I read an interesting post from someone who claims to sit on an IRB here in the US. In short, they were confused. The idea of suggesting more studies at a hig

I read an interesting post from someone who claims to sit on an IRB here in the US. In short, they were confused. The idea of suggesting more studies at a higher standards was a good thing. However, what puzzled them was that it was incredibly rare - at least in the US - to withhold existing treatments while those studies take place when not only have they been proven to have efficacy on a portion of the population, but the only treatment available. Pulling a treatment entirely seemed to be reserved only when there was absolutely no efficacy, such as in the case of a drug like Makena. EDIT: You also bring up a good point - these drugs are being withheld for kids with gender dysphoria, but not for others. The more I read about the particulars of this ruling, the harder it is to avoid the idea that this is a political decision, and not one made with the kids well-being in mind.