerful drugs and are not licensed for the purpose of halting puberty in healthy children. (They have been used for a condition known as precocious puberty). They have been billed as harmless and reversible. This not true. Little is known about the long term effects but the impact on bone density is documented. This can lead to osteoporosis. This is also a treatment used to treat prostate cancer and to chemically castrate sex offenders.

Withers quotes the work of Michael Biggs on puberty suppression. I covered that in this post :

TAVISTOCK 4 : Michael Biggs

Even for precocious puberty, where we do have data, blocking puberty resulted in a drop in IQ. Most of this data, scant though it is, is mainly about females, who are more likely to experience, or be medically treated for, the condition. There is, therefore, less data on males.

I find this, personally, terrifying because doctors have prescribed these drugs to my son and brain maturation relies on sex based hormones; which are being blocked. The medical profession are acquiescing in this treatment despite the lack of research.

Bob describes attending a conference about the “Science of Gender” , at the Tavistock. Note, this conference was funded by Pfizer pharmaceuticals! Withers references two speakers. Notice the role of sex hormones in brain development. I looked up Professor Blakemore. You can find a presentation she did on YouTube for The Royal Institution. What struck me about her talk was how little we know about the processes involved in brain development. Despite this lack of knowledge we are experimenting with pubertal development in children/adolescents.

{As a side issue I notice the myelination of nerve pathways occurs during this period. Damage to myelination sheaths occurs in multiple sclerosis and there is some research showing males who take exogenous female hormones are seven times as likely to develop multiple sclerosis. I will blog about this, when I get chance}.

Another speaker gave a talk on puberty blockers given to sheep. 👇. Cognition is impacted and this persists even a year after stopping taking them.

You can access this paper here. 👇

Puberty Blockers in sheep

A pause? 

As you can see the claim puberty is only “paused” is not borne out by the data. Children put on puberty blocking drugs invariably progress to cross sex hormones. Historic data, prior to this early medical intervention, saw most desist, and turn out to be gay males or lesbians, by the way. I am skeptical in respect of the claim, made below, this is due to superior diagnostic techniques. Those of us with children /teens who claim a transgender identity know they learn a script to make sure they get access to hormones.

This is a poorly evidenced medical response to kids struggling with gender identity issue. Many of them are gay, some autistic, kids in the care system are over-represented at gender clinics, as are females more generally.

Looks a lot like eugenics.

In part three I will look at the same paper which explores how society is treating distress by administering drugs and the drug companies who are profiting. If you are able to support my work you can do so here. I will keep my content free but I do this full-time and unwaged and I have an annual bill of £240 coming up to renew this blog.

Researching Gender Identity Ideology and it’s impact on women’s and gay rights and the unnecessary medication of children/teens who are struggling with gender identity issues.

£10.00

TAVISTOCK 4 : Michael Biggs

665A1C9E-6117-4E00-84B7-EF9442EA5791Michael has been indomitable in his research into the use of puberty blockers on, ever younger, children.  Michael is an Oxford University academic who researches social movements and ordinary people, driven to extraordinary actions.  He also researches self-harm as a form of social protest.   An interesting background. As you will see from his paper he was told by some woke students to Educate Himself.  So he did! Here’s what he uncovered.

As always I am happy for you to bypass my commentary and access the paper directly  here.  Either way I recommend reading the full paper.

PDF attached in case his work is taken down: Biggs_ExperimentPubertyBlockers

The pressure, on the Tavistock, Gender Identity Service (GIDs) to introduce earlier intervention is well documented.  For neophytes you can can see the tensions, between Tavistock staff  & Lobbyists, in this oral evidence to the Transgender Equality Inquiry.  here.  With contributions from Susie Green, of Mermaids, and Bernadette Wren, of the Tavistock.

The aim of Trans Activists was to get “The Dutch Protocol” embedded in Tavistock practice. This protocol advocated earlier intervention, seen as the key to a more passing  Trans Community.  Blocking puberty was one way to do this, since it halted the process of masculinisation/feminisation.  Publicly Blockers were touted as merely allowing a delay to explore gender identity issues. Based on research this would seem to be pure Public Relations. 

The paper goes into some detail on the activists involved in the campaign to institute this changed treatment protocol.  One of the familiar names is Stephen Whittle.  Whittle is a transman and has played a key role in instituting Transgender Ideology. The best way to pass as a man, it would appear, is to be to behave like the most regressive mysogynist and attack women’s rights. Below are some other key figures together with groups which provided funding.  ( I did a double take at the Servite Sisters! My Uncle was a Servite Brother; which is a Catholic order. Sure enough, it’s a Charity run by Catholic Nuns. Why would Catholic nuns fund blocking puberty?)

05579902-E722-4410-8475-548EF0E10749E25EB18D-E05E-4BF0-B0BB-BC45C0D057ED

Norman Spack was involved in the treatment of Susie Green’s child.  Susie is now the head of Mermaids, the leading UK charity advocating for medicalising children. Parents with children, who have been through this process, are evangelical in their zeal to extend this to other children. I suspect the motivation is to reassure themselves they did the right thing.   The over-investment of older Trans activists, for early transition, looks like retrospective wish fulfilment.

9F4CD2FF-D2FA-4722-956A-42E7FABB46EA

As stated above the argument for puberty blockers had mainly been promulgated as a “pause”  providing a, temporary, halt to the development of sexual characteristics.  So what happened in the Dutch study?  We know that the Tavistock were aware of this study but they didn’t include this fact in their bid for funding and ethical approval. No adolescent withdrew from puberty suppression and all started cross-sex hormone treatment, the first step of  actual gender reassignment (de Vries, Steensma, Doreleijers, et al., 2010) Source. 

Biggs paper highlights the discrepancies in the statements from GIDS clinicians on Puberty Blockers as a pause.  He even highlights near contemporaneous, and contradictory,  statements on the topic.  See Polly Carmichael, from the Children’s BBC programme, I am Leo, juxtaposed with a statement she gave to the Guardian at around the same time. “We just don’t have the evidence…”

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Ultimately Polly Carmichael got her wish. The Gender Identity Development Service eventually received ethical approval to administer Puberty Blockers to children.   A first attempt was rejected but, undeterred, the application was made again. This time the Tavistock chose to submit the application to a different ethical approval body.  It was then approved. The initial study was based on participants  from 12 years old. However the  evidence  suggests the actual age of commencement can be as young as 10. [See Michael’s paper for how he deduced this.  Also Dr Aiden Kelly admitting this in my earlier piece TAVISTOCK PART THREE (A)]

4FC886F5-C503-46C3-B6E2-1146D4A1F871

The paper illustrates how Tavistock accounts of the actual number of subjects involved have varied. The figure of 44 does not remain constant .  This matters because one of the failings in much of the research, in this field, is a failure to follow up patients long term.  Biggs traces the various numbers used in the public reporting on the study.  Damningly, despite being the custodian of the research project,  the Tavistock does not appear to be keeping adequate records on the experimental subjects or taking the opportunity to rectify the dearth of long term follow-up studies.  A missed opportunity or a deliberate attempt at obfuscation?  Dr Carmichael admits that they lose contact with subjects once referred, at age 18 to the adult services.  She also admits that they have not tracked those given hormone blockers in a single database! Thus the medium and long term consequences are not being tracked.  Despite this look at the growth in numbers being given this treatment and the reduction in the age at commencement.  Moreover changes to names and NHS numbers also make it difficult to track those on the receiving end of this experiment. ⇓⇓⇓.  All set out in the clips below. 

949784BF-E619-47A0-8C8A-614F984C64DD82C693E8-4D02-4FBC-9173-152F03ADDDD1

Also note that almost all cases led to cross-sex hormones.  Just as in the Dutch Study. Therefore this was not a pause and, 9 years on, the Clinicians involved must know this.  Interestingly only in May 2020 did the NHS change its own guidance to stop referring to Puberty Blockers as “fully reversible”.

8E496789-5926-4290-925B-30BFA81A386D

Biggs has some significant criticisms of the project. Only one of which is the failure to meet any reasonable threshold for informed consent by not revealing the seemingly, inevitable progression to Cross Sex hormones.  He also highlights the risks of the use of the drub triptorelin,  whose negative outcomes have either been ignored or supressed.

FD48B0C9-4B68-46CD-A7BF-72272E906350There is more information, in the public domain, about the treatment of dangerous sex offenders, than there is of children put on the same drug. Let that sink in.

52C656DB-1A05-450E-8330-1EEECC0915F9

 

 

 

Below are a couple of quotes. You can read the full study here  Triptorelin.

325EE134-E310-4E7B-B6BA-D65E31250BD61E835BEF-5C8A-467D-8100-46F4C7A9D6D6

You can read a detailed list here of : Side Effects

0A8CFE51-18D1-4500-8D0F-2A38D1EFE300

More details of the impact on male children include a stunting of genitalia and negative impact on sexual function.  Given that any surgeries to create a “neo-vagina” rely on sufficient penile tissue, for the most common techniques, this is another serious concern.

A50E090A-83D5-42BB-A683-6C69EA844D51

Other damning evidence suggests a negative impact on fertility and even sexual function.

4B91A1D9-66FF-4A91-9030-0439D3BF8A22

Even from the limited evidence that GIDS has shared, mainly in Abstract Form from presentations at conferences, Biggs argues that negative outcomes have been omitted or downplayed.  Some of these relate to bone density, which should be increasing during puberty.  Others relate to reported psycho-social functioning and even suicidal thoughts.

F55E1385-EBC2-400B-B2E5-3073B15E770B5AD78E08-A236-4712-8723-34E82540B2B0

In the light of the concerns raised by the scant evidence in the public domain why has their been no detailed report over 9 years since the project commenced?  Biggs raises some serious questions about how a “research project” , instituted in 2011, has been allowed to progress to 2020 without publishing a full evaluation.

48B57AD7-306C-4AF3-BF99-7B5E8BBDAC04E99C2C93-7EB9-4ED9-A15C-6385D2A798C1

Increasing media coverage and the beginnings of political scrutiny may finally be about to shine a spotlight on this experimental treatment.  Currently there is an ex-patient, Keira Bell, in the process of taking the Tavistock to Judicial Review over the medical intervention she received.  The Safeguarding Lead is to take the Tavistock to court after being informed that safeguarding information was being deliberately withheld from her. Another former member of staff , Susan Evans, commenced legal action over the treatment of children.  The Cass Review will look at Puberty Blockers on behalf of NICE. Liz Truss has signalled a change of direction over the treatment of under 18’s.

More politicians are also waking up to this issue.

An Ex- Labour peer, and Doctor of Medicine, Lord Moonie, has been raising issues on the medicalisation of kids and the impact on women’s spaces for well over a year. (Banned from twitter & resigned from Labour over this issue.)  Latterly a Conservative MP , Jackie Doyle-Price has begun to speak up.  Baroness Nicholson another Conservative Peer has been a tour de force in raising issues about the creeping influence of Gender Identity Ideology.  Another Medically trained peer, Lord Lucas raised a question in the House of Lords in May 2019.

2726D36A-B466-4EFF-9A87-80AA73C270961436A7BF-1D03-4AC3-901F-3857EE13D099

At the time of that question we were told the data would be available in the next 12 months.  We have heard that before.  However Lord Lucas is on the case and assured me he intends to follow this up.

94999E8D-C6E8-45B8-8F3E-526F452FF5FA

Michael acknowledges the support he had in putting this document together which I include here: 991912D2-F98F-4DC7-AA4F-D9383DBBB3EA

I will leave you with the original patient who triggered the establishment of The Dutch Protocol in the early 1990’s.  2B3693F3-297D-443B-92AE-CB54E31CC72B

Patient B has been followed all the way up to age 35.  One would assume that the outcome would have been positive and indeed patient B is highlighted as a success.   Indeed they say they do not regret their transition.  This does not look like a good outcome to me and I fear we will have many more before someone, finally, halts this experiment.   Allow me to also make the observation that if were talking about a biological male there is no way an absence of a healthy sex life would be regarded as positive.

A01AC7DF-6CC7-4CD3-B450-5E0A77E65015

Puberty Blockers: Part Two

Endocrine Society and the case for Puberty Blockers.

For my second post I will look at an article which, on balance,  advocates for an affirmative approach for children/teenagers with Gender Dysphoria. Endocrine News

Historically the treatment, for children, was to watch and wait.  The medical consensus indicated that the majority resolve gender identity issues, following puberty. In the light of this research  the treatment protocol was to defer medical intervention.   An overview of some of the research, advocating for this approach,  is contained in this article:  Critique of the American Association of Paediatrics.

Over the last decade, however, the sector has moved to an affirmative model of care which holds that discordance between biological sex and gender identity is a biologically based phenomenon. The condition of Gender Dysphoria is no longer regarded as a psychological phenomenon. We are told  one can be “born in the wrong body”  and the phrase “assigned fe/male at birth” is in widespread use, even by medical practitioners. This ideological shift  underpins a revision  to how we treat children presenting with issues of Gender Identity. Medical intervention, according to this theory, is merely confirming a biological fact. This necessitates aligning the physical body to an, assumed, opposite sex brain.

Despite the overall thrust in favour of early intervention the article does  raise some interesting ethical dilemmas and  makes some, albeit limited, reference to opposing clinical views.   The language used, however, talks of “biological gender” rather than “biological sex” which serves to reinforce belief in the biological underpinning for the condition. 👇

D9054923-0696-4DE1-B036-B2CB1CFD7870

Notice also the sleight of hand that presents puberty blockers as a “delay” and a device to “buy time”.   {Later on in the piece it seems  clear that we are not simply delaying or pausing puberty, watch the language shift}2F2853F7-D2AC-44F6-9DD6-0B5A6B7626BBNorman Spack was the person involved in the high profile, early transition, of the child of, Mermaids founder Susie Green.  The last sentence is indicative of the number clinicians feeling wary, or ill-equipped to practice in this field.  The effect of this reluctance, arguably, leaves the discipline dominated by those with a particular zeal to work in this area. Are those clinicians more likely to adhere to biological theories of its aetiology? Are the treatments advocated then more likely to  follow an affirmative pathway? Most practitioners I encounter, who work in this field, do seem to subscribe to a “born in the wrong body” narrative which, I would contest,  deeply influences their approach to practice. Do we have enough variety of approaches in the  Gender Identity specialists, working with Gender Dysphoric children /teens?

So what vidence is there for the  claims of a biological origin for “transgenderism” ? There is research showing a much higher incidence of transsexuals in identical twins than in fraternal twins. 👇 The figure of 40% has been critiqued, but do we even need to cast doubt on this figure? Wouldn’t we expect it to be at least closer to 100% if the cause is biological & not cultural/ environmental? 

E8E76E24-1998-4945-9DDE-984B75C3605E

The research relies on the, hugely contested, notion of female brain versus male brain. The article below raises some questions about the nature of the research, the lack of  consistent outcomes and limited understanding of the effects of cross-sex hormones on the brain, or the impact of neuroplasticity. I think it is a fair conclusion to say the jury is still out  but here is one study: The Transgender Brain . 

69EC03B3-77D1-4097-8BEF-63DC7CD4C8FF

Clearly there are divergent views but irrespective of those espousing the idea of conflicting “brain sex” the fact remains  we do not have a diagnostic tool to “prove”  anyone, presenting with Gender Dysphoria, has a biological condition. In the absence of definitive, diagnostic criteria are we confident that early intervention is the best course of action?   Especially in the context of historically high rates of desistance from a trans-identity? Ken Zucker has worked in this field for decades and is also quoted in the article.

973C32A8-5BD2-4B13-826B-6884812D8E91

Not only are we looking at an average of 80% desistance rates there is also a high correlation between those that desist but many will mature  into gay males or lesbians. Are we being cautious enough?  The level of  desistance rates  is often disputed but it has been a consistent finding that the majority desisted even if you reject the figure of 80%. There are legitimate criticisms of the data on persistence /desistance. Loss to follow up is one.  Patients who cease to engage with service providers may be desisters or, as is argued, they may have moved to other providers.  De-transitioners are pretty consistent in saying they would not return to the very professionals who were complicit in their medicalisation/surgery so this has to form at least part of the “loss to follow-up” population. I have covered some of these critiques in part one.  Here a pro-affirmation practitioner raises caution about a too swift diagnosis even though, as they make clear, they are proponent of a “hard-wired” transgender identity. 

7DDABD2C-893C-453D-B03D-AC0E65A36B63726A78C5-CE14-4D4D-AE2A-940D9AD6B80EIt is clear, to me, this is a contentious area and furthermore that there is no consensus on a biological basis for Gender Dysphoria. However, if as I contend, the “hard-wired” belief is  widely accepted by the sector  it will have an impact on clinical approaches. It follows that identifying this population early is believed to  allow swift intervention to ameliorate present, or anticipated, distress.  It appears to be a widely, and fervently, held,  view, that it is necessary to block puberty and administer cross sex hormones at ever younger ages. A more recently advanced justification, in this paper, is that blocking puberty reduces the need for later surgery and, makes it easy for the Transgender child to conform to norms for their target sex.

681A8424-194E-4A51-BB8A-DBCFE2E5385F30985768-CBD2-4A66-B8AE-38511C5D8D30

The move to earlier medicalisation, for gender dysphoric children is a) conditional on a belief it is biologically based b) that we can identify this population with a degree of accuracy. I reiterate: we currently do not have a reliable, medical method of testing any biological markers for innate gender /sex incongruence.   In the UK we can start puberty blocking at age 12.  Spack advocates for age 10-12 for girls and 12-14 for boys.  This prevents development along expected lines so the idea is that we halt masculinisation in boys and feminising effects in females.  We halt female breast development and promote greater height and, do the opposite to males. Yet the very phrase “puberty-blockers” gives an impression of a targeted intervention when we actually don’t know what other impact these drugs  have.

7FD75291-7B35-4B16-85C4-7FF40BAF7FC6

Notice above that we are not talking about a “delay” or a “pause” we are now talking about “prevent pubertal progression”.  That is a change of language that matters.  If we are right we are preventing something that is undesirable. If we are wrong…..

89F3A0A0-028A-4495-88E5-15D91072F497

The article continues and references the , by now well documented, change in the sex ratios in those presenting with Gender Dysphoria.  This shift cannot be explained by an underlying biological basis unless argued, as it is, that we are now more accepting of Transgender communities which enables more girls to come out. As many of us  have highlighted there does seem to be a dearth of middle-aged women suddenly discovering their authentic selves.   I have not seen any research which questions why there are so many older males and an almost complete absence of late transitioning in the female sex.   I am also not sure that Butch lesbians would concur that there is widespread acceptance of “masculine” women as is argued below.

5741A5E9-FC5D-4065-A233-DCB81512C1C2

What we are talking about below is removal of the testes or ovaries, womb, inversion of the penis and creation of a facsimile or neo-vagina. The proponents of this tend to use medical or euphemistic language to soften what they are actually undertaking.  Hence we have the prevalence of “top surgery” crowd funders which do not use the terminology of “double mastectomy”.

50F3102B-9A92-472C-9A99-6F7AEAE78937 Spack’s own policy is that patients must have the support of “both custodial parents”.  That phrase jumped out because we are starting to see cases of parental disagreement and the non-custodial parent is omitted from this statement. He also states that there must be a referral letter that confirms there is no other co-morbidities.  I know from my own reading that this is not the case with many of the cases I have followed.  I have seen diagnosis of Border Line Personality Disorder and Schizophrenia described as “coincidental” to the Gender Dysphoria.  This is often accompanied with a demand to respect the bodily autonomy of those with mental health conditions. Here is a letter sent by Dr James Barret to the London Review of books which confirms that mental health conditions, of a most serious nature, are not a barrier to treatment:

8DC47DE5-5A41-4664-9F24-18EE4D3209DC

Norman Spack , on the other hand, states that severe psychopathology must be ruled out before commencing treatment:

7AC6F402-9FB3-451E-AFA6-90751D027189

Below we are told that there is no “litmus test before Tanner 2 puberty”.  Also it is also revealed that those who go onto puberty blockers don’t desist.  I have seen Dutch research that confirm a 100%, of those on puberty blockers,  don’t reconcile to their biological sex, and do go onto cross-sex hormones.  Here is that  Dutch Study

7B1087DA-D74E-41BF-A6AC-B25607F038ED

GnRH analogues appear to be pretty fast acting.  What this means for these adolescents is that they are left in a “prepubertal” state and out of step with their cohort.  Again we are told they are “reversible” but of course all of that is a moot point if, as the Dutch study illustrates, most don’t desist once they have embarked on medical intervention.

604EC972-795D-4ABA-8BD0-C6B5C77E7A43

Here is a clear statement that the price that will be paid is “infertility”.   I have lost count of the number of people who have , not always politely, accused me of lying about this and here we have it confirmed.  Of course it is difficult to have a conversation with a 12 year old about infertility and for them to understand what they are giving up.  Ironically there was , quite rightly, outrage from the Trans Community, at those countries that made sterilisation a pre-condition for their treatment.  Yet on this type of sterilisation transactivists have been resolutely silent. (Though there are adult transsexuals who have expressed concern about youth medicalisation).

4696C6A3-58C1-484B-9004-BF36531D9D607AC75242-C3DE-4BEE-91CB-9ADE1C9943E5Here is a risk benefit analysis which again promotes the benefits of earlier intervention.  Yes. Cancer is a risk.  Yet we can simply surgically remove the at risk organs.  And of course appropriately sized breasts has to be a priority!

8F700E9C-95F3-41F9-93B5-28A13560E11A531382CC-11A1-42F8-AAD6-7A09C4DA81A5

It is true that puberty blockers have been used for precocious puberty for decades. This research mainly covers girls who are more prone to early onset puberty or, perhaps, more likely to be medicalised. Even whilst claiming the safety of puberty blockers for this group of patients it is admitted that we are still not clear if the same applies to “transgender” patients.

1BD724F1-4676-401E-AC29-EBEDB23F9836Furthermore it is also not quite true that there are no dissenting voices about the safety of the treatment.  Adverse outcomes: Puberty Blockers.  

Also note that this patient group have a diagnosed condition.  We do not have a diagnostic tool for the transgender patient group.  Furthermore , there is a dearth of males in the first cohort so limited research on this group.

The article concludes with this statement.  I am not reassured. Not at all.

D2AEBF12-A557-4804-89B3-5C808B11EFB8

 

Puberty Blockers. Part One

Puberty Blockers are promoted as an ideal way to allow your child to “pause” puberty whilst undergoing gender identity confusion.  This is the consistent stance taken by “experts” in the field. This appears to have been taken on trust by the medical establishment and is now embedded within our own NHS.  Here is the GID (Gender Identity Service) statement (accessed November 9th 2019).

CE821109-9F5A-4F48-AFE6-8DBB4B61E631

Here is Polly Carmichael of the GIDS service. This is a clip from a documentary shown on Childrens BBC.  Yep that’s right.  CBBC.  Which of the parents now dealing with Gender Dysphoric kids realised this was being propagandised to our kids?  Not me.36D86977-4F65-4CD8-AF4C-2A7E48DF5E3F

Originally this blog had a link to Becoming Leo but it has now been removed. It was  here Becoming Leo: CBBC 

Yet when you access the service spec which GIDS work to you actually get this rather contradictory information.  Seems that they *know* that far from a “pause” it actually sets these kids on an irreversible path to “gender affirmation surgery”. FFA66A0C-0623-498D-9CE7-0817BE2648E0You can access this document here: Service Specification

So my question is why, if they know 100% go onto a medicalised pathway, are they still saying this allows for a “pause”?  It isn’t new information.  So what else do we know about puberty blockers?  Here is the outcome of an investigation into a GIDS research programme that puts children on puberty blockers as young as age 12.  The Health Research Authority conducted an investigation into the research programme after concerns had been raised. The full report can be accessed here:HRA Report on GIDS

For the purposes of this blog the pertinent admission is here 

B3BFC722-7DCD-4251-A761-4DD11F9F76B3

We have moved from “pause” to very careful selection of the group who are “likely” to progress.  This sleight of hand diverts scrutiny from the role puberty has, formerly, played in resolving Gender Dysphoria.  Historically it was the actual changes that occurred during puberty that resolved the dysphoria and allowed re-identification with biological sex.  Stopping puberty means 100% go on  lifelong dependence on cross-sex hormones and significant surgery.  Something noted by key researchers in this field. Its even worse. Most of these youngsters, if left alone, would grow up to be Gay Males or Lesbians.

2F47DB4D-D65F-4654-BEF1-B3F70F9A3F31D6E8FB85-F3CF-4A53-9F09-D77FCBA36132

Here is a youtube which goes through all the Long Term Studies that look at persistence versus desistance rates. .  It looks at the methodology in cluding the problematic aspects. Lack of control groups, changes in diagnostic criteria for Gender Identity Disorder (now Gender Dysphoria), loss to follow up in the studies and small sample size. Desistance rates

Despite all the caveats to the studies the incontrovertible fact is that the majority desist.  IF, crucially, they are left to go through a natural puberty.

This article covers much of the same studies and comes to the same conclusion. Trans Kids.

Pertinent quote 4F5449E2-406E-4766-BAC7-813863E0613D

Here is a professor who asks the question we all need to be asking.  Watch here: Are we medicalising away the Gay?

9AAEBE78-2449-4E00-B2BE-9351E9599D90

I will leave part-one here and follow up with a detailed look at two studies. These raise serious  questions on the evidence base on which the treatment protocols are based.  A child who has puberty blockers followed by cross-sex hormones will be sterile.  We know, historically, most were same sex oriented and we also know that there is, currently, an over-representation of autistic kids caught up in a trans-identity.

Is this the Woke Gay /Autistic Eugenics?

You can support my work here: 

 

D9802021-1296-45B8-9A3F-5D53ED0421B9

Researching Gender Identity Ideology, the impact on women’s rights and the biggest medical scandal this century

£10.00