6 ms·

No permanent side effects? Risks of puberty blockers include compromise bone development, underdeveloped genitals, and infertility. I don't know where you're cl

No permanent side effects? Risks of puberty blockers include compromise bone development, underdeveloped genitals, and infertility. I don't know where you're claiming that they're the "opposite of unproved and ill-advised". Using synthetic hormones to block puberty in adolescents and pre-teens is something that's only been done in the last decade or so. Most publications indicate that the safety is far from certain, due to the limited amount of time that these drugs have been used [1]. The potential benefit of puberty blockers is that it potentially makes children who transition to the opposite sex more aesthetically similar to that sex. But since the majority of people who identify as transgender as children desist [2] (they eventually identify as their sex at birth) many are going to endure the risks of puberty blockers for no benefit. 1. https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/4/e20182162 https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/142/4/e201821... 2. https://www.kqed.org/futureofyou/441784/the-controversial-research-on-desistance-in-transgender-youth https://www.kqed.org/futureofyou/441784/the-controversial-re...

DuskStar 7y ago
Thank you for providing elaboration here!
tptacek 7y ago
Your comment makes a bunch of strong claims and backs them up with research results that appear to say the opposite thing. For instance: the American Academy of Pediatrics report you've cited is supportive of puberty blockers, and cites as sources other reports noting that they've been used safely for decades. If these are your best sources, the conclusion I draw is that your argument is weak.
- manfredo 7y ago
  You originally claimed that "All a puberty blocker does is delay the onset of puberty" and that they "have no permanent effects that require reversal". From the pediatrics journal I cited: > Pubertal suppression is not without risks. Delaying puberty beyond one’s peers can also be stressful and can lead to lower self-esteem and increased risk taking. Some experts believe that genital underdevelopment may limit some potential reconstructive options. Research on long-term risks, particularly in terms of bone metabolism and fertility, is currently limited and provides varied results. Not only are there health risks, some of the potential damage is irreversible. Your above comment is completely dismissive of the health risks of puberty blockers. Whether or not the user puberty blockers is ethical is a question of whether compromising the health of the majority of children that display gender dysphoria but eventually identify with their birth sex versus blocking secondary sex characteristics to provide a more aesthetically pleasing body for the minority that do follow through with gender reassignment. While the study does ultimately support the use of puberty blockers it does so in an environment where highlighting that the majority of transgender children desist is socially unacceptable - to the point where many categorically deny that any transgender youth desist.
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Did you take the time to read any of the citations for this report, which, again, is supportive of puberty blockers and (strongly) supportive of early medical intervention for TGD patients? Or are you hanging your entire argument on "research on long-term risks is currently limited"? The report's citations are clearer, as are the other resources you'll find on puberty-blocking drugs. The medical research consensus appears to overwhelmingly support delayed puberty as a treatment strategy for TGD patients. (The "irreversability" of effects from puberty blockers is itself contentious; TGD patients given puberty blockers apparently tend not to desist, and puberty delay is followed up with cross-sex hormone treatment that can theoretically reverse bone mineralization issues; the age at which the drugs are administered is also a major variable in these studies). I've read something like 9-10 studies on this issue this afternoon and haven't found one that couldn't reasonably be described as "strong support" for GnRHa-type treatment. Can you find a credible study that isn't? All I found were things by people like Michael Laidlaw, a private practice doctor and tort expert witness who is cited more frequently in places like The Daily Wire and The Federalist than in medical journals. You can probably do better! And you need to do better than a single sentence from a long report that appears to straightforwardly and directly disagree with the thrust of your argument.
    - manfredo 7y ago
      You initially claimed that there are no effects of puberty blockers besides delaying puberty. This is not the case. You seem to be conflating support for the usage of puberty blockers with the idea that puberty blockers are safe and free of adverse side effects. These are two very different things. Those studies that endorse puberty blockers do so despite the health risks - they do not deny the existence of health risks. And lastly, while you purport to have read many studies and have asked that I provide references you have not provided a single source to support the claims you're making. Link me to a study that categorically denies the existence of adverse consequences of puberty blockers. This is what you claimed above. Finding studies that support the use of puberty blockers is not support for your claim that "All a puberty blocker does is delay the onset of puberty" and that they "have no permanent effects".

DuskStar 7y ago

Thank you for providing elaboration here!

tptacek 7y ago

Your comment makes a bunch of strong claims and backs them up with research results that appear to say the opposite thing. For instance: the American Academy of Pediatrics report you've cited is supportive of puberty blockers, and cites as sources other reports noting that they've been used safely for decades. If these are your best sources, the conclusion I draw is that your argument is weak.

manfredo 7y ago
You originally claimed that "All a puberty blocker does is delay the onset of puberty" and that they "have no permanent effects that require reversal". From the pediatrics journal I cited: > Pubertal suppression is not without risks. Delaying puberty beyond one’s peers can also be stressful and can lead to lower self-esteem and increased risk taking. Some experts believe that genital underdevelopment may limit some potential reconstructive options. Research on long-term risks, particularly in terms of bone metabolism and fertility, is currently limited and provides varied results. Not only are there health risks, some of the potential damage is irreversible. Your above comment is completely dismissive of the health risks of puberty blockers. Whether or not the user puberty blockers is ethical is a question of whether compromising the health of the majority of children that display gender dysphoria but eventually identify with their birth sex versus blocking secondary sex characteristics to provide a more aesthetically pleasing body for the minority that do follow through with gender reassignment. While the study does ultimately support the use of puberty blockers it does so in an environment where highlighting that the majority of transgender children desist is socially unacceptable - to the point where many categorically deny that any transgender youth desist.
- tptacek 7y ago
  Did you take the time to read any of the citations for this report, which, again, is supportive of puberty blockers and (strongly) supportive of early medical intervention for TGD patients? Or are you hanging your entire argument on "research on long-term risks is currently limited"? The report's citations are clearer, as are the other resources you'll find on puberty-blocking drugs. The medical research consensus appears to overwhelmingly support delayed puberty as a treatment strategy for TGD patients. (The "irreversability" of effects from puberty blockers is itself contentious; TGD patients given puberty blockers apparently tend not to desist, and puberty delay is followed up with cross-sex hormone treatment that can theoretically reverse bone mineralization issues; the age at which the drugs are administered is also a major variable in these studies). I've read something like 9-10 studies on this issue this afternoon and haven't found one that couldn't reasonably be described as "strong support" for GnRHa-type treatment. Can you find a credible study that isn't? All I found were things by people like Michael Laidlaw, a private practice doctor and tort expert witness who is cited more frequently in places like The Daily Wire and The Federalist than in medical journals. You can probably do better! And you need to do better than a single sentence from a long report that appears to straightforwardly and directly disagree with the thrust of your argument.
  - manfredo 7y ago
    You initially claimed that there are no effects of puberty blockers besides delaying puberty. This is not the case. You seem to be conflating support for the usage of puberty blockers with the idea that puberty blockers are safe and free of adverse side effects. These are two very different things. Those studies that endorse puberty blockers do so despite the health risks - they do not deny the existence of health risks. And lastly, while you purport to have read many studies and have asked that I provide references you have not provided a single source to support the claims you're making. Link me to a study that categorically denies the existence of adverse consequences of puberty blockers. This is what you claimed above. Finding studies that support the use of puberty blockers is not support for your claim that "All a puberty blocker does is delay the onset of puberty" and that they "have no permanent effects".