5 ms·

This is untrue. Puberty blockers have been in use for trans children for over 40 years now, we have lots of evidence of benefit and lots of evidence that there'

by DanBC 4y ago

This is untrue. Puberty blockers have been in use for trans children for over 40 years now, we have lots of evidence of benefit and lots of evidence that there's not much harm. We don't have randomised controlled trials, but if you don't know why we don't have those maybe you should refrain from commenting until you understand the topic a bit more.

eoops 4y ago
What about detransitioners? Most of those kids grew into adults that have been ruined for life. Knowing this, the risk of giving these drugs to kids to outright block their puberty is just too immense. Not to mention the underage surgeries some of them receive.
- kuschku 4y ago
  > What about detransitioners? Detransitioners are a tragic case, but they amount of detransitioners compared to all trans people is smaller than the amount of trans people compared to the rest of the population. If taking detransitioners into account is the primary priority of trans healthcare for you, then trans people should be an equal or larger priority in overall healthcare as well. > Not to mention the underage surgeries some of them receive. That's something that's questionable, but it's not that simple either. Cis people doing surgery against gynecomastia is the majority of underage surgeries of this type. > to outright block their puberty It's just paused. It continues as if nothing had happened the moment you stop, with no risk to the patient. Even the Cass Review argues that blockers are entirely safe for AMAB trans people. It also argues that AMAB trans people have such a small percentage of detransitioners that it's basically disregardable. If the Cass Review, a paper that was commissioned to find a way to reject healthcare for trans people, argues it's safe, you can trust it is safe.
  - eoops 4y ago
    > Even the Cass Review argues that blockers are entirely safe for AMAB trans people. It also argues that AMAB trans people have such a small percentage of detransitioners that it's basically disregardable. I've read the Interim Report, it asserts neither of these points.
    - kuschku 4y ago
      the Cass Review explicitly says "The rationale for use of puberty blockers at Tanner Stage 2 of development was based on data that demonstrated that children, particularly birth-registered boys who had early gender incongruence, were unlikely to desist once they reached early puberty" and only recommends reviewing puberty blockers for AFAB people.
      - eoops 4y ago
        Your quote misses out the part of the sentence immediately following: "this rationale does not necessarily apply to later-presenting young people, including the predominant referral group of birth-registered girls" The group referred to here is defined by being later-presenting. Female is only a subset of this. Also, Cass is just describing the rationale, not endorsing it. This is implied by the paragraph immediately following, where she discusses the paucity of data regarding potential negative effects of puberty blockers on brain maturation: "A further concern is that adolescent sex hormone surges may trigger the opening of a critical period for experience-dependent rewiring of neural circuits underlying executive function (i.e. maturation of the part of the brain concerned with planning, decision making and judgement). If this is the case, brain maturation may be temporarily or permanently disrupted by puberty blockers, which could have significant impact on the ability to make complex risk-laden decisions, as well as possible longer-term neuropsychological consequences. To date, there has been very limited research on the short-, medium- or longer-term impact of puberty-blockers on neurocognitive development." > and only recommends reviewing puberty blockers for AFAB people Cass does not make this recommendation.

by DanBC 4y ago

eoops 4y ago

What about detransitioners? Most of those kids grew into adults that have been ruined for life. Knowing this, the risk of giving these drugs to kids to outright block their puberty is just too immense. Not to mention the underage surgeries some of them receive.

kuschku 4y ago
> What about detransitioners? Detransitioners are a tragic case, but they amount of detransitioners compared to all trans people is smaller than the amount of trans people compared to the rest of the population. If taking detransitioners into account is the primary priority of trans healthcare for you, then trans people should be an equal or larger priority in overall healthcare as well. > Not to mention the underage surgeries some of them receive. That's something that's questionable, but it's not that simple either. Cis people doing surgery against gynecomastia is the majority of underage surgeries of this type. > to outright block their puberty It's just paused. It continues as if nothing had happened the moment you stop, with no risk to the patient. Even the Cass Review argues that blockers are entirely safe for AMAB trans people. It also argues that AMAB trans people have such a small percentage of detransitioners that it's basically disregardable. If the Cass Review, a paper that was commissioned to find a way to reject healthcare for trans people, argues it's safe, you can trust it is safe.
- eoops 4y ago
  > Even the Cass Review argues that blockers are entirely safe for AMAB trans people. It also argues that AMAB trans people have such a small percentage of detransitioners that it's basically disregardable. I've read the Interim Report, it asserts neither of these points.
  - kuschku 4y ago
    the Cass Review explicitly says "The rationale for use of puberty blockers at Tanner Stage 2 of development was based on data that demonstrated that children, particularly birth-registered boys who had early gender incongruence, were unlikely to desist once they reached early puberty" and only recommends reviewing puberty blockers for AFAB people.
    - eoops 4y ago
      Your quote misses out the part of the sentence immediately following: "this rationale does not necessarily apply to later-presenting young people, including the predominant referral group of birth-registered girls" The group referred to here is defined by being later-presenting. Female is only a subset of this. Also, Cass is just describing the rationale, not endorsing it. This is implied by the paragraph immediately following, where she discusses the paucity of data regarding potential negative effects of puberty blockers on brain maturation: "A further concern is that adolescent sex hormone surges may trigger the opening of a critical period for experience-dependent rewiring of neural circuits underlying executive function (i.e. maturation of the part of the brain concerned with planning, decision making and judgement). If this is the case, brain maturation may be temporarily or permanently disrupted by puberty blockers, which could have significant impact on the ability to make complex risk-laden decisions, as well as possible longer-term neuropsychological consequences. To date, there has been very limited research on the short-, medium- or longer-term impact of puberty-blockers on neurocognitive development." > and only recommends reviewing puberty blockers for AFAB people Cass does not make this recommendation.