Characteristically - when it comes to trans issues - intellectually dishonest reporting by the BBC. bbc.com/news/health-56…
What the NICE review found was that the quality of evidence of positive effects from puberty blockers in the studies it examined was "very low certainty". 
However, this is what the BBC's lede reports: it rephrases NICE's observation about the *quality* of the evidence supporting the treatment in the studies it examined into a criticism of the treatment.
Wait, it gets worse.
NICE also looked at allegations that puberty blockers have negative effects - and here again it said the quality of the evidence suggesting that was "very low certainty". Exactly the same finding as for the quality of evidence for positive effects.
NICE also looked at allegations that puberty blockers have negative effects - and here again it said the quality of the evidence suggesting that was "very low certainty". Exactly the same finding as for the quality of evidence for positive effects.
How does the BBC report what is exactly the same NICE conclusion? Does it say the quality of evidence supporting negative effects is "very low"? It does not: it suggests there may very well be negative effects.
The BBC reports on trans issues - and in particular the treatment of trans adolescents - in this way All The Time. It's quite wrong that it should conduct this kind of ongoing campaign.
If you want to read the NICE review yourself - rather than the BBC's inappropriate and intellectually dishonest slant on it - you can do so here. arms.nice.org.uk/resources/hub/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
