Health secretary says emergency measures banning sale and supply will be made indefinite after expert advice

Puberty blockers for under-18s with gender dysphoria will be banned indefinitely across the UK except for use in clinical trials, the government has announced.

Wes Streeting, the health secretary, said that after receiving advice from medical experts, he would make existing emergency measures banning the sale and supply of puberty blockers indefinite.

The Department of Health and Social Care said the Commission on Human Medicines (CHM) had published independent expert advice that there was “currently an unacceptable safety risk in the continued prescription of puberty blockers to children”.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldMEnglish
    154·
    6 hours ago

    Unacceptable safety risk in trans kids feeling comfortable with who they are as human beings.

  • n2burns@lemmy.caEnglish
    733·
    11 hours ago

    Puberty blockers to be banned indefinitely for under-18s with gender dysphoria across UK

    I fixed the title. Of course, they’re still available for other medical conditions, they’re just singling out gender dysphoria.

    • anon6789@lemmy.worldEnglish
      41·
      10 hours ago

      I don’t know about the issue enough for me to comment on if she is biased or not, but I found this NYT interview (archive.org link) and she really seems to try to be playing both sides to me. Her main arguement seems to be don’t treat this as an issue to resolve gender, that makes you ignore mental health/depression/other things, but with there not being the best care of that nature available for trans individuals, what avenue is left for them?

      It sounds like she wants to go on about a lack of enough proof for her to stop treatment, but it also doesn’t sound like she has enough proof to say it’s harmful, but that doesn’t seem to discourage her helping eliminate it.

      • TOModera@lemmy.worldEnglish
        25·
        11 hours ago

        Credentials sure, but Cass has also been found to follow anti Trans groups, threw out any positive study that wasn’t blind (which would have been unethical to run) and the report itself was influenced by a similar report originally done in Florida under Ron DeSantis. This is a biased report that started with a conclusion and ignored any evidence that disagreed.

            • n2burns@lemmy.caEnglish
              71·
              9 hours ago

              K…I started my original comment with, “While I don’t agree with it’s findings,” and was responding to a comment asking for elaboration on the safety risks. I was just providing context, not stating the report was gospel-truth or anything.

          • nfh@lemmy.worldEnglish
            8·
            9 hours ago

            The report exists, but it has so many errors, misinterpreting its own data to bend to the conclusions its authors decided they wanted to find, lots of cherry picking, and ignoring any fact inconvenient to its conclusions.

            Imagine a paper that concludes that dowsing or homeopathy is good science. It’s about that accurate.

    • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
      231·
      11 hours ago

      think

      I’m gonna stop you right there, no useful thought process was involved here at all.

    • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
      72·
      7 hours ago

      How is denying scientifically proven medical care “common sense”?

      • ZK686@lemmy.worldEnglish
        13·
        3 hours ago

        Because kids under the age of 18 shouldn’t be allowed to use these types of medications. I just don’t think we’re fully aware of the consequences at that age. I mean, I did a ton of stupid shit when I was a kid… didn’t we all? I look back and think, WTF was I thinking?

        EDIT: my comment that was removed literally said “common sense”. Y’all getting worse than Reddit…

        • catloaf@lemm.eeEnglish
          1·
          10 minutes ago

          Are the unknown consequences more or less severe than depression, self-harm, and suicide?