Health secretary says emergency measures banning sale and supply for gender dysphoria 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”.

  • febra@lemmy.worldEnglish
    163·
    4 hours ago

    These monsters just hate trans kids so much. TERF island strikes again.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldMEnglish
    377·
    13 hours ago

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

  • dotslashme@infosec.pubEnglish
    1197·
    19 hours ago

    So puberty blockers are not legal until puberty is over? Makes complete sense /s

  • n2burns@lemmy.caEnglish
    934·
    19 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
      91·
      17 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.

      • nonailsleft@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        10 minutes ago

        Well her position doesn’t seem to be that she wants to eliminate it at all. She says the evidence is too weak for a general green light. She supports it being offered but as research:

        There are young people who absolutely benefit from a medical pathway, and we need to make sure that those young people have access — under a research protocol, because we need to improve the research — but not assume that that’s the right pathway for everyone.

        Also:

        I think there is an appreciation that we are not about closing down health care for children. But there is fearfulness — about health care being shut down, and also about the report being weaponized to suggest that trans people don’t exist. And that’s really disappointing to me that that happens, because that’s absolutely not what we’re saying.

      • TOModera@lemmy.worldEnglish
        291·
        18 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.

          • nfh@lemmy.worldEnglish
            152·
            16 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.

            • Adanisi@lemmy.zipEnglish
              52·
              7 hours ago

              Also it was commissioned by the Tories, to be done by a woman who before even starting her research for the report, was clearly biased against trans people.

            • n2burns@lemmy.caEnglish
              101·
              16 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.