United Kingdom
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
Only for gender dysmorphia.
Which is still stupid to ban it for that, but a lot better than a total ban.
I don't know why people are so worried about it. I was over 6 feet tall and shaving before I was a teenager, if I had been given the option to press pause for a few years I would have jumped on it.
There is pretty much zero negative side effects to puberty blockers, it literally just delays it and early puberty is an issue and one that continues to trend in the wrong direction.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/puberty-starting-earlier-treatment-children-rcna125441
Obviously it can be much worse for girls than boys, but it was still fucking weird being a child and having people twice your age assume you were a peer.
As far as I understand it, there are two main concerns that people have.
There is very limited data regarding clinical proof that the long term use of puberty blockers is 100% reversible in cases that block puberty during the typical years that you would go through it. Traditionally, puberty blockers would be used in cases where children start puberty at extremely young ages, in these cases the puberty blockers would be withdrawn at an age typical for a child to start puberty.
Leading on from point 1. Many people don't trust children to make decisions that could impact them for the rest of their lives. Some parents are concerned they will be met with their child who is now a young adult to be asked "why the hell did you let me make that decision, don't you know the brain is still developing at that age?". I would not want to be held accountable for the countless stupid things I said or beliefs I held at a young age, so I can see why it is a concern.
Personally, I'm broadly in support of trans rights and what people want to do when they're adults is their own business (as long as they're not hurting anyone), but I think allowing a child to make a decision that may impact them for the rest of their lives is a grey area to say the least. Until conclusive evidence is available I'd draw the line for a child at anything that's not 100% fully reversible.
Vaccines can have devastating permanent side effects. Should parents no longer vaccinate their children?
The answer for both is:
Whichever option does less harm should be taken. A delayed puberty, despite potential long-term risks does less harm than a trans child going through the "wrong" puberty.
Besides, due to the start of puberty having a pretty large range there should in theory be little harm until the age of 14 or so. And at that age children are much more capable of deciding on medical treatments than as preteens.
The main difference with vaccines is the overwhelming medical proof of the benefits, that's something that currently isn't there with the use of puberty blockers during the years you would typically go through it.
I do somewhat agree with your less harm premise. If a child literally threatens to kill themselves, then as a parent you'd feel like you had little choice in the matter, however if there are permanent side effects and the child, now as a young adult starts regretting their decision, it's going to be shit for everyone.
There is significant proof of benefits:
https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12437
I can't vouch for the quality of this literature review (because I don't want to take an hour or more to read a paper for a Lemmy comment), but usually literature reviews show a fuller picture than individual studies.
Also, this sentence is in the conclusion: