this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
115 points (96.7% liked)

United Kingdom

4133 readers
87 users here now

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.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

My understanding is by medical standards, the evidence is pretty low quality, which is why GnRH agonists aren't approved by the EMA, MHRA, FDA, or NICE for gender dysphoria.

It highlights a wider issue in medicine though, the obsession with randomised controlled trials, which is basically the only evidence the GRADE method considers "high quality". We are seeing exactly the same problem with MDMA assisted therapy, any therapy where blinding is difficult is dismissed by the medical establishment. NICE dismissed (es)ketamine for depression for the same reason. Add to that the fact that GnRH agonists are off patent, so there's no incentive for industry to fund studies.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

My understanding is by medical standards, the evidence is pretty low quality,

Your understanding is wrong and influenced by transphobic rhetoric, not "medical standards", which have considered puberty blockers safe and effective since at least the 1980s.

The use of puberty blockers is supported by twelve major American medical associations, including the American Medical Association,[14] the American Psychological Association,[15] and the American Academy of Pediatrics.[16] the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,[17] the Pediatric Endocrine Society,[18] the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,[19] the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists,[20] and the American College of Physicians.[21] In Australia four medical organizations support them,[22] as does the Endocrine Society,[23] and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).[24]

Overall, puberty blockers have demonstrated an excellent safety and efficacy profile in the treatment of precocious puberty. The most common side effects reported include nonspecific headaches, hot flashes, and implant-related skin reactions.[39]

source

E: and before you try throwing bone density at me, most of the people impacted are cis (and will not be stopped from taking blockers), and either way, there is simple treatment to counteract this minor issue (and which is completely insignificant when compered to the alternative). The ban is 100% motivated by transphobia and cruelty.

[–] 13esq 3 points 6 days ago

We're not talking about the use of puberty blockers in cases of precocious puberty, we're talking about them in cases where they'd block typical puberty in cases of gender dysphoria.