It did not take long for the claims the report makes to begin to unravel on closer analysis. The TransActual briefing on the Cass report [1] covers a lot of gro

It did not take long for the claims the report makes to begin to unravel on closer analysis. The TransActual briefing on the Cass report [1] covers a lot of ground very succinctly, including the poor quality of supporting evidence for the claims the report makes on puberty blockers: > The Cass Report reveals that it discarded huge amounts of medical evidence, both from the UK and across the world. Out of 102 studies into puberty blockers and hormones, only 2 were included by the Cass Review team. > Further, the Report criticises the quality of evidence that WPATH (the international body which develops and monitors standards in trans healthcare worldwide) relies upon. No international evidence was considered good enough. > Many, if not most, of these exclusions are on the basis of the studies not including 'blinding' and a control group, which would be not only an unethical approach to research but also practically impossible due to the clear impacts of either puberty blockers or hormones on the patients. > In November 2022, WPATH rejected criticism around the lack of evidence around puberty blockers, stating that most of the evidence included the effects of other medication and interventions and that this was appropriate, and found that puberty blockers did have a beneficial effect for trans young people. This was ignored by the Review Team and by NHS England. For a long-established international medical standards body to simply be ignored is highly concerning. [1]: https://transactual.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/TransActual-Briefing-on-Cass-Review.pdf https://transactual.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/TransActual-Br...