Update on the puberty blockers trial

[Hoardasurass]

They're going ahead with the puberty blockers trial and it will be open to girls as young as 11 and boys from 12. So it looks like we're going to have to fight again to stop this eugenics campaign of sterilising predominantly gay and autistic children

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gift/4b3e2839923e3d87

I think she could have just not addressed it at all, and then wait to see if anyone noticed or said something about 'an omission.' It's so deliberately incongruous with the rest of the report, at least from what I have read.

Instead of deliberately leaving it out, she deliberately added it in. I can only assume she wants this experiment to proceed, for...reasons. I'd like to know what those reasons are.

Yes, i don't think she is a true believer; but she has chosen to opt for this compromised position for the reasons you suggest ( self preservation).

Or maybe unlike the fanatics and ideologues here, she accepts the reality that trans people exist, that there are people living in our society who have transitioned and are happier and healthier for it, and all of those people were children once.

I think Cass is a "mild" form of true believer - she thinks there are some children who might really benefit. And she wants to be balanced and to be seen as balanced. I wouldn't object to that if only she would put her foot down about getting positive results from the data linkage study first!

She has also gone down the "harm reduction" path, that there are parents who will deliberately get all kinds of bad medication for their children if the NHS isn't supervising them.

I don't accept any of that myself but I can see why she might, and not only for self preservation reasons. It's also because her position has obliged her to see "both sides" to focus on lack of evidence rather than seeing that lack in itself as evidence of failure.

@Zoonosis

Or maybe unlike the fanatics and ideologues here, she accepts the reality that trans people exist, that there are people living in our society who have transitioned and are happier and healthier for it, and all of those people were children once.

Please explain how you go from, "Trans people were kids once," to, "It's okay to mess with children's health and deliberately make them sick."

Does that make it right to take a healthy child and sterilise them or render them permanently unable to have a sex life? Before there's any possible chance of them knowing what they are losing?

What about the ones who will be sterilised and deprived of a sex life and later realise it was a mistake? How many damaged and highly distressed kids are worth it for one happy one? Why does the happy one matter more than them?

What about the clear evidence that many of these kids are gay and autistic and this is effectively removing them from the gene pool? What are the ethics there?

Is there really no other less harmful and less unethical way to support gender confused children?

There isn't an excuse to do this to kids.

How many damaged and highly distressed kids are worth it for one happy one? Why does the happy one matter more than them?

That's assuming that one "true trans" kid would be happy in the first place, when they would have plenty of reasons not to be. So the end result could very well be NO happy kids at all in the end. Literally zero. Kind of a huge deal.

Nobody is the opposite sex to that which they are.....and in that there is no such thing as 'trans'. What we have is people who adopt trans 'identities'. Some persist for a few years; some persist for decades.....though many desist and/or detransition, and no longer claim such an identity.

Thank-you, and goddamn

What fascinates me is that they never bother to ask just why these kids supposedly believe that they are the opposite sex when they are quite patently not the opposite sex. Just what causes so-called "gender dysphoria"? Why don't they look into that first?

The rationale for this trial is really bizarre. These kids are apparently going to find ways to get these pharmaceuticals anyway so let's at least give them to them in a "controlled way". Why not give kids cigarettes then, since they're going to get their hands on some and try smoking anyway. Or give heroin addicts heroin on the NHS? That way they can't get pure stuff - not the stuff filled with dangerous impurities - and have an eye kept on them so they don't suffocate on their vomit.

Of course. It's bollocks, and you want someone to stand up in the House and say so. I didn't hear the debate, but I guess one or two MPs did, more or less. But the machine rumbles on anyway. For all the relatively good news recently, if the trial goes ahead, it feels like a big defeat.

Yes, and Dr Cass said that some of the children getting hold of these drugs are only 11 years old. How are they managing to source them, and where are these children getting the money from? Surely they cost more than pocket money.

If it's their parents buying them, isn't that a criminal offence? Why aren't they going after the parents and the suppliers? That seems a more sensible course of action than handing out more drugs to children.

Yes!! I mean, I'd love to know if other trans people are like me, at least some of them, and what other causes might exist. It's just so weird that they go, "Okay, this disorder exists, but we won't bother figuring out how it happens." They do it for everything else, so why not that? That's just weird.

Yes, far too much focus is put on “we know what the problem is, we are just trying to establish what is the best way to fix the problem” when it’s not remotely settled what the problem actually is. No one can logically explain what is being treated.

Correct, as in, by what mechanism does a child's <insert esoteric noun here> actually get born into "the wrong body". I've been pregnant twice, and can assure anyone who needs to ask that there was only one body to pick from! So, is it some floaty entity in the atmosphere that follows pregnant women around and goes in through our ear or nose or something and settles into the zygote, only to realise months or years later that it was the wrong kind of body... honestly, obviously I'm being ridiculous but if this causes such a dreadful psychological state for so many people, to the point that laws need to be re-written, language has to change and medical and surgical intervention is required, why is there not a global panic/research response into the CAUSE of this phenomenon, rather than a piecemeal local government approach based on nothing that can be scientifically verified.

There are numerous parents touting their 'trans children' around on social media, as part of their attention seeking personal brands.

I suspect that is largely down to those who have been most effective in pushing the idea of an innate gender identity - and that is those older men who have, since childhood, been cross dressing. Cross dressing tends to start in childhood.
These men now say " I've always known I was trans, since childhood". The problem for them is that once you go past male puberty it becomes exceptionally difficult to 'pass' as a woman.

There is also, I suspect, a movement of men who are 'interested' in children - often in boys...but not excxlusively in boys, girls too. The girls, though, are largely irrelevent casualties; mostly young 'gender' non conforming lesbians. I suggest most young same sex attracted people developed some degree of cross sex identification as children.

I suggest most young same sex attracted people developed some degree of cross sex identification as children.

I remember reading (although I can't remember the source) that boys who want be girls (before puberty) often grow up to be gay, but there is no similar correlation with sexuality for girls who want to be boys.

Most middle-aged male transitioners are heterosexual. If this starts in childhood with crossdressing then crossdressing must be something different from a cross sex identification.

Definitely!

I wasn't suggesting that the cross dressing element are the same cohort as the gay cohort. As we know, most male transitioners are now of the heterosexual/AGP variety - but I do think child transition has been mostly pushed by this cohort of men - because they started off cross dressing in childhood. They then spin the narrative around that practice into " I've known i was trans since childhood"

Although, of course, a lot of gay male culture revolves around drag - which is literally men cross dressing and assuming a 'feminine' identity.

I was attracted to girls from before my teens. Don't ever remember thinking I was a boy. When I first started to go to clubs etc it was still the dark ages the time when lesbians were supposed to signal it by DMs and short haircuts and women who looked too feminine were viewed with suspicion, but they were very much women who loved women, with no interest in men at all.

I'd think it's been the more modern strict coding of toys/clothes/stereotypes and the fear of having to grow up a woman in this society that has pushed girls towards trying to identify away from their reality.

Look at how things have gone in Canada in the name of pursuing 'harm reduction': in British Columbia drug use and drug deaths are increased and in other parts of Canada disabled people have been offered euthanasia rather than adaptations to their home to help them live independently.

Did you ever feel you identified more with boys, or preferred male company - even if you didn't actively want to be a boy?

Research data shows that gender questioning children are more likely to desist than continue. The Cass Review observed early studies suggested that in a minority (approximately 15%) of pre-pubertal children presenting with gender incongruence, this persisted into adulthood. The majority of these children became same-sex attracted, cisgender adults. A review of the literature (Ristori & Steensma, 2016) noted that later studies (Drummond et al., 2008; Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis, 2015; Wallien et al., 2008) also found persistence rates of 10-33% in cohorts who had met formal diagnostic criteria at initial assessment, and had longer follow-up periods.

Furthermore, results from a Finish Registry study published in April 2026 showed that continuing along a medical pathway carries risks. “Severe psychiatric morbidity is common among gender-referred adolescents and appears to be more prevalent in those referred after the recent surge in referrals. Psychiatric needs do not subside after medical gender reassignment.”

More children will be harmed than benefit by any analysis. They don't know which will persist. That is before the question whether PB's are harmful or helpful even if they could 100% know which children would persist.

Honestly, not in the slightest.