WPATH Members Provide Uncontested Validation of GHQ Mission

News Commentary

Going back as far as 2014 and earlier, parents, desisters, detransitioners, LGB people, health professionals, autism experts, and some trans people have been ringing alarm bells about the safety of pediatric medical transition for gender dysphoric minors under "the affirmative model." This model may involve social transition at age three, puberty blockers at age ten, and surgery and cross-sex hormones as young as thirteen. WPATH is a very pro-medical transition organization that promotes "Standard of Care" but is strongly influenced by activists highly motivated to transition children medically. Despite this, three of its members have been speaking out about the dangers that are surrounding "the affirmative model." They are Marci Bowers, an MtF surgeon who specializes in vaginoplasty, and Erica Anderson and Laura Edwards-Leeper, who are mental health professionals. Their concerns are regarding reckless mental health practices that rapidly transition youth with little assessment, the considerable increase in female young people wanting medical transition, and the reality placing male tweens on puberty blockers (and then cross-sex hormones) ruins their sexual function for the rest of their lives and requires dangerous and experimental bottom surgeries due to stunted genital growth.

These are the very concerns our organization has raised since 2019, and our board members have raised since 2015. Because affirmative model advocates such as Johanna Olson-Kennedy, Diane Ehrensaft, Michelle Forcier, Jack Turban, and Kristina Olson have so misled the public to believe in the health and safety of this protocol, any person who raised the concerns these WPATH members are now has been painted as a "bigot," a "concern troll," and a "transphobe,” often accompanying verbal abuse and threats to one’s career.

We are glad the WPATH members are speaking out now. We'd like to believe this is in good faith and not solely motivated by fears of lawsuits. The fact that they have done this creates a new reality that there will be no more plausible deniability this can harm in the future. This protocol should have received more scrutiny years ago:

Top Trans Doctors Blow the Whistle on ‘Sloppy’ Care

What Do We Mean By “Gender Affirming Care?” A Conversation with Dr. Laura Edwards-Leeper

Gender Dysphoria Endocrine Society & Pediatric Endocrine Society Guidelines Intentionally Hide Risk & Harm

Editorial

Heading: “Your Dangerous, Inaccurate, and Ideological Guidelines for Trans-Identified Youth”

Sending this to 100s of mental health and medical professionals as this is a wide-spread problem- apathy about risk to LGB and other youth. This is profoundly destructive to these individuals and to our communities. The younger children are transitioned, the more of them there will be.

To the Endocrine Society and Pediatric Endocrine Society,

We are board members for an LGBT medical watchdog organization regarding pediatric medical transition for minors with gender dysphoria. In 6 years of intensely researching this issue, your recent statements and guidelines on this topic are some of the most unethical and sloppy of anything we have seen, in our free-speech opinion. And we have seen a lot of substandard discourse, confirmation bias, censorship, and blatant disregard for the safety of mostly LGB youth who may resolve GD as all prior research shows many do. There are so many ideological spins and factual errors in these documents it would take far too long to go over them all. And that should not be the public’s job. That is your job as the leadership and board members of The Pediatric Endocrine Society and the Endocrine Society, tasked with the most important goal of all, being trustworthy. Your organizations are experiencing ideological capture by extremist gender identity activists (even PhDs and MDs), and our guess is that you are entrusting small, agenda-driven committees to write balanced information. This is a huge mistake regarding this contentious and complicated issue that requires responsible nuance.

No, the “affirmative model” is not universally recognized as “safe” by all gender dysphoria experts, and it is clearly proving to be unsafe for some young people. That is the truth.

BBC

FB comment from WPATH member

Science bodies have a moral obligation to present facts and accurate information to the doctors and scientists they represent and the public. If you don’t, you will justifiably be accused of negligence and malpractice for the harm we are seeing befall young people due to the dishonesties represented in your documents regarding gender dysphoric youth. These dishonesties are being exposed by a groundswell of well-informed parents, doctors, mental health professionals, trans-rationalists, detransitioners, podcasters, and concerned LGB people who have been going public for years, negating the possibility of plausible deniability by organizations such as yours. 

The documents in question: 

https://transhealthproject.org/resources/medical-organization-statements/endocrine-society-statements/

https://www.endocrine.org/-/media/a65106b6ae7f4d2394a1ebeba458591d.ashx

https://academic.oup.com/jcem/advance-article/doi/10.1210/clinem/dgaa816/6031005

https://www.endocrine.org/-/media/endocrine/files/advocacy/position-statement/transgender_health_minors_fact_sheet.pdf

And here is this statement demonstrating the Endocrine Society and Pediatric Endocrine Society have a complete lack of concern or compassion for the young woman in the Bell v Tavistock case (she won) who transitioned at too young an age who is now permanently scarred by doctors such as yourselves. She is here merely as a prop to be kicked to the side and aggressively opposed so you can continue to prescribe extreme and experimental medical treatments on minors who don’t reach full executive function until age 25:

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-12/tes-dpt121120.php

While there are too many errors and hard ideological slants to go over in the material in these links, we will review a few of the most egregious. This is unacceptable for doctors’ organizations.

Your attempt to debunk this quote falls flat to those of us who know what is really going on:

“Texas should ban chemical castration, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and genital mutilation surgery on all minor children for transition purposes, given that Texas children as young as three (3) are being transitioned from their biological sex to the opposite sex.” Even though “chemical castration” and “genital mutilation” are not part of gender-affirming care for minors, such wording serves to alarm the general public, and 94.57% of the electors supported the measure [15].

Not part of gender-affirming care for minors? While you may dislike the phrase “chemical castration” because it doesn’t have the marketable ring of “gender affirming” it is the proper term for the use of hormone blockers. These are the very drugs and terminology used to “chemically castrate” sex offenders. When you give puberty blockers to an 11-year-old, you stunt their genital growth. The problem of “micropenis” is well documented and the state becomes permanent when the youth goes on estrogen. This can permanently destroy the youth’s sexual response making a fully realized adult romantic relationship impossible. Due to lack of tissue, the youth now requires a rectosigmoid or peritoneal graph vaginoplasty to create a neovaginal canal as surgeons can’t do the “gold standard” one. These protocols sterilize both sexes. The wording in the quote above is hardly hyperbolic.

And now to the second part of the inaccuracy of the sentence. Genital surgeries are done on minors. Jazz Jennings, who likely has permanently destroyed sexual function for life, had this procedure done at 17 on national television. Jazz had to have 3 corrective surgeries after the experimental vaginoplasty “popped” and collapsed, an incident described by Jazz as extremely messy and painful. This path was decided by Jazz at age 11 when doctors such as yourselves prescribed hormone blockers. One of the patients in the Steensma/de Vries cohort died from the vaginoplasty, despite this being the #1 “success” study cited to promote pediatric transition. These young people are guinea pigs. We contest a child who hasn’t had a first boyfriend or crush even, can consent to permanent sexuality destruction despite your confidence in the face of conflicting data and views. There are trans people who adamantly oppose this.

Should the public feel “alarm” over this?

Reddit

Here is evidence of vaginoplasty surgeries underage. The same is true for double mastectomies performed on tweens.

https://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/09/prweb12141694.htm:

“The patient, a California high school student who began administering estrogen and anti-androgens to transition from male to female at the age of 11, is the youngest transgender patient in U.S. history to completely avoid male puberty and subsequently undergo gender reassignment surgery at the age of 16.”

Another problem:

"Gender identity was considered malleable and subject to external influences. Today, however, this attitude is no longer considered valid."

A detransition subreddit with thousands of people holds views that say otherwise. We also document many social factors that influence gender dysphoria linked below. Of particular concern to us, but not you, is that homophobic bullying pushes youth towards trans identification. This is according to a peer-reviewed study and many anecdotal examples of LGB youth who claimed this was the case or their therapists saying so. Lack of stability in the home appears to be another environmental factor. There are many examples of social contagions throughout history, and most involve young females. We believe there is robust evidence to support this is currently the case with spiking levels of trans identification in females. Responsible doctors analyze situations when epidemiology has drastically changed. 

We are an intellectually honest, evidence-based organization. We cover the valid "nature" data on brain research, lending credence to the above claim's possibility. But why does a layperson org have more comprehensive, evidence-based information than the Endocrine Society or Pediatric Endocrine Society? You pretend people who flatly state their social environment helped fuel their dysphoria and desire to transition don't exist. You pretend the multiple sex and gender researchers who worry that early social transitions may groom pre gay and lesbian children for medicalization don’t exist (Dr. Wren, Dr. Carmichael, Dr. Cantor, Dr. Zucker, Dr. Soh, Dr. Bailey, Dr. Blanchard, Dr. Korte, Dr. Drescher, Dr, Bradley, even Dr. Steensma have made these statements). The very design of your materials is to hide harm and risk. This is intentional, isn’t it? To see yourselves as protecting the important children even if it means recklessly endangering others by pretending they don’t exist, and ensuring your doctors and the public don’t know they exist.

https://www.genderhq.org/trans-nature-vs-nurture-innate-gender-identity-culture

https://www.genderhq.org/increase-trans-females-nonbinary-dysphoria 

https://www.genderhq.org/trans-children-gender-dysphoria-desistance-gay/#anchor-page1-section-b

You cite Jack Turban and pretend serious critiques by GD experts of his work don't exist. A good list of these professionals can be found in the comments on his JAMA article (under paywall), which should have been published if people were acting with integrity around this issue. 

https://www.genderhq.org/blog/conversion-therapy-trans-study-turban?rq=Turban

https://www.genderhq.org/blog/2020/11/2/recent-article-criticizes-the-quality-of-jack-turbans-analysis?rq=Turban

Miesen (2018)

Another criticism: 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30392631/

“We work and live with the co-occurrence of autism and gender diversity on a daily basis, and we are concerned that perpetuating misunderstanding about the co-occurrence places individuals at risk.”

More on Jack Turban: 

http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10508-020-01844-2

Moving on:

“Pre-pubertal youth who are supported and affirmed in their social transition long before medical interventions are indicated, experience no elevation in depression compared to their cis-gender peers.” (12)

Your reference is Achilles (2020). Should this not be Olson (2016)? Achilles is a drug study on adolescents. And the social transition Olson study is far from perfect.

Here is another example of the malpractice of your documents that violate all standards of informed consent:

"Over the last decade, there has been considerable research on and development of evidence-based standards of care that have proven to be both safe and efficacious for the treatment of gender dysphoria/gender incongruence in youth and adults.”

Where is this hard evidence this is “proven” “safe?” Jazz Jennings had 4 sexuality-destroying vaginoplasty corrective surgeries and will never have any sexual feeling, and you call this “safe.” Multiple gender dysphoria experts are concerned about this harming potential desisters, and you call this “safe.” There is information that this impacts bone health, and you call this “safe.” It looks like the blockers you are prescribing cognitively immature children can negatively impact pubertal brain development by lowering IQ. IQ is something very pertinent to career choice and earned income. But this is “safe.” There is no mention of the study that indicates a significant increased risk of heart attack in FtMs or mitochondrial damage or vaginal atrophy. You don’t mention you have no idea what the long-term consequences are of transitioning tweens on their bodies over the decades to come. How is this ethical, this hiding by you of negative, valid data? How? Having a good, honest desire to help this population is not a valid excuse for violating basic tenants of informed consent and “do no harm.” Citations for serious medical side-effects below:

https://www.genderhq.org/trans-youth-side-effects-hormone-blockers-surgery

We highly recommend you look at historical accounts of how medical and mental health professionals have harmed the public due to mirthful excitement about new protocols that wound up harming people because sterilizing children, destroying their sexual response forever, harming LGB youth, impacting bone health, IQ, and circulatory health are grave matters. We aren’t lawyers, but it sounds like “safe” is lawsuit-worthy (and was in the Bell v Tavistock case).

Bottom line- The sheer extremity of what you are doing to children is because you are being led to believe you are preventing suicides (referenced in your documents). There is a lack of robust proof that this is true, and several media-covered suicides used to promote underage transition involved fully affirmed youth with access to medical protocols. Inflating suicide risk, something often employed by affirmative model doctors and therapists to the public, violates all anti-suicide reporting guidelines, even those for LGBT youth laid out specifically by the American Foundation for the Prevention of Suicide. Suicide is highly socially contagious. Sending the message youth will kill themselves if not given strong drugs immediately is harmful. GHQ does not spin suicide. It is too serious a matter. No one should. Some studies indicate transition is helpful in this way. The studies in the Cornell review and others that have this information is on our evidence-based website.

But we will list studies/articles that should alarm you given the soaring numbers of children endocrinologists are “chemically castrating,” leading to underage surgeries: 

Branstrom (2020) recently had to be corrected (authors really wanted positive results). The reality is this study from Sweden’s healthcare system, with a large population, failed to prove mental health benefits to either hormonal therapy or sex reassignment surgery. This is in a country that is very pro LGBT, where people have access to public healthcare. It’s not perfect data but better than much in the Cornell review.

Lipson (2019) should concern you. This is a large population of college students surveyed. Why is the mental health so poor in trans people at universities where trans identity is celebrated, minority status is elevated in general, and they have access to student health care that often pays for transition?

Graph circulated by a researcher on SM regarding Lipson (2019)

The use of puberty blockers has not been shown to improve mental health in the UK, one of the reasons Tavistock lost the Bell v Tavistock case. There are likely thousands of kids on these blockers now in the US.

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/Biggs_ExperimentPubertyBlockers.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2X8HdzFfeUnaY0995EiTh9-gYCBKz5FmHG98PTdMjbXgZd5IhhGvl6uhY

At this time there are 20,000 adverse effects reported to the FDA from Lupron. An older article-

https://khn.org/news/women-fear-drug-they-used-to-halt-puberty-led-to-health-problems/

See Adams (2017)- This study, a meta-synthesis analysis, indicates transition may be ineffective in reducing suicide risk. When combining averages across 42 of the more recent studies (relevant because being trans was likely more difficult and unaccepted in the past), they found very high suicide ideation rates, even within the last year. Past year's stats also are not much better than lifetime stats in this review. And these are individuals accessing "gender-affirming" medical care. 

Stop engaging in desistance denial. This data is not presented in your documents. Having researched this for years, we understand why. Desistance data clearly shows pediatric transition is a risk to pre-gay and lesbian kids and ROGD (Littman 2018) shows this is a risk to teens struggling with puberty. This isn't included because you do not care about these youths. No one does in “affirmative” discourse. If you cared, you would address the risks to them and their needs. You can see it every time any data or evidence shows they are being harmed (they are) or may be harmed. You can see a long list of censorship incidences enforced not only by activists (who always threaten people) but by major universities, LGBT media, and magazines like Psychology Today. Everyone does it who wants to appear "progressive." Because LGB youth don’t matter. Girls struggling with puberty don’t matter. Girls who may have a sexual assault in their background don’t matter. If they mattered, you would talk about their needs and suffering, how they are scarred when their body parts are removed at too young an age, and how you are destroying their human right to just grow up and work out their identity issues.

You can't bring yourselves to write one sentence in care of them. Not one.

http://www.heather-brunskell-evans.co.uk/body-politics/1114/

There is so much that is sloppy about your material and ignoring of legitimate studies and critiques of the happy/safe narrative. Please fix this. It delegitimizes you and violates your moral and professional obligations. There are too many people who are very well informed who will hold those accountable for ignoring risk and, worse, lying about it and covering it up. We will leave by summarizing the problems:

1) No acknowledgment of high rates of desistance in all prior research and the likelihood of them being gay or lesbian, thus obscuring risk to pre-gay kids by putting them in social transition at age 5 and interfering with their natural puberty with blockers.

2) No acknowledgment of bizarre trends of clusters of teenage females coming out as trans in a gender dysphoria spike unheard of 20 years ago. Any responsible health professional takes a close look at a condition when its epidemiology changes drastically, especially when treatment results in permanently altering a minor and social contagion is a well-established phenomenon with many historical examples.

3) No acknowledgment of several disturbing studies indicating the hormone blockers, hormones and sex reassignment surgery overall may not reduce the likelihood of mental health problems and suicide risk. And no honest review of information showing very significant negative health impacts.

4) References to Jack Turban and no references to the critiques of this barely out of med school doctor’s work. 

5) No care from the Endocrine Society and Pediatric Endocrine Society for mounting numbers of mostly young women, many ASD and/or lesbian and bisexual, encouraged to hate their bodies as struggling same-sex attracted tomboys, who are now permanently scarred by the mental health and medical profession. See their stories on this subreddit with thousands (assume a high 90% are lurkers and just 10% detrans/desisters, this is a lot of people with regret on this site with 17K subscribers).

https://www.reddit.com/r/detrans/

Tout data that shows benefits to pediatric transition. It’s there. We don’t deny that. But this is an unfolding nightmare and major human rights violation for those of us who care about pre-gay and lesbian kids and LGB teenagers, known to experience intense but ultimately transient GD. We are also very small minority groups. More and more detransitioned young people are significantly impacted. Our communities and our humanity are significantly impacted. We do not blame the mounting numbers of scarred and permanently altered young people. We are working to ensure mental health and medical professionals involved in these inappropriate transitions are held accountable and are not allowed to kick these “bad optics” youth under the rug as morally acceptable collateral damage. Your endocrine guidelines/statements do just that and it’s intentional.

We are a trans-inclusive organization that cares about the obsession with passing being worshipped over brain development, bone health, genital development, avoiding severe and experimental bottom surgeries, and fertility.

This will be on our website. We will provide documentation of this to anyone who later feels they were harmed by the doctors in your organizations following substandard informational guidelines and want them held accountable. This has been successfully done in the UK. Don’t assume there isn’t an intense motivation to hold those accountable in the US. Don’t assume you are immune.

We aren’t the only people/organization/group concerned about this international issue. And some of them are trans.

https://segm.org

https://rethinkime.org

https://detranscanada.com

https://www.gccan.org

https://lgballiance.org.uk (with chapters in the US, Canada, Poland, and Australia)

https://www.transgendertrend.com

Supporting parents of children with gender dysphoria

https://genderreport.ca

_____________________________________

Our board

https://www.genderhq.org/about

A list of supporters

https://www.genderhq.org/letter-signatures 

References:

Adams, N., Hitomi, M., & Moody, C. (2017). Varied Reports of Adult Transgender Suicidality: Synthesizing and Describing the Peer-Reviewed and Gray Literature. Transgender Health, 2(1), 60-75. doi:10.1089/trgh.2016.0036

Holt, A. (2020, December 1). Puberty blockers: Under-16s 'unlikely to be able to give informed consent.' BBC. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-55144148

Correction to Bränström and Pachankis. (2020, August). The American Journal of Psychiatry. Retrieved from https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.1778correction

Biggs, M. (2019, July 29). The Tavistock’s Experiment with Puberty Blockers. Retrieved from http://users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/Biggs_ExperimentPubertyBlockers.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2X8HdzFfeUnaY0995EiTh9-gYCBKz5FmHG98PTdMjbXgZd5IhhGvl6uhY

Brunskill-Evans, M. (2018, June 21). A Woman’s Place is Standing Her Ground. Retrieved from http://www.heather-brunskell-evans.co.uk/body-politics/1114/

D’Angelo, R., Syrulnik, E., Ayad, S, Marchiano, L., Kenny, D.T., Clarke, P. One Size Does Not Fit All: In Support of Psychotherapy for Gender Dysphoria. Archives of Sex Behavior (2020). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01844-2

Endocrine Society (2020, December 16). Discriminatory policies threaten care for transgender, gender diverse individuals. EurekAlert. Retrieved from https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-12/tes-dpt121120.php

Endocrine Society, Pediatric Endocrine Society. Transgender Health: Suporting Gender Diverse Youth to Improve their Health, Well-being, And Safety. Retrieved from https://www.endocrine.org/-/media/endocrine/files/advocacy/position-statement/transgender_health_minors_fact_sheet.pdf

Endocrine Society, Pediatric Endocrine Society. Endocrine Society and Pediatric Endocrine Society Transgender Health Position & Statement (2020). Retrieved from https://www.endocrine.org/-/media/a65106b6ae7f4d2394a1ebeba458591d.ashx

Endocrine Society (2020, December 16). Discriminatory policies threaten care for transgender, gender diverse individuals. EurekAlert. Retrieved from https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-12/tes-dpt121120.php

Jewett, C., & Kaiser Health News. (2017, November 30). Women Fear Drug They Used To Halt Puberty Led To Health Problems. Retrieved from https://khn.org/news/women-fear-drug-they-used-to-halt-puberty-led-to-health-problems/

Lipson, S.K, Raifman, J., Abelson, S., Reisner, S.L. Gender Minority Mental Health in the U.S.: Results of a National Survey on College Campuses. American Journal of Preventative Medicine 53(3), 293–301. doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2019.04.025

Olson, K. R., Durwood, L., DeMeules, M., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2016). Mental health of transgender children who are supported in their identities. Pediatrics, 137(3), e20153223. doi:10.1542/peds.2015-3223

PRWeb. (2014, September 5). Beverly Hills Plastic Surgeon, Gary Alter, MD, Performs Gender Reassignment Surgery on Youngest Transsexual Patient in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/09/prweb12141694.htm

Strang, J.F., Janssen, A., Tishelman, A., Leibowitz, S.F., Kenworthy L, McGuire, J.K., Edwards-Leeper, L., Mazefsky, C.A., Rofey D., et al. (2018) Revisiting the Link: Evidence of the Rates of Autism in Studies of Gender Diverse Individuals. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 57(11), 885-887. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2018.04.023

TLDEF's Trans Health Project (2020, December 17). Endocrine Society. Retrieved from https://transhealthproject.org/resources/medical-organization-statements/endocrine-society-statements/

van der Miesen, A., Cohen-Kettenis, P., de Vries, A. (2018) Is There a Link Between Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder? Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 57(11), 884-885. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.04.022

Walch, A., Davidge-Pitts, C., Safer, J.D., Lopez, X., Tangpricha, V. Iwamoto, S.J. (2020, December 16). Proper Care of Transgender and Gender Diverse Persons in the Setting of Proposed Discrimination: A Policy Perspective. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaa816

Recent Article Criticizes the Quality of Jack Turban's Analysis

News

Several health professionals have criticized the work of affirmative model advocate Jack Turban, from the Stanford University School of Medicine, regarding his studies and analysis of childhood and adolescent gender dysphoria issues.

This post references a paper by Turban, Beckwith, Reisner, and Keuroghlian and is found below:

“Association Between Recalled Exposure to Gender Identity Conversion Efforts and Psychological Distress and Suicide Attempts Among Transgender Adults”

Archives of Sexual Behavior published an LTE in response to this study:

“One Size Does Not Fit All: In Support of Psychotherapy for Gender Dysphoria.”

They wrote a piece in Quillette for the general public:

“Jack Turban’s Dangerous Campaign to Smear Ethical Psychotherapy as Anti-Trans ‘Conversion Therapy’”

From the article:

We agree with Turban’s position that therapies using coercive tactics to force a change in gender identity have no place in healthcare. However, we take issue with the authors’ problematic analysis and flawed conclusions, which they use to justify the misguided notion that any practice that deviates from reflexively “affirmative” psychotherapy for gender dysphoria (GD) is harmful and should be banned. Their analysis is compromised by serious methodological flaws, including the use of a biased data sample, reliance on poorly constructed survey questions, and the omission of any control variable that tracks subjects’ baseline mental-health status.

References:

D’Angelo, R, Syrulnik, E., Ayad, S, Marchiano, L, Kenny, DT, & Clarke, P. (2020, November 1). Jack Turban’s Dangerous Campaign to Smear Ethical Psychotherapy as Anti-Trans ‘Conversion Therapy.’ Quillette. Retrieved from https://quillette.com/2020/11/01/jack-turbans-dangerous-campaign-to-smear-ethical-psychotherapy-as-anti-trans-conversion-therapy/

D’Angelo, R, Syrulnik, E., Ayad, S, Marchiano, L, Kenny, DT, & Clarke, P. (2020, October 21). One Size Does Not Fit All: In Support of Psychotherapy for Gender Dysphoria. Archives of Sexual Behavior. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01844-2

Turban, J.L., Beckwith, N., Reisner, S.L., Keuroghlian, A.S. (2019). Association Between Recalled Exposure to Gender Identity Conversion Efforts and Psychological Distress and Suicide Attempts Among Transgender Adults. Journal of the American Medical Association 77(1), 1-9. Retrieved from DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2285

Oregon Health And Sciences University: Shaky Science Around Gender Dysphoric Minors

News Commentary

The Federalist is a conservative news site generally unsupportive of LGBT issues.. However, an article from September accurately covers some of the shaky information being presented as hard facts in transgender medicine for children and teens. The article is called “How Oregon Built A Transgender Medical-Industrial Complex On Junk Science.” It is about the staunchly pro-pediatric medical transition culture in Oregon, where a 15 year old can undergo surgery without parental consent.

A quote from the article:

As a group of suburban Portland psychiatric nurses sat for training in late 2016, they had no idea they were witnessing a paradigm shift in public health policy. They simply wanted to know what to do about a sudden upsurge in young psychiatric patients who believed themselves to be in the wrong body. They had turned to a colleague from Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU) for help.

The reply was astonishing: The children’s claims should be taken at face value, and the children should be referred to OHSU, or like institutions, for a “Dutch Protocol” of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. Further, the nurses should expect such referrals to comprise 3 percent of the children in their care.

The author discusses an astronomical 3% estimate of trans children they expect at their hospital:

OHSU professionals have been asserting that 3% of children in their care will be transgender. The article takes them to take on this estimate:

Yet in a hospital training, administered by people with advanced degrees to other people with advanced degrees, no one questioned the assertion that 3 percent of local kids were in the wrong body and that the hospital on the hill could give them the right one.

‘A Quality Improvement Project’

The cultural trajectory — from “first do no harm” to “no holds barred” — that Oregon is traversing under a regulatory framework shaped by gender service providers, is reflected in the disparate responses the two institutions gave when asked about the invalid 3 percent citation.

This article highlights the reality that there are a lot of unsubstantiated assertions around the treatment of transgender youth. GHQ reviews many of them in Topic 4. It also highlights the fact that so many health professionals and people in media seem to have zero interest in asking why so many young people, particularly females, are identifying as trans, given the serious medical side effects that result from medical transition.

This should be of concern as there have been reports of transition regret and botched surgeries at OHSO and taxpayers are funding these surgeries by medicaid:

The first recommendations in the letter are to implement advanced transgender-specific surgical training for the surgeons and a formal grievance procedure for the patients. Ashe told me in an email he felt rushed and pushed into having surgery by all his medical providers — therapist, general practitioner and surgeon. He wrote:

“The doctor [Dr. Daniel Dugi III] basically used a bunch of trans people to experiment on and gain experience without being properly trained. I was denied by him for an orchiectomy [removal of the testicles] and coerced into having SRS [Sex Reassignment surgery] by him and my GP [general practitioner] who was stressing that I needed to be castrated ASAP. I had previously told my therapists who wrote my letters [of approval] I never wanted surgery. I feel like I was very much pushed into transition as an answer to my mental health problems that were ignored by my ‘gender’ therapist.”

Also:

As the stories in the letter to the university clearly show, the number of surgical complications in this small group far exceeds the program’s publicly stated total of three. These six stories and three more in the letter demonstrate why the group recommends that the OHSU THP begin collecting, evaluating, and independently reviewing patient results.

Another article was published on Medium highlighting questionable claims and statistics involved in transgender “science.” The article by vocal critic of trans activism, Julian Vigo, was removed by Medium and then reinstated. They likely removed it because activists sought to censor it despite the validity of its content. This is a common problem with current trans activism. This article is more critical of the concept biological sex is irrelevant, a common attitude in gender activism. We review the serious conflicts this ideology is causing within and outside of the LGBT population.

Quotes about a new agenda-driven UK survey study and confirmation bias and lack of scientific validity:

From the ground up, this project’s experts and advisory board have a clear agenda to install pro-transgender conclusions given the ethos of the research team, their political and theoretical motivations, and what seems to be a troubling push by many in academia around the English-speaking world to elide any discussions of material reality to the extent of removing sex as a legal characteristic.

And:

The imbalance in these studies bulldozes the survey-taker and passive reader into having to collude with the ethos that gender is “good.” These research projects never put into question the possibility that gender is uniquely a stereotype and harmful to males and females alike. The planned impact of Cooper’s project is formulated around the researcher’s assumption that the research findings will be “ideally placed to influence future legal and policy debate.” What this means, when you sift through the bios of the principal investigators and many on the advisory board who hold seats on other granting institutions, editorial committees, and institutional seats of great power, is this: that an enormous amount of money has been thrown at academics who are using public funds for political activism within a dishonestly formulated project.

References:

Heyer, W. (2019, December 18). 9 Transgender Patients Complain Of Mutilation, Botched Sex-Change Surgeries In Oregon. The Federalist. Retrieved from https://thefederalist.com/2018/12/06/9-transgender-patients-complain-mutilation-botched-sex-change-surgeries-oregon/

How to Stage a Study: The Transgender Lobby in British Academia. (2019, July 30). Retrieved from http://archive.md/vV8zf#selection-209.0-209.63

Kirkpatrick, K. (2019, September 16). How Oregon Built A Transgender Medical-Industrial Complex On Junk Science. The Federalist. Retrieved from https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/16/how-oregon-built-a-transgender-medical-industrial-complex-on-junk-science/#.XYBfLUNkRYI.twitter

Several New Groups Have Formed to Question the Safety of Medically Transitioning Minors with Gender Dysphoria And The Affirmative Model

News

Several new groups/organizations have formed to question the safety of social and medical transition of minors and young adults with gender dysphoria. These concerns are all in line with the concerns listed on the Gender Health Query website.

Rethinking Identity Medicine is based in the United States and says they will focus on best mental health practices and standards of care.

The MISSION of ReIME is to promote the highest standards of care and ethics in the area of identity medicine for children and youth.  To this end, we gather, curate and distribute up-to-date evidence-based information on best practices that ensure individualized, developmentally appropriate standards of care and treatment related to gender and identity non-conformity, variations and dysphoria. Our GOAL is to better inform individuals, friends, family members, communities including clinicians and policy makers at all levels who are seeking information to best safeguard the long term interests and physical autonomy of such children and youth.

We support the right of minors and young people to explore identities, including sexuality and gender that are developmentally appropriate. And that care is required to prevent prematurely foreclosing such exploration that may lead to permanent, invasive medical procedures.

Gender Identity Challenge is a group in Sweden and Norway.

Ever more parents feel that their child or adolescent wants to change their gender without previous warning. We wonder what has brought this about and how to deal with this phenomenon called

Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria - ROGD

KIRJO is a group in Finland.

The transgender phenomenon is based on gender ideology which harms our society in many ways. It is now time to start the conversation about gender ideology. Is gender dysphoria the new anorexia?

PS. The word “Kirjo” is a Finnish equivalent to the English term “spectrum” (of color or types of people). You can follow and join us here.

Baywater Support is a group of parents from Britain and Ireland who wish to have a more cuatious approach to medicalizating minors:

We are a group of parents in the UK and Ireland who have been brought together by our experiences of parenting children with gender dysphoria or who have declared a transgender identity.

Having looked for the best support for our children, we have found only the 'affirmative' approach to their new identity, backed up by affirmative environments in schools and elsewhere. We've found little scope to explore the new identity as a young person's solution to trauma or distress, as a response to the challenges of adolescence, or to understand its role within underlying mental health or developmental contexts

A new consumer rights organization called Gender Care Consumer Advocacy Network has formed to support people questioning their gender, trans people, and detransitioners seeking mental health and medical services.

Their Mission:

Our mission is to empower recipients of gender transition-related care to become healthy and whole.

They have created a patients bill of rights:

GCCAN is a consumer rights group for any person who has previously or is currently receiving gender care related services. Our aim is to empower consumers of gender-transition related care to get the best health care possible.

GCCAN was founded by gender care consumers because we determined that the level of care we receive during or after gender care treatment is inadequate to achieve healthy mental and physical outcomes. Members of our group have been subject to harms from inadequate gender care services, and our goal is to reduce or mitigate similar harms to other consumers. The current delivery of care does not match established best-practice protocols. Established institutions often fail to balance the interests of consumers with the interests of gender care providers. We seek improvements to accountability, provider education, holistic care protocols, medical research, and public policies. We deserve better.

GCCAN is a registered 501(c)(3) consumer-run nonprofit organization that is non-partisan and non-ideological. Our membership represents many perspectives and experiences, and GCCAN is inclusive to all gender care consumers. As a result, our focus is on every consumer's wellbeing. We advocate for more informed consumers and better gender health care, under the presumption that the best outcome is different for each person. Our Consumer Bill of Rights outlines the necessary improvements to gender care that we seek.

A Damning Review of the Justifications for Puberty Blocker Use in the U.K.

News

Oxford professor Micheal Biggs has been vocal in criticizing the protocols for treating gender dysphoric minors at the Gender Identity Development Service in the United Kingdom. He has completed a review of the decisions that have been made by the Tavistock clinic around the use of puberty blockers and a move towards an affirmative model titled “The Tavistock’s Experiment with Puberty Blockers.”

The first quote provides the history of the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria:

In 1994 a 16-year-old girl who wished to be a boy, known to us as B, entered the Amsterdam Gender Clinic. She was unique for having her sexual development halted at the age of 13, after an adventurous paediatric endocrinologist gave her a Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone agonist (GnRHa). Originally developed to treat prostate cancer, these drugs are also used to delay puberty when it develops abnormally early: in girls younger than 8, and boys younger than 9. The endocrinologist’s innovation was to use the drug to stop normal puberty altogether, in order to prevent the development of unwanted secondary sexual characteristics—with the aim of administering cross-sex hormones in later adolescence. Dutch clinicians used B’s case to create a new protocol for transgendering children, which enabled physical intervention at an age far below the normal age of consent (Cohen-Kettenis and Goozen 1998).

His review is not positive:

This paper describes the origins and conduct of this study and scrutinizes the evidence on its outcomes. It draws on information obtained by requests under the Freedom of Information Act to the Tavistock, to the NHS Health Research Authority, and to University College London (UCL). I will argue that the experimental study did not properly inform children and their parents of the risks of triptorelin. I will also demonstrate that the study’s preliminary results were more negative than positive, and that the single published scientific article using data from the study is fatally flawed by a statistical fallacy. My conclusion is that GIDS and their collaborators at UCL have either ignored or suppressed negative evidence. Therefore the NHS had no justification for introducing the Dutch protocol as general policy in 2014

The paper addresses the fact that the hormone blocker protocol has been called reversible and that this has not actually been proven and is very likely not true. GHQ covers the many statements by affirmative model advocates that blockers are “fully reversible” and the actual serious consequences of blockers here.

The paper also describes the reality that the blocker to cross-sex hormone protocol stunts genital growth:

One further absence deserves emphasis. The 2005 Symposium had noted the paradox that blocking a boy’s puberty left him with stunted genitalia, which were then not sufficient to transform into a pseudo-vagina. 

This necessitates a more drastic vaginoplasty surgery. We cover the ramifications of this protocol.

Biggs goes on to criticize the Tavistock professionals:

Three years after the experiment began, Carmichael announced success to the tabloid press. “Now we’ve done the study and the results thus far have been positive we’ve decided to continue with it” (Mail on Sunday, 17 May 2014). Her statement was at best misleading.

Biggs on bone density, something the GHQ website covers here:

The authors state reassuringly that bone density did not decline in absolute terms. This is misleading, because growing children need density to increase (Laidlaw 2018). The abstract acknowledges that the children experienced a decline relative to the norm for their age group, and this decline was especially marked for girls. By year three, the average girl on GnRHa had lower bone density than 97.7% of the population in her age group. Surely this raises serious concerns?

A graph:

He describes on the psychological outcomes (particularly in females who are coming out as trans in unprecedented numbers) and what appears to be an intention to spin them in the most positive way possible, despite some negative findings:

Diligent searching has uncovered unpublished results on the psychological effects. Most revealing is an appendix to Carmichael’s report to the Tavistock’s Board of Directors (GIDS 2015).4 It tracks 30 of the children on triptorelin, measuring changes after one year of the drug regime; presumably the remaining 14 subjects had not completed their first year on the drug.5The text is sometimes internally inconsistent and occasionally contradicts the tabulated figures, suggesting that the appendix was prepared in haste. But we can summarize those changes that were reported as statistically significant (p-value < .05). Only one change was positive: “according to their parents, the young people experience less internalizing behavioural problems” (as measured by the Child Behavior Checklist). There were three negative changes. “Natal girls showed a significant increase in behavioural and emotional problems”, according to their parents (also from the Child Behavior Checklist, contradicting the only positive result). One dimension of the Health Related Quality of Life scale, completed by parents, “showed a significant decrease in Physical well-being of their child”. What is most disturbing is that “a significant increase was found in the first item ‘I deliberately try to hurt or kill self’” (in the Youth Self Report questionnaire). Astonishingly, the increased risk of self-harm attracted no comment in Carmichael’s report. Given that puberty blockers are prescribed to treat gender dysphoria, it is paradoxical that “the suppression of puberty does not impact positively on the experience of gender dysphoria” (measured by the Body Image Scale). When differentiated by sex, the impact was positive for boys on one aspect of body image, but negative for girls on two aspects.

Another problematic example:

The abstract proclaims that “adolescents receiving also puberty suppression had significantly better psychosocial functioning after 12 months of GnRHa ... compared with when they had received only psychological support” (Costa et al. 2015: 2206). The literature treats this article as providing evidence in favour of puberty blockers (e.g. Butler et al. 2018; Heneghan and Jefferson 2019). But the abstract is misleading: the analysis actually failed to detect any difference between children who were given GnRHa and those who were not

The paper ends with a suggested ban on hormone blockers and more extensive research:

What, then, is to be done? Richard Byng (2019) recently demanded a moratorium on the use of GnRHa for children suffering from gender dysphoria until there is robust evidence that this drug regime is safe and effective. A team of independent researchers must be given access to all the data from the 2011 experiment. They will need expertise in statistics, psychiatry, and endocrinology; most importantly, they must have no vested interests in the promotion of GnRHa. Given that this experiment has been used since 2014 to justify the provision of these drugs to children under the NHS, the outcomes of this experiment—on all the physical and psychological measures that were collected—must be published urgently.

Update 08/18/19: Adding information on late puberty and lack of bone density “Teenagers who identify as transgender taking powerful ‘puberty blocker’ drugs ‘may suffer from weaker bones in the future’”

Update 10/22/19: The study has been cleared of ethics concerns by the Health Research Authority but criticisms continue.

References:

Adams, S. (2019, August 17). Teenagers who identify as transgender taking powerful ‘puberty blocker’ drugs ‘may suffer from weaker bones in the future.’ Daily Mail. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7368017/Teenagers-identify-transgender-taking-puberty-blocker-drugs-suffer-weaker-bones.html

Biggs, M. (2019, July 29). The Tavistock’s Experiment with Puberty Blockers. Department of Sociology and St Cross College, University of Oxford. Retrieved from http://users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/Biggs_ExperimentPubertyBlockers.pdf

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

A Recent Flurry of Articles in the British Press Concerning the Affirmative Model & Increasing Numbers of Medicalized Gender Dysphoric Youth

News

Several articles have recently been published that are airing concerns and painting complicated pictures of the issue of childhood/teen gender dysphoria in the United Kingdom. This is almost non-existent in the United States, as of now, in any media other than conservative news sites. Part of the reason is likely that the U.K. has a public health care system, and the public is being informed of the statistics showing large increases of youth identifying as trans.

An article in The Telegraph contains quotes from an expert in the National Health Service who believes socially transitioning children may harm them:

Parents are risking psychologically damaging their children by allowing them to “socially transition” their gender without medical or psychiatric advice, NHS experts have warned…

The GIDS psychologists, who practise at London’s Tavistock Clinic, said that younger children who believe they may have been born with the wrong body should be permitted to explore behavioural aspects of the opposite gender, such as dress or types of play.

However, they warned that many such children end up preferring to remain the biological gender they were born, and that to formally socially transition before puberty risks pre-determining the outcome.

GHQ covers the many statements by gender dysphoria affirming mental health and medical professionals who say that social transitions are fully reversible. Some health professionals do not believe there is any proof social transitions are reversible.

Dr. Wren from the Tavistock clinic is not sure a child who may desist will be able to re-identify with their natal sex after years of living transitioned as a child. GHQ members are also skeptical of this.

Dr Bernadette Wren, head of clinical psychology at the trust, said: “Social transitioning has become a really big topic. 

“We have never recommended complete social transitioning but it has become a really popular thing and many advocacy groups really promote it.

“We take the long view because our concern has been that what might work to lower anxiety in a younger child may become the thing that is problematic when they get older.

“It can become harder for children as they move into adolescence, they are moving into puberty and the young person suddenly faces a wall of puberty.

“We think that is setting up problems for later.”

Daily Mail also published an article “Parents are encouraging children as young as three to change gender without consulting specialists, experts warn about social transition” discussing the subject of social transition.

The BBC and the Guardian have been promoting, almost entirely, positive transition stories and narratives around dysphoric youth and the affirmative model. A new BBC article quotes people calling for more caution in “Children with gender identity issues 'need help from all sides”:

Dr Polly Carmichael, consultant clinical psychologist and director of the Gender Identity Development Service (Gids), said many had complex social and personal histories.

"We think about all the needs of young people and try and work closely with local services to clearly manage risk around self-harm, and other difficulties, but also to raise awareness around gender issues," she said.

"I think there is sometimes a danger there can be a split - if someone is presenting with issues around their gender identity, that local services perhaps think that's going to be the answer to everything.

"Whereas in reality it's a complicated picture that needs to be addressed from all sides."

The BBC also covered the investigation on the use of puberty blockers happening in the U.K. in the article “Transgender treatment: Puberty blockers study under investigation.”

The study's full findings have not been published - but early data showed some taking the drugs reported an increase in thoughts of suicide and self-harm.

A Gender Identity Development Service psychologist, Kirsty Entwistle, who quit due to ethics concerns, posted an article on Medium recounting her experiences with the GIDs. She believes political pressure is guiding care. GHQ covers the political environment, often veering into extremism. She also talks about how some affirmative model advocates level accusations of transphobia at any suggestion of caution.

Daily Mail also covered the story of her concerns and how political pressure is driving a very pro-medicalization environment and that children with trauma and other issues are being transitioned too enthusiastically in some health professionals’ views:

In her message to the service’s director, Dr Polly Carmichael, she said ‘clinicians are afraid of raising their concerns for fear of being labelled transphobic by colleagues’…

Dr Entwistle raised another red flag about young people with a wide variety of problems, not related to their gender, being diagnosed as transgender and put on drugs to help them change sex. In addition to sex-abuse victims, she said significant numbers coming to the clinic were living in poverty and ‘risky situations’.

The Spectator also reported on the increase of health professionals expressing concerns about gender dysphoria treatment in Britain.

The Gender Identity Development Service gave The Spectator a statement regarding their treatment approach:

Update: The Gender Identity Development Service gave The Spectator the following statement:

The Gender Identity Development Service operates in a contentious field and appreciates and holds in mind the concerns raised by staff about the complexity and background of many of the referrals we see. There have always been many spaces for staff to share their concerns about the work in general and specific cases they are involved with. These include weekly team meetings, a fortnightly case discussion group, a monthly psychoanalytic group, monthly CPD meetings, a monthly reflective group and a monthly research meeting. In addition, all staff have regular supervision and line management. Senior members of the team are regularly meeting with clinicians to consider more complex issues as the need arises. GIDS, and the Tavistock more widely, is a thoughtful, reflective place to work. Our assessments are co-worked so there is space for discussion between colleagues who were both present with a young person. We also run two service-wide away days per year to discuss developments in the field and in our practice as well as encouraging staff to attend national and international conferences. The service organises regular CPD events which cover topics raised by members of the service. Obviously, specific safeguarding concerns should be raised with line managers and our safeguarding lead. Staff can also avail themselves of the Trust’s Freedom to Speak Up Guardian.

It remains that there are different views about how best to support young people with gender dysphoria. Fewer than half of patients who present to the service go on to our endocrine clinics and we do not hold a view on what the outcome will be for a child when they come in to the service. There is no pressure to provide medical intervention from the service, though there can often be from the young person or family. Our work seeks to minimise the impact of distress associated with gender development on general development, whilst spending time exploring gender identity and the range of possible pathways which may or may not include physical treatment.

We appreciate that people may want wider discussions about how best to care for this population and for this reason we continue to engage with a range of stakeholders, including our staff and patients. It is vital that the voices of young people are heard. We will continue to deliver our service in a considered, ethical and caring manner, as endorsed in our CQC inspections.

Other articles:

“Use of puberty blockers on transgender children to be investigated”

”Puberty blocking drugs: ‘For the past four years I’ve been stuck as a child’”

“Politicised trans groups put children at risk, says expert”

References:

Bannerman, L. (2019, July 26). Puberty blocking drugs: ‘For the past four years I’ve been stuck as a child’. The Times [London]. Retrieved from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/experts-investigate-use-of-puberty-blockers-on-transgender-children-6l695lflf

Bannerman, L. (2019, July 26). Use of puberty blockers on transgender children to be investigated. The Times [London]. Retrieved from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/experts-investigate-use-of-puberty-blockers-on-transgender-children-6l695lflf

Bodkin, H. (2019, July 17). Encouraging children to 'socially transition' gender risks long-term harm, say NHS experts. The Telegraph. Retrieved from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/17/encouraging-children-socially-transition-gender-risks-long-term/

Children with gender identity issues 'need help from all sides'. (2019, July 17). BBC. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/health-49020371

Cohen, D., Barnes, H. (2019, July 22). Transgender treatment: Puberty blockers study under investigation. BBC. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/health-49036145

Doward. J. (2019, July 27th). Politicised trans groups put children at risk, says expert. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/27/trans-lobby-pressure-pushing-young-people-to-transition?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR3V8gNC4D6Z_qmT20be6euLDKth1J5fpHbYplGBAMGnQC25S-ggEuuam-M

Entwistle, K. (2019, July 18). An open letter to Dr Polly Carmichael from a former GIDS clinician. Medium. Retrieved from https://medium.com/@kirstyentwistle/an-open-letter-to-dr-polly-carmichael-from-a-former-gids-clinician-53c541276b8d

Hayward, E. (20189, July 17). Parents are encouraging children as young as three to change gender without consulting specialists, experts warn. Daily Mail. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7258767/Parents-encouraging-children-young-three-change-gender-without-consulting-specialists.html

Kirkup, J. (2019, July). It’s time to listen to the NHS gender clinic whistleblowers. The Spectator. Retrieved from https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/07/its-time-to-listen-to-the-nhs-gender-clinic-whistleblowers/

Manning, S. (2019, July 20). NHS psychologist claims poor and abused children are wrongly being labelled transgender and prescribed sex-change treatments without appropriate testing by clinicians who 'fear being labelled transphobic.’ Daily Mail. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7268807/NHS-psychologist-claims-poor-abused-kids-wrongly-labelled-transgender.html

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

Professionals from Various Backgrounds Described as "Whistleblowers" are Releasing a Book Challenging the Affirmative Model Used in Britain.

News

The Daily Mail has published an article about a book being released by an array of health professionals and academics challenging the ethics of the affirmative model used in Britain and rapidly being adopted (see here and here) everywhere in the West.

Their opinions will be highlighted in an upcoming book called Inventing Transgender Children And Young People:

The book warns:

-Doctors are failing to tell young people they are 'sacrificing' their chance to have children by taking powerful sex-change drugs;

-Psychologists are scared to question transgender ideology;

-Clinicians who resist diagnosing children as transgender face accusations of transphobia;

-Britain's only NHS child gender service is failing to acknowledge other reasons for youngsters wanting to change sex, such as autism;

-Teenagers who have 'normal feelings' of discomfort with their bodies are being classified as transgender.

Many worries and negative opinions are expressed by social science, mental health, and medical professionals:

A whistleblower from Britain's only NHS gender clinic for children said: 'I'm really angry at what's happening to these children. What I've witnessed feels incredibly distressing and disturbing and like something that should be stopped.'

The psychiatrist, who last year produced a critical internal report on GIDS which branded the service 'not fit for purpose', further warned: 'Many services have championed the use of medical and surgical intervention with nowhere near sufficient attention to the serious, irreversible damage this can cause and with very disturbingly superficial attitudes to the issue of consent in young children.'

One of the NHS gender specialists said: 'I keep thinking about all of the children, adolescents and families who are being harmed by the one-dimensional discussion and the attack on truth and on thinking and on what we know about adolescent well-being.'

Another added: 'I'm angry with all the grown-ups, all the clever people, all the thoughtful people, who are letting this happen.' One of the issues causing 'turmoil' at the clinic is the prospect that children are being rendered infertile by the medication prescribed for them.

Some of the other comments reflect issues raised by GHQ about medical consequences, the increasing numbers of females coming out as trans, trans activist pressure influencing professionals, and homophobia fueling trans identification.

The Gender Identity Services in Britain denies that they are behaving unethically and that they aren’t properly informing youth about the risks:

Last night a spokesman for GIDS insisted the service took a 'thoughtful and safe approach'. He said an internal review in response to concerns about the clinic's practices had made recommendations to address certain issues.

'However, we strongly refute the blanket and generalised criticisms of the service,' he said.

References:

Manning, S. (2019, July 13). The book that dares to take on transgender myths told to children: Experts reveal psychologists are scared to question transgender ideology, GPs are afraid of being branded transphobic and teens are being wrongly diagnosed. Daily Mail. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7244783/Academics-medical-experts-fears-children-number-seeking-sex-change-operations-sky-rockets.html

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

RxISK Requests Reports from Trans Individuals About Medical Treatment Side Effects

News

A drug side effects reporting site, RxISK, has called for submissions of reports of side effects from transgender medicine.

A description of the RxISK site:

RxISK is owned and operated by Data Based Medicine Americas Ltd. (DBM), based in Toronto, Canada.

It is run by a group of high-profile medical experts with international reputations in early drug-side-effect detection and risk mitigation, pharmacovigilance, and patient-centered care.

It’s call for feedback around trans medicine side effects titled “Transgender Meds: A Call for Reports” reviews information reflecting the same concerns examined on the GHQ website.

The specific medical treatments they are asking for information on are as follows:

This post is an invitation to report on drugs prescribed to transgender people. These include cross-sex hormones – testosterone for women, estrogen and progesterone for men, hormone-blocking agents like Lupron given to children with gender dysphoria to stop the physical changes of puberty, and other drugs like finasteride, spironolactone and birth-control pills prescribed to manage the transition from male to female or female to male.

Some of the reasons they cite for the request are the increasing numbers of youth being medically treated and the changing demographics and protocol around this:

Until recently, drugs and surgery were choices facing a small number of transgender people, mainly adults. Only when a child’s longstanding “gender identity disorder” persisted into their teens would clinics discuss physical treatments. For adult patients, most required months of counseling and at least a year of “social transition” to living in their preferred gender role.

They go on to list many of the medical risks and side effects covered in our topic on medical consequences.

References:

RxISK. (2019, July 8). Transgender Meds: A Call for Reports. Retrieved from https://rxisk.org/transgender-meds-a-call-for-reports/

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

Royal College of General Practitioners Has Issued a Position Statement Expressing Alarm About Treatments of Children with Gender Dysphoria

News

The Royal College of General Practitioners, described as “highly influential” in this Daily Mail article, has issued a position statement warning about the lack of evidence of safety of current protocols used to treat trans-identified minors, whose numbers are increasing drastically.

Here are some quotes from the article “GPs risk causing transgender storm after issuing unprecedented warning over 'lack of evidence' on treatments that pave way for children to have a sex change”:

And it says there needs to be far more research into the pros and cons of treatment, including medical intervention being compared with a 'wait and see' approach…

And it says there needs to be far more research into the pros and cons of treatment, including medical intervention being compared with a 'wait and see' approach…

Last night, doctors said it was the first time a major UK medical institution had called into serious question how transgender patients are treated on the NHS…

The number of 13-year-olds seeking treatment at England's only child gender identity clinic has risen by 30 per cent in just one year, while referrals for 14-year-olds are up 25 per cent, recently released figures show.

For the first time, most patients are under 15.

Equally significantly, girls wanting to transition to being male dominate, making up 74 per cent of patients at the Tavistock Clinic in London.

The original policy statement can be found on the RCGP.org website.

More information on the increasing numbers of females identifying as trans can be found on our website here.

Statements that indicate clinicians themselves acknowledge they are experimenting on minors can be found here.

References:

Adams, S. (2019, July 16). GPs risk causing transgender storm after issuing unprecedented warning over 'lack of evidence' on treatments that pave way for children to have a sex change. Daily Mail. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7220897/GPs-risk-transgender-storm-issuing-unprecedented-warning-lack-evidence-treatments.html?fbclid=IwAR0wz9KZm5QEb76K0fPs4AJP_j50rq4Qd6MttA5Hr-kCj9DVeySRJgmFX9k

Royal College of General Practitioners. (2019, June). The role of the GP in caring for gender-questioning and transgender patients. Retrieved from https://www.rcgp.org.uk/-/media/Files/Policy/A-Z-policy/2019/RCGP-transgender-care-position-statement-june-2019.ashx?la=en

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

Parent Group Circulates a Petition to the Surgeon GeneraL

News Commentary

A petition is circulating from a non-partisan parent group, Kelsey Coalition, to encourage the Surgeon General to look into the medical effects of transitioning minors.

Some comments about the petition:

Parents who consent to these treatments are often misled to believe that their child will be at greater risk of suicide if they do not. There is no evidence to support this claim.

There is some evidence to support the claim that rejecting a child’s trans-identification can have harmful mental health effects. This site does not advocate for making rejecting comments to a trans-identified youth, or indicating they will be devalued if they transition, as they do have higher suicide ideation rates. There hasn’t been any studies with control groups (considered unethical) to compare treatment plans for minors distressed about their gender. But there is evidence that denying the trans youth’s identity or rejecting the youth may be harmful.

Of all of the information around minors transitioning, suicide is one of the most important subjects to try to frame honestly. GHQ reviews the data that denying transition may increase suicide risk, but some data shows it may not help suicide risk. It is a complicated issue and the methodology in studies is far from perfect. And it doesn’t explain why it appears there are more young people are saying they feel suicidal around their gender than ever before, as more and more young people are taking on trans identities. The pro-transition argument would be that these youths always felt this way but just didn’t talk about it.

But suicide rates are going up in young people in general.

It really is an unprecedented surge," said lead author Oren Miron, a research associate at Harvard Medical School in Boston. "You can go back decades and you won't find such a sharp increase."

One objective analysis of suicide risk in youth can be found in this presentation (46:00) by Dr. Ken Zucker where dysphoria clinic patients are isolated. The youths have suicide risk rates similar to other youth presenting for professional help for mental health issues, like depression or bipolar disorder.

There is solid evidence that there are serious health risks in transitioning and ethical questions about having immature children, teens, and young adults making these decisions, the impetus for this petition. Even gender dysphoria affirmative model advocates make statements indicating their treatments are experimental.

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

British Doctors' Editorial Raises All of the Same Concerns Present on the GHQ Site

News

British doctors have submitted an editorial to a UK medical journal that reflects the same concerns raised on the GHQ website.

From the abstract of “Gender incongruence in children, adolescents, and adults” by Bewley et al., 2019:

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.

One Family Closely Involved with a Trans Support Group has Three Dysphoric Children Not Biologically Related

News Commentary

One British family associated with the controversial trans support group Mermaids, that promotes validating all gender dysphoria in children, has three dysphoric children who are not biologically related. Despite some alarm from social workers, a judge is allowing their four year old to transition.

Affirmative model advocates, such as the researchers at the Trans Youth Project, emphasize an “innate gender identity” narrative, and the promotion of these studies is being used to justify putting thousands of children on hormone blockers, giving them cross-sex hormones, and offering them surgery as minors, whether this is their goal or not.

“There’s a lot of public writing focused on the idea that we have no idea which of these gender-nonconforming kids will or will not eventually identify as trans,” says Olson. And if only small proportions do, as some studies have suggested, the argument goes that “they shouldn’t be transitioning.” She disputes that idea. “Our study suggests that it’s not random,” she says. “We can’t say this kid will be trans and this one won’t be, but it’s not that we have no idea!”

Some youth who are dysphoric as children will decide to transition as adults.

There is also a fair amount of data to support the argument environmental and cultural factors influence gender dysphoria. They are covered extensively on this site, in addition to data that supports biological causes for transgenderism and homosexuality, in the “Nature vs. Nurture” topic. One of the influences that may be environmental is family stability. Children who are adopted or foster parented appear to have higher rates of gender dysphoria (or parents who get them treated for it).

We asked a person competent in statistics to calculate the odds of having three seriously gender dysphoric children in one family based on some recent reported percentages of transgender people in the population. The first two percentages are from The Williams Institute. The third statistic is from a recent Minnesota school survey.

0.3% = (0.3/100)^3 = 27 chances in a billion

0.7% = (0.7/100)^3 = 343 chances in 1 billion

3% = (3/100)^3 = 27 chances in 1 million

This family’s situation is very rare if all three children have a biologically driven, innate gender identity.

We do not have open comments on the Gender Health Query website. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t interested in what you have to say. If you have a comment, blog post idea, or any other feedback, we would be interested if the information can be supported by science research, an informed opinion, real-world observations, or personal experiences. Please contact us.