The puberty blocker "trial" isn't as a real clinical trial, but rather a way for the medical profession to wash their hands of the children currently taking puberty blockers. 🧵/20
Hilary Cass says there are "no limit" to places for the first phase of a clinical trial. Everyone knows that isn't how clinical trials work. 2/20
There arguably can be "no limit" so that the NHS can shift as many children currently taking puberty blockers onto the "trial". 3/20 nhs.uk/conditions/gen…
These children are clinical negligence claimants, as they have been prescribed puberty blockers with what the Cass Review said was unclear rationale and weak evidence. 4/20
However if they are entered onto the trial, they can become "unfortunate clinical trial outcomes" and the medical profession can wash their hands of them. 5/20
The puberty blocker trial is open to all currently attending a "gender service". 6/20 fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR1675…
The Cass Review's conclusion that puberty blockers had been prescribed with unclear rationale and weak evidence was also an understatement. 7/20
GIRES had been training the NHS to prescribe puberty blockers to a tomboy who had seen "transgender" on YouTube. 8/20
One trustee of GIRES appears to be a man with autogynephilia, a cohort known to project their belief that they have a "mismatched" "gender identity" or "essence" of the opposite sex onto children, and recommend medical treatments. 9/20bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-…
The same thing arguably happened in the United States, where Rachel Levine, former assistant US secretary for health, lobbied to remove minimum age limits for "gender affirming" surgeries: 10/20nytimes.com/2024/06/25/hea…
The Cass Review covered up all the accounts it received of men talking about autogynephilia, marked “strictly confidentially”, “where relevant anonymously”, “not to be shared". 11/20whatdotheyknow.com/request/inform…
Given that the NHS signposts to GIRES in other content, it is arguable that GIRES had an influence on the NHS's page on "gender dysphoria", which bears no resemblance to "gender dysphoria" in the DSM-5 (below). 12/20 nhs.uk/conditions/gen…
Any mention of the different pathways of "gender dysphoria" and autogynephilia have been stripped out, and instead replaced with GIRES's mismatched "gender identity"/"essence"/"soul" narrative for everybody (below). 13/20
I have been asking the NHS since 2022 to fix its page on "gender dysphoria" to resemble what is in the DSM-5 definition of "gender dysphoria". This is now a task from the Cass Review, but they still haven't updated it. 14/20
The medical profession arguably can't update it, as if they update it, the idea that children can have a "mismatched" "gender identity" "essence" of the opposite sex will be shown to be a lie, spoiling the premise of the "trial". 15/20
It appears what the medical profession have done instead, is to shift to "gender incongruence", a definition that also strips out any mention of autogynephilia (this definition was influenced by WPATH, i.e. by men with autogynephilia). 16/20
The "gender incongruence" definition works for both men with autogynephilia and the medical profession, as neither want to tell the truth. The puberty blocker trial uses "gender incongruence": different words for the same "mismatched" "essence" narrative. 17/20
I do not think I am being overly cynical, given the contaminated blood scandal shows the medical profession would absolutely engage in "downright deception", "deliberate concealment" and "not telling people what they had a right to know". 18/20
The medical profession could easily show that I am wrong, by adding a paragraph on autogynephilia to their page on "gender dysphoria", and by saying it is an option for children who were prescribed puberty blockers to sue the NHS. 19/20
I have an objection sitting with the Health Research Authority if the medical profession decide to go ahead with the trial: 20/20transpolicy.substack.com/p/objection-to…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
