The United Kingdom is preparing for a new clinical trial in January involving medications that prevent puberty. A group of over 200 kids who believe they might be transgender, possibly as young as eight years old, would participate in the research. The development occurred after drugs were banned for gender treatment last year, owing to concerns expressed by an extensive evaluation regarding the lack of clinical data regarding their safety for minors.

According to reports, the new trial has received public funding and has been submitted for ethics approval. A staggering £11 million budget has been allocated, and nearly 220 youngsters under the age of 16 who are going through puberty are expected to engage in the trial. The information was submitted by the researchers from King’s College London (KCL), who will look into the effect of the drugs on their physical, social and emotional health.

Professor Emily Simonoff asserted that young people and their parents seeking aid for gender distress “tell us that they don’t know what to do – they look at the information that’s out there, and they don’t know what’s best for them,” reported BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). She is the study leader and professor of child and adolescent psychiatry at the institution.

Simonoff further claimed, “We are looking very much at the balance between, possibly, benefits for mental health and quality of life, and any possible risks or harms.” She added that it will involve keeping an eye on the physical well-being of the individuals. This is also the first study to examine the effect on brain development.

Cass Review and the truth about puberty blockers

Drugs called puberty blockers or puberty-suppressing hormones (PSH) are used to postpone or avoid puberty. They were utilised on young people with gender dysphoria. However, doctors can now only administer them to patients under the age of eighteen as part of a research study due to the uncertainty around their safety. The details were brought to light by the Cass Review into gender care.

Dr Hilary Cas,s who headed the research, pointed out, “We don’t have good evidence” that puberty blockers are suitable to take to “arrest puberty,” while talking to the BBC. The former President of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) stated that the initial clinical trial had been expanded to a larger group of youth before the trial’s findings were disclosed.

The paediatrician also noted, “It is unusual for us to give a potentially life-changing treatment to young people and not know what happens to them in adulthood, and that’s been a particular problem that we haven’t had the follow-up into adulthood to know what the results of this are.”

Cass suggested creating a puberty blocker trial as an element of a “full program of research” as she observed that gender medicine was “built on shaky foundations” and “an area of remarkably weak evidence.” She emphasised, “My review uncovered a very weak evidence base for benefits from the use of puberty blockers for children and young people with gender dysphoria. In fact, some children had more negative than positive effects.”

“However, given that there are clinicians, children and families who believe passionately in the beneficial effects, a trial was the only way forward to make sense of this,” she added. Hence, Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, outlawed puberty blockers after the four-year independent review concluded that the data supporting their use was “remarkably weak.”

The government then implemented an indefinite prohibition on the medications being prescribed to children and young persons who are unsure about their gender identity, either privately or through the National Health Service (NHS).

“Sale and supply of puberty blockers via private prescriptions for the treatment of gender incongruence and/or gender dysphoria to be banned indefinitely in the UK for under 18s. It follows a targeted consultation and advice on patient safety from the independent Commission on Human Medicines and the Cass Review,” declared the Department of Health and Social Care.

The fresh trial is on the cards

A study named “Pathway” has been approved by the UK to purportedly ascertain “how the NHS can best support children and young people with gender incongruence,” per the World Health Organisation’s diagnostic manual. The subjects are expected to meet specific criteria. All of them should have reached puberty, but not be above 16. They must also fulfil certain requirements and undergo extensive medical and psychological testing before the commencement of the process.

A group of specialised NHS doctors need to have a complete overview of their health before approving their candidature. The youngsters also have to demonstrate that they have a sufficient grasp of the possible consequences of using puberty blockers alongside the permission of their parent or legal guardian to gain consent. They will also receive continuous psychological assistance.

The researchers intend to start the trial on one group immediately and a second group after a year. The drugs will be offered for two years to one group and one year later to the other. The kids in these groups shall be selected at random.

For girls and boys, puberty usually begins at age 11 and 12, respectively. However, the researchers stated that there would be no minimum age to take the medications. The experiment will focus on factors including brain development, bone density and long-term mental health and wellness.

Only patients under specialised care from NHS Children and Young People’s Gender Services will be eligible for the trial. There will be another study to compare the brain health of persons given puberty suppression with those who were not.

According to the research team, the trial has received ethical approval and is poised to begin soon. Five to six children will be recruited each month,th and the preliminary outcome should be accessible in about four years. Moreover, a bigger observational study with 3,000 kids is going to probe various forms of assistance and their efficacy.

Interestingly, the trial protocol was reportedly declined to be made public by the Health Research Authority (HRA), which is in charge of ethics approvals for such initiatives in the nation.

Pathway sparks outrage, warning of legal action

The trial has generated massive controversy, with opponents even threatening legal action. Keira Bell, who sued the Tavistock gender identity clinic in 2020 after receiving cross-sex medication and puberty blockers as a teenager, has threatened legal action if the trial is not terminated right away.

The NHS closed the Tavistock Clinic, a facility for services related to gender identity development, after an inquiry discovered that it was unsafe for children. Bell regretted her decision and expressed that the staff should have challenged her more about the critical life-choice.

She has conveyed that it is “disgusting” to administer these drugs to kids after being barred because of their perils. “Children are essentially going to be harmed from this trial,” she voiced in an interview with the BBC. She added that it could impact fertility and sexual function while disclosing how she was “extremely angry” about her personal experience with puberty blockers.

Bell and fellow activist James Esses, a psychotherapist,t even issued legal letters to Streeting and medical research institutions in relation to the matter. “Some of the children who are going to be taking part in this trial are not even old enough to open a current account or open a Facebook profile,” Esses mentioned.

The Health Research Authority (HRA) and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Authority (MHRA) have received legal letters from the campaigners. The clearance for the trial has been granted by them. The South West London and Maudsley NHS Trust, King’s College London, NHS England and Streeting have also been contacted over the concern.

The trial provokes widespread disapproval

The trial has likewise drawn condemnation from two former Tavistock Clinic members. Susan and Marcus Evans, who worked for the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust, demanded that the trial be put on “immediate halt.” They argued, “The stakes are too high and the lessons from recent failures too fresh to ignore,” in a nine-page letter and asked Streeting to halt investing in “this shallow, harmful medical trial.”

The two stressed, “There is huge value in learning more about the ongoing longer-term outcomes for them before we impose puberty blockers on a new cohort of children.” They recommended that studies on those who have already taken puberty blockers be restarted.

“The trial design is incapable of answering the important questions about risk that have been raised – to cognitive function, bone health, fertility and long-term health. It is unethical as it will be exposing children to risk for no clear benefit,” ex-psychiatrist and Tavistock whistleblower Dr David Bell told The Telegraph.

Associate sociology professor Dr Michael Biggs of the University of Oxford speculated that the impending trial might turn into a recurrence of the Tavistock blunder, “this time with even more children being subjected to an unethical experiment.”

Dr Louise Irvine, co-chairman of the Clinical Advisory Network on Sex and Gender, condemned the HRA, complaining that its “supervision, regulation and accountability process was totally inadequate” and the previous experiment “failed to do its job.” She added, “The world is watching” this time.

Former education secretary Sir Gavin Williamson signed a letter written by independent MP Rupert Lowe accusing the move to proceedofs caving in to political pressure. The letter outlined, “We cannot and must not repeat the catastrophic failures of the Tavistock era, and we cannot allow twisted ideological pressure to override our duty to protect children.”

Canterbury MP Rosie Duffield remarked that she could not “believe I came to Parliament to have to point out that we should never use experimental/irreversible drugs in trials on children under 13 which halt their puberty.” She stepped down as the Labour whip in protest last year.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage even sent a letter to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, asking him to pay heed to the concerns and roll back the trial. He wrote, “The Pathways trial represents state-sponsored child abuse, dressed up as research, and is wholly incompatible with the NHS duty to safeguard children and do no harm.”

Conservative Party leader and former Equalities Minister Kemi Badenoch reiterated Cass Review’s results that treating kids required “a holistic approach” and voiced, “Puberty blockers have never been certified as a safe or effective treatment for children with gender distress, and it is hard to believe there could ever be an ethical way of trialling these irreversible drugs for this purpose.”

Anti-trial petitions attract support from JK Rowling and Richard Dawkins

On the one hand, legal action is imminent accompanied by huge protest over the matter, with endorsement from various politicians, while on the other hand, campaigners have launched online petitions that have already garnered significant backing from both netizens and prominent British figures such as author JK Rowling and biologist Richard Dawkins, thereby intensifying pressure on the government to address the gravity of the situation.

A petition titled “Memorandum of Understanding on the Role of Puberty in Adolescent Development” by Genspect, which outlined the dangers associated with the forthcoming clinical trial and demanded its cancellation, was signed by Dawkins.

The petition stated that each child has a right to an open future with “the freedom to enter adulthood as whole as reasonably possible – physically, emotionally, and cognitively – and to have the opportunity to assume adult responsibilities and fully participate in society.” It added that “medically suppressing puberty to relieve gender-related distress infringes upon this right.” The petition described the puberty blockers for gender-distressed minors as “ethically unjustified, medically unnecessary and potentially harmful.”

It mentioned that this natural process has been hampered by the adoption of puberty blockers, stressing, “Approximately 98% of minors starting puberty blockers proceed to cross-sex hormones, with many also undergoing irreversible surgeries, contradicting claims that these interventions merely pause development. Puberty suppression poses considerable risks to physical health and presents significant uncertainties regarding its impact on cognitive and psychosocial development.”

Esses, who serves as a spokesperson for Sex Matters, launched a similar petition named “Cancel the clinical trial into puberty blockers & safeguard vulnerable children.” The cause received support from Rowling, who also encouraged others to back the petition,n which is inching closer to 125,000 signatures.

Launched on the official Parliament website on 8th January, the petition experienced a spike in popularity after the Harry Potter author shared it. A petition must gather 100,000 signatures to qualify for discussion in the Parliament.

“Most people really, truly hate the idea of harming children in the name of ideology,” commented Helen Joy,ce who is director of advocacy, Sex Matters. “The government needs to take note – people loathe the idea of the puberty blocker trial and won’t forgive anyone who is involved,” she warned.

“I’ve spent over half a century in medicine, and I certainly do not approve of using puberty-blocking medicine on healthy young children. It is dangerous and wrong,” pointed out Professor Karol Sikora, a consultant oncologist, also spoke of her satisfaction over the positive response to the petition.

Furthermore, Labour MP Jonathan Hinder expressed, “The speed of this petition reaching 100k signatures shows the strong public opposition to this.” He contended that his party’s “voters oppose puberty blockers by a margin of four to one. Wes Streeting must think again.”

Conclusion

This trial has encountered considerable flak spanning the political spectrum and including concerned citizens from all walks of life for legitimate reasons. There are substantial reservations that Pathway could mirror the Tavistock issue, but on a grander scale, affecting a greater number of vulnerable lives.

The Bayswater Support Group, which assists 600 families with gender-confused children, expressed that it was “inconceivable” that the NHS was geared up “to re-open a back door to further vulnerable children taking medically unnecessary and potentially irreversible drugs.”

“All the way through, I’ve had to weigh up the risk of harm to children and young people, which is why it’s not straightforward, why I’ve leaned on clinical advice from people far more qualified than us to make these decisions. But this is not easy, and it is not a comfortable decision, and it’s one that I wrestle with daily,” Steerling has stated amid the mounting attacks regarding Pathway.

The trial would be “watched like a hawk” to make sure that “everything is done absolutely by the book,” vowed Shadow Health Minister Dr Caroline Johnson, who is a paediatric consultant. However, the guarantees have not managed to mitigate the criticism stemming from real concerns.

More importantly, the medications inflict enduring and irreversible harm, especially on young patients who are already at a sensitive age. Adolescence is also a crucial period for the rapid acquisition of new cognitive skills, and therefore, the possible effects of puberty blockers on brain growth and function have been a major source of concern. The same apprehensions have been put forward,d including by those who underwent these operations and were left to cope with their repercussions, underscoring the negligence on the government’s part.

The youngsters are relegated to the status of guinea pigs, gs disregarding their future and well-being, while millions are wasted to devastate lives just to validate a warped perception of gender identity and liberalism, instead of offering genuine help to resolve the problem at hand.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here