World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) Files

My opinion is irrelevant. I neither support nor don't support puberty blockers. In the same way I neither support nor don't support a particular drug.

It's not my decision to make. It's the clinician's decision.

And as long as that decision is evidenced-based medicine, that's what matters — not what I personally like or dislike.

Ditto.

I think the one thing that we should be able to agree on is that the Tavistocks was massively underfunded and underresourced for many decades - and this lead directly to child safety issue.

The best outcome from the Cass report will be the significant increase in funding and resources for gender dyphoric people in general. This will lead to more timely and appropriate treatment to all people referred for consultations.

That is in no way accepted by reasonable people and is a slander of the medical profession.

What we are witnessing with this report is the same disinformation we saw with anti-vax campaigners.

Like the people dismissing WPATH files and the Cass Report, they argue there's a kind of medical "conspiracy" going on; that people cannot be trusted; that certain medical professionals are biased and compromised, and that "we know what's really going on" here; the "we know what the best medical advice should be based on our own limited data that just happens to agree with us" etc.

It's funny to watch the same side who rightly identified and condemned the illogic of anti-vaxxers use exactly the same strategies to wholly dismiss or play down the WPATH files and Cass Report.

The report says fairly much what I expected it to say - which is not the same as what you think it says.

The treatment path will be very much the same, but what will happen is people will get more external supports when they are found to not need gender affirming treatments, which again is better than the history of out the door and your on your own.

You so want this to be the end of gender affirming treatments that you can't see that it is the exact opposite of what you imagine will be the outcome.

Clinicians will continue to offer the best treatments for their patients and since transgenderism is real that will mean therapies that affirm that for those that need it. Anything less would be unethical.

You cannot deny treatment to people who have been identified as needing it - what that would look like is medical malpractice and no ethical clinician would sign up to it especially with the world looking on.

The only basis on which you could attempt that is if you deny the reality of transgenderism which is an untenable medical position. Treatments will carry on much as before because clinicians were correctly identifying their patients.

Your belief that there was widespread over treatment is simply not evidence based so your belief that the review will produce radically different outcomes is simply your wish.

If that is true then transgender people will be mighty grateful because they will get faster and better gender affirmative treatments.

The Cass Report also detailed how adult gender clinics refused to cooperate with Hillary Cass when she asked them for their data so she could do long-term follow-up. In the report, it says they "thwarted" her efforts to gather this information.

This is not the action of people acting in good faith, refusing to provide essential data. It's definitely not the actions of people who care about the actual treatment outcomes of the people under their care.