(🧵) NEW: Today’s news that NHS England has paused new prescriptions of cross-sex hormones for under 18s a) seems a bigger deal than being suggested, b) raises several questions, c) has potentially significant consequences for any forthcoming trial of puberty blockers...
England has - for a period at least - ended the medical transition of children on the NHS. This puts a stop to 20+ years of practice. (The former Tavistock Gender Identity Development Service [GIDS] referred 16 year olds for puberty blockers from around the year 2000.)
The precise trigger for the pause seems unclear. What is the “in-depth review of all available clinical evidence” referred to by NHSE in their statement? I have asked NHSE. NHSE's statement says it was triggered by Dr Hilary Cass’s 2024 major report into children's gender care...
But one of the systematic evidence reviews that informed that final report and its recommendations had already looked at CSH use in under 18s. It pointed to a "lack of high-quality research assessing the outcomes of hormone interventions in adolescents [with] gender dysphoria..."
The review noted that few studies undertook long-term follow-up. "No conclusions can be drawn about the effect on gender-related outcomes, body satisfaction, psychosocial health, cognitive development or fertility." adc.bmj.com/content/109/Su…
Maybe the new 'review' refers to the findings of the expert ‘Working Group’ – asked to look into this by Wes Streeting in April 2025? (and which put a stop to legal action – see my copy below)? If so, that was completed in June 2025. Why the delay? newstatesman.com/politics/healt…
Expert evidence provided to the High Court last year, and which triggered the NHSE group, outlined multiple serious concerns about under 18s' use of hormones. One expert explicitly criticised NSHE's prescribing to 16- and 17-year-olds, saying there was no evidence behind it.
Prof James Palmer, national medical director for NHSE specialised services at NHSE says, “the available evidence does not support the continued use of masculinising or feminising hormones... for young people under 18.”
If so, why are private providers not included in the pause?
Finally, were the pause to be made permanent (after consultation), it has profound implications for any future trial of puberty blockers. The MHRA's recent request for a minimum age of 14, was in part because of fears of being on PBs for too long before hormones were available
That observation was when hormones were available at 16. What if they're unavailable until adulthood? If the trial goes ahead with unchanged age criteria, it could mean children remaining blocked for up to eight years, with all the risks that brings. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6998b06d…
A 90-day public consultation on a permanent policy of the NHS no longer routinely prescribing hormones for under 18s starts later today. Young people already receiving these treatments can continue, but will have to be reviewed individually by their clinical team. (ENDS)
🚨BREAKING: NHS-backed puberty blocker trial PAUSED as regulator raises safety concerns. The Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has requested the King’s College trial team amend study protocol, to better reflect risks to children 🧵 assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6998b06d…
Trial team are asked to increase the minimum age of participants to 14 because of fertility concerns.
MHRA explicitly recognises "sterilising effect of puberty blockers followed by cross sex hormones and that gamete retrieval to preserve fertility is not possible at the stage when puberty blockers are given (Tanner stage 2) as neither sperm nor ova have matured."
NEW: I’ve taken a deep dive into the new puberty blockers trial, exploring how we got here, what it will and won’t answers, with a sprinkling of new revelations too.
With contributions from Hilary Cass, trial team members (past & present) and MPs
A former member of the trial told me, “the early planning meetings were unlike any other clinical trial I’ve encountered. We could easily list all the potential harms to monitor and how to test for them, but we didn’t have a clear rationale for giving the drug in the first place”
I can also reveal:
- Close to one in eight children being seen at the London gender hub have disclosed self-medicating with hormones
- NHSE hasn’t started the data linkage study of former Gids patients & has not got the required ethical and regulatory permissions to do so AND…
NEW: Puberty blocker trial for children gets green light, but many questions remain. Sadly, my request to attend a media briefing & put some of them to study leads was turned down on the grounds I’m not a ‘specialist’ health/science journalist. newstatesman.com/politics/2025/…
E.g. Those permitted to join the trial will be considered by clinicians to have “a reasonable prospect of benefit[ting]” from blockers. How will they judge this? Dozens of clinicians from Tavistock GIDS told me it was impossible to tell - that was why some became more cautious.
(They did agree to share the recording of the 1.5 hour event with me several hours afterwards)
COURT CASE Big🧵: I was at High Court today watching Sue Evans v CQC. Psychotherapist & former Tavistock GIDS worker, Evans argues it was ‘irrational’ for the CQC to register private Gender Plus Hormone Clinic (GPHC) & allow it to prescribe (cross-sex) hormones to 16 & 17 yo
Quick note: Gender Plus Healthcare Ltd consists of Kelly Psychology (KP) and GPHC. Owner and director of both is clinical psychologist Dr Aidan Kelly, who worked at Tavistock Gender Identity development Service (gids) 2016 -2021. KP carries our assessments. GPHC is the prescriber
Tom Cross KC (TC) represented Evans and opened proceedings. TC argued that when CQC agreed to register GPHC and see if behaving safely it rightly looked to NHS practice. It judged that GPHC’s practices were “sufficiently aligned” w. NHS. But the situation has subsequently changed
CASE RESUMES: High Court is deciding whether to allow JR by Keira Bell (KB) against Health Secretary (WS) & NHSE in arguing it was "irrational" not to ban cross-sex hormones (CSH) along with puberty blockers (PB). Gov has announced new working group is looking at a pos ban now
Mr Steel for the government is resuming. S argues PB prescribed to v specific groups for specific reasons e.g young children for precocious puberty; adults for certain cancers - so relatively clear division by age group.
Anyone in puberty wld most likely be receiving them for gender dysphoria so easy for pharmacist to tell. This is not case with CSH - used for many reasons, and not so easy to tell why someone might be receiving them. Makes a S.62 order more difficult
BREAKING. The Government has established a Working Group to look at whether prescription of cross-sex hormones (CSH) will, like puberty blockers, should be banned to under 18s, outside of NHS (ie private & overseas providers). The group is expected to report back in July.
The news came during a hearing at the High Court today. Former Tavistock patient, Keira Bell (KB) had sought Judicial Review against Health Sec Wes Streeting and NHS England about decision to allow the prescribing of CSH, despite evidential concerns about safety for children
Arguing on behalf of Ms Bell, Zoe Gannon (ZG) explained that Streeting (WS) himself had described what happened at the Tavistock GIDS as a “scandal”, “where children suffering from gender-related distress were treated on the NHS” based on evidence which was “at best, weak”.