Cal Horton (they/them)

Any wikipedia editors out there could update the cass page to confirm that the york studies were advised by cass, Steensma and kaitiala (as per recent york foi) - hardly 'independent' reviews

This is what you would do if the intended outcome was to ban access to care. They'll cite the numerosity of the reviews, the "low quality" etc. but that was by design. None of these reviews were intended to pass muster, just provide pretext for restricting access.

I haven't dived into it, but it seems they excluded from the 'HRT plus blockers' study anyone who started blockers first, and then later added HRT.

i.e. almost everyone under 18 for whom that was the expected & mandated 'stepped' approach.

Nonsense piled on farce.

Typical NHS.

In a competitive field where it is hard to stand out, to truly shine for national transphobia, the UK and NHS are absolutely knocking it out of the park. They looked and looked and only found 1 study on puberty blockers + oestrogen

Others try and transphobe but we are world class transphobes

It is those chairing, steering, or designing the studies that are of more interest, than those who plugged in numbers. This company might not be a problem, they are just following a terms of reference that was rigged by careful design.

Also, in case you've spotted it - Does it say who the authors of the 10 studies were or anything on the make up of the advisory group overseeing their design and leadership?

Does it say who the authors of the 10 studies were or anything on the make up of the advisory group overseeing their design and leadership?

Do they define what they mean by non-binary partial transition? Are they talking about low dose E, or just pretending regular oestrogen works differently in a non-binary trans femme person than in a trans girl?

Success was achieved. Thanks for the encouragement.

Thank you. Last time I made myself while in a similar state of stress I ended up crying in the central isle at the supermarket and being entirely unable to make basic food choices, but this time WILL be different & I can be a competent human even while stressed. One step at a time here we go

Blimey I am struggling today. I also need to go food shopping in order to carry on with basic life functions. Pls can someone give me a kick up the ass to believe this is indeed within my capability right now.

The toll this state persecution takes on us all FFS

Noting that the NICE reviews were chaired by Cass, and the York reviews were chaired by Cass.

So '10 reviews' is just 'Cass says'.

It's normal to restrict or move away from treatments when evidence of harms starts to outweigh evidence of benefits.

It's not normal to restrict or move away from treatments when there is evidence of benefits and none of harms, even if the evidence of benefits is "low quality."

They are not 'transphobic', we are told. They don't hate trans people.

They simply feel deeply 'concerned' about children being 'trans', & therefore, need to put 'sensible' people in charge of trans children's healthcare, people who, for example, don't believe in the existence of trans children.

I'm told some Labour MPs are unhappy with this latest act of hostility towards trans people being blamed on Streeting. That feels silly or naïve. It's happening because Wesley kept in place in the NHS, indeed encouraged, the ideologues that Kemi Badenoch *told us* she introduced to key positions.

To be left dead by attacks is the natural state of the Middle Easterner, while in the Western culture (also Israel somehow) being killed is a major taboo.

What do we think the NHS means by 'independent' here?

If I have closeted trans people following me (and I know I do) please do not let this line of thinking stop you from transitioning and living as yourself. Your life does not end if you don't transition at 18, or 20, or 30, or 50. I promise.

This rhetoric is for policy, not for individuals.

Looks around at everything on fire

Worse case scenario it is a pre-step towards 1) telling pharmacies not to dispense for private or overseas HRT prescriptions for under 18s and or 2) criminal ban on private or overseas HRT provision for under 18s.

I'm therefore stressed on exactly what it is a pre-step towards.

Best case scenario it is a pre-step towards 1) more aggressive action to WellBN families 2) more ammunition for social services where under 18s go private and 3) more pressure on UK private providers for 16/17 yr olds.

I'm struggling this morning, not because of the NHS policy announcement, that changes nothing in practice, but because I'm always depressingly accurate in predicting where healthcare policy goes, and because this policy doesn't make sense as an end goal, but as a step towards something else.

Wait - you are have some hope left? - can I borrow some?

I haven't seen anything

Today I'm meant to be working on a thing that will be useful in a future world where state-funded trans healthcare is run by and for trans people.

It's really hard in these current times to find the optimism to work on it.

Literally can't even start this morning.

If you have been blessed with a trans child;

1. Keep them away from the NHS
2. Try and move abroad if you can
3. Be prepared to fight transphobic staff at school
4. Find other sources of hormones/medication. If you can, get a car loan to pay for them.
5. Protect them from all governmental agencies.

the average cis person would have to be admitted into a psych ward if they suddenly had to manage the regular stress of day-to-day that we all face with the added pressure of being a tranny and having the Entire World focus on trying to kill you almost every day

"Like all propaganda, the Cass Review is not intended to stand up to scrutiny. It is intended to make a bang, a media blitz across the country saying trans healthcare is bad, which can then be used by the government to justify further restricting access to gender-affirming care."

@notrightruth.bsky.social apparently a Palmer review. Why would this review be needed I wonder given all the other reviews? Or is it just a 'review of hormone use' as opposed to a review of the evidence base. If the former he prob reviewed MDT panel notes & concluded no-one needed HRT under 18.

What is the "review conducted by a head injury specialist" please?