X Close

WHO quietly announces controversial gender guidance

The WHO is outsourcing decisions to trans activists. Credit: Getty

December 28, 2023 - 4:45pm

A few days before Christmas, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that it would be developing guidelines on “the health of trans and gender diverse people”, with a focus on access to hormones and surgeries (what it calls “gender-inclusive care”) and legal recognition of gender self-identification. 

The WHO also announced the formation of a guideline development group. This panel of experts is heavily stocked with apparatchiks from the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH), including two former presidents; trans activists employed by the Global Action for Trans Equality network, or GATE; the parent of a trans-identifying child; and at least one member with strong ties to the pharmaceutical industry. 

A few of the panellists have especially colourful public profiles, none more so than Florence Ashley, a “transfeminine jurist and bioethicist” whose preferred pronouns are “They/Them/That Bitch”. Ashley believes that “puberty blockers ought to be treated as the default option” for all youth, as opposed to “letting puberty runs its course”. The activist argues that letting this stage of human development progress uninterrupted “strongly favours cis embodiment by raising the psychological and medical toll of transitioning”. Thus: 

… Puberty blockers structurally place transgender and cisgender hormonal futures in approximate symmetry. Youth who take puberty blockers have their options wide open, their bodies unaltered by either testosterone or oestrogen. Although much remains unknown about the long-term effects of puberty blockers, limited empirical evidence and clinical experience make us more than justified in assuming that whatever risks puberty blockers have do not foreclose future life paths as much as undergoing puberty does.
- Florence Ashley

Besides being absurd, this proposal discounts the possible effects of puberty blockers on adolescent brain development. We don’t yet know how suppressing the sex hormones that spur cognitive development during puberty affects factors like impulse control, emotional regulation, critical thinking, and decision-making. What’s more, evidence suggests that blocking puberty may “lock” children into a trans identity, rather than buying time and space to think. 

Ashley has argued elsewhere that clinical assessment does not predict or prevent regret (so why bother?) and dismissed concerns about the rapid increase in adolescent and young adult females seeking transition. Ashley concludes on an odd note, first denying, then embracing the possible role of social influence: “If the rise in transgender identities evidences social contagion — a claim I have shown to be unsubstantiated — it may yet be a healthy contagion.” This comes from the philosopher who once mused: “What is your main motivation in life, and why is it getting railed in a sundress by a hot dyke?”

Another panellist, Teddy Cook, described the “actual side effects of gender-affirming medical care” as “a significantly improved quality of life, significantly better health and wellbeing outcomes, a dramatic decrease in distress, depression and anxiety and a substantial increase of gender euphoria and trans joy”, concluding that “we are not at risk of harm by affirming our gender.” 

Panellists with WPATH-heavy résumés oversaw the controversial inclusion of eunuchs, as well as the exclusion of a draft chapter on medical ethics, from that organisation’s most recent standards of care. In short, many of them have significant personal, intellectual, and professional conflicts of interest that may interfere with their ability to evaluate and follow the evidence when that evidence leads to uncomfortable places. 

Conflicts of interest are unavoidable, but balance matters. One won’t find any critics, concerned clinicians, experts in child and adolescent development, specialists in neurodevelopment, or desisters and detransitioners in the WHO’s guideline development group. 

The organisation also opened a brief window for public comment over the Christmas holidays — a window that closes just two days after Epiphany. If Friday afternoons are the best time of the week to dump bad news, the quiet stretch around Christmas and New Year is the ideal time to solicit public comment — if one wants as few people as possible to weigh in, that is. 

The World Health Organization has a responsibility to facilitate — not preempt — an open, transparent, and scientific dialogue about the risks, benefits, and unknowns surrounding the most effective and ethical treatments for gender-dysphoric patients. At this point, such a process would require starting from scratch.


Eliza Mondegreen is a graduate student in psychiatry and the author of Writing Behavior on Substack.

elizamondegreen

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

168 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
6 months ago

How the frick have these clowns gained so much power in the world?

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Bureaucracies trust one another. They look at one another and see themselves.

Bob Downing
Bob Downing
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Because we let them? Of another UN agency (the IPCC) it was acknowledged long ago that “of course it’s political, it’s a UN body“. Set against the backdrop of political rectitude which still pervades Western thinking, the entire network of such bodies is open to any and every such pressure group. Which we pay for, and cannot not do so because our own bureaucrats and activists would howl in outraged anguish. As suggested in the article, the non-Western world will take no notice of what emerges, knowing that we shall, so it’s a routine way of trapping us in our own sacred lunacies.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
6 months ago
Reply to  Bob Downing

Yes, I can‘t quite see African and Asian leaders jumping for joy by the prospect of WHO’s policy on “trans and gender diverse people”. We, in the West, will destroy our sanity, the health of our children and, if that isn’t enough, NetZero will finallyfinish off the West’s future prosperity …

Last edited 6 months ago by Stephanie Surface
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

Respect for facts is sane, and that is not what you are about here.

Wim de Vriend
Wim de Vriend
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

To identify Insane, just look in the mirror

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Wim de Vriend

True you have nothing substantive to say.

Anthony Roe
Anthony Roe
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Ask your government, they are funding this.

Simon Denis
Simon Denis
6 months ago
Reply to  Anthony Roe

And when we find that they do, can we vote them out? With gerrymandered elections, ignored referenda (see France and Holland some twenty years ago) frustrated referenda (observe the despicable plain sight conspiracy of the British establishment to junk Brexit) and uniparties offering a parody of democratic process across the western world? The WHO is just one department of the western world’s entrenched perma-state.

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

What they wouldn’t be able to ignore or contain is mass civil disobedience on an international scale. If the bastards try to use force against us, respond accordingly.

Tonis Arro
Tonis Arro
6 months ago
Reply to  Simon Denis

We can: In line with WHO policy on conflict of interest, members of the public and interested organizations can access the biographies of the GDG members for this guideline and inform WHO of their views about them. The list comprises 21 members. All comments should be sent by email to hiv-aids@who.int by 8 January 2024.

Bettina Reiter
Bettina Reiter
6 months ago
Reply to  Tonis Arro

And the reply is made easier by this balanced and sound petition which can be signed individually and/or institutionally: https://who-decides.org/

Mike Downing
Mike Downing
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Dear Jim there is a great YT video by Jennifer Bilek who was herself trying to answer the same question.

After much digging, she found that contrary to claims that this is a grass-roots movement (as Gay rights actually was) it has in fact been pushed top-down by a coterie of very wealthy and well-connected ‘men in frocks’ who have spent literally millions of dollars infiltrating academia, business etc and setting the agenda that we all should follow to ‘be kind’.

And progressive wannabees and people who don’t understand it at all really but want to do the right thing have been led by the nose down this particular garden path ( just like with BLM).

But the bright side is that they may not have realised what a poisoned chalice this is and with a bit of luck, the dreaded WHO and the EU like oooir Nicola may regret the day they ever put it to their lips.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Mike Downing

“Jennifer Bilek” is a bigoted idiot can’t do math. There are thousands of billionaires, and more than a handful will be transgender. Why shouldn’t they oppose the oppression and destruction of transgender people?

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
C J
C J
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Jennifer Bilek is an intelligent and thorough investigative journalist who has done excellent work showing that transgenderism is intended, by Martin(e) Rothblatt, to pave the way for transhumanism. Rothblatt has already made a robot of his wife.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  C J

No, she is a bigoted imbecile. Transhumanism literally has nothing to do with it.
“Rothblatt has already made a robot of his wife.” <– You need to be seen.

Al Hicks
Al Hicks
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2020/01/the-billionaires-behind-the-lgbt-movement
There are a number of ‘the typical’ kind of male white middle aged men in dresses in the US who are pushing and have been pushing ‘trans’ for a while; money talks and big pharma smells money on the back of it too. The billionaire Pryzkers are one of these families promoting trans. Its all rather dismal in my view. Genuine cases of dysmorphia are now drowned out by the social media victims and troubled probably gay teens with ADD and anxiety now get ‘pushed’ towards trans when in the normal social media free 70s they’d just be gay. Now there is a serious chance that such a teen will end up permanently damaged/mutilated in a gender clinic rather than listening to Joy Division in a bedroom and working it out with poetry like we did.

Last edited 6 months ago by Al Hicks
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Al Hicks

But we know there are no such things and “social media victims” or “troubled probably gay teens with ADD and anxiety” involved.
ROGD is not just a myth, it is a fraud.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4427508

Susan Grabston
Susan Grabston
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Infrastructure of legal human rights making everything contestable rather than a function of parliament (UK). Establishment of these rights has then given rise to cause-specific NGOs building and cornering their niche (often cynically as in the case of Stonewall having achieved gay marriage). There is then the horizontal globalist emboldenment of the WHO et al. These movements fly in the face of majority views, but the majority have spent 5 years in denial (“they’ll grow out of it”) and then trying to work out the levers of these new power bases, before moving into reaponse mode. Some going off grid (food, home schooling, etc) and increasing numbers of counter-bodies emerging (sex matters, free speech union, etc) but i doubt this will end well. We can increasingly see some unexpected, but meaningful alliances forming (socially conservative immigrants with parents One Million March in Canada for example). But to deal with this root and branch, you have to replace current human rights legislation where there is a clear conflict of interests, and remove the supreme court which is allowing lawfare, stalemate and a disarmed, impotent parliamentary system. How bad will it get? I was struck by a recent Sam Harris podcast where he said “if the current politicians don’t deal with this, then the fascists will”. He was
deadly serious, alas.

Last edited 6 months ago by Susan Grabston
Jeanie K
Jeanie K
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

We, the people/sheep have allowed it, most often by voting every 4 or 5 years for alternate sides of the Uniparty.

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth re GMO, Sierra Club re US nuclear, Stonewall of course … being well funded and having honed arguments, they can relieve the uninformed of cognitive effort.

Darlene Craig
Darlene Craig
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

How does someone like Florence Ashley get a law degree. I read some of his X feed and it sounds like narcissistic gibberish to me.

William Hickey
William Hickey
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Because normal people abdicated the use of violence to protect their fundamental interests against misfits with clever arguments and the wealth to promote them.

Glib charlatans used to be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. That may have been nasty, but it was socially superior to what liberal tolerance and moneyed interests have decreed for our children and our society.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Hopefully this will serve as a catalyst to discredit the WHO in the eyes of people who might still support this clown show.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Because unlike Social Conservatives, they are not liars out to abuse some people for political power or to flatter their moral vanity.

Jane H
Jane H
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Incredulity by most people that this agenda could be real. Media blackouts, in particular the global pandemic treaty due to be signed next June by almost 200 countries, population distraction and coercion of governments by the global elites.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
6 months ago

Of course the WHO takes the most disconnected position possible. While countries throughout Europe are rethinking their trans policies – and no country outside the west gives a second thought to any of this – the technocrats at the WHO do the complete opposite. And these people wonder why populists are gaining so much traction.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Jim Veenbaas

Your opinion on matters of transgender people are disconnected from facts.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Chromosomes are facts, “Talia”.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

So what? They are not as you imply always perfect per usual or what you think is normal, in their results.

A J
A J
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Chromosomes can correctly sex people 99.99% of the time. As can simple observation of new born babies. Sex is not randomly assigned at birth; it is observed.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  A J

I googled “what percentage of people have sex chromosome abnormalities” and see it’s more like 99.5. https://www.britannica.com/science/human-genetic-disease/Abnormalities-of-the-sex-chromosomes.
Your falsehood is a matter of a factor of 50. I begin to see where some of your ignorance lies. You think think are far more perfect i nature than they are and you are willing for your moral vanity and convenience to abuse what imagine is a trivially small minority.
Sex is assigned at birth, and so is gender by imputation — gender can not even be seen.
“Assignment” has nothing to do with randomness, no one but your sort ever claims it does. That is usually accurate, but about gender it is wrong 1 time in 150.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
6 months ago

The WHO should be studiously ignored by all serious people and it’s funding should be cut. Utter rubbish. International organizations not answerable to the people is the very definition of tyranny on a global scale. These people should have no power over anything.

Huw Parker
Huw Parker
6 months ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

“puberty blockers ought to be treated as the default option”
Ignoring them is not enough. This alone would be enough to destroy an entire generation.

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

And, potentially, all future generations as puberty blockers may not be reversible, so an entire generation would be sterilised. End of the human race, unless the transhumanists can upload human consciousness by then.

Alison Wren
Alison Wren
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

Puberty blockers really aren’t a“pause button” as expounded by the BBC on children’s television. They have severe effects on intelligence bone density and probably fertility latter is harder to assess for obvious reasons. Women put on them for brief periods for other medical reasons report severe side effects. No child should be on them since puberty itself resolves gender dysphoria in 90% of cases.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Alison Wren

You are a liar. I know this because you will never be able to back up your claims with any examples of any such problems ever happening above baseline to people using puberty blockers.
“No child should be on them since puberty itself resolves gender dysphoria in 90% of cases.” <– That is also a lie, and you will not be able to back that up either. In fact, the regret rate is <1%.

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Dr Hilary Cass in her report into the Tavistock is the source for the statement that most kids with gender dysphoria become content with their gender if allowed to go through natural puberty.

The oft-quoted regret rate of 1% is drawn only from gender clinics in the US. This means the figure only counts those patients who go back to their surgeons and state their regret. Since their is no medical insurance to cover detransitioning, the vast majority of regretters cannot afford to express their regret to their surgeons. They just live in misery. Many express regret and a wish to detransition on social media.

Regret rates are becoming higher in Europe as a consequence of clinics introducing affirmation only care. In the past, patients were much more thoroughly vetted, so that those who transitioned were less likely to experience regret. Affirmation Only means children are started on PBs, and 80% of those who do will continue on to wrong sex hormones, which will indeed cause irreversible effects, including infertility. PBs taken on their own and stopped before the window for natural puberty closes, are indeed reversible, but that is not what’s happening. It’s the PB-to-cross sex hormone treatment that is irreversible.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

“Dr Hilary Cass in her report into the Tavistock is the source for the statement that most kids with gender dysphoria become content with their gender if allowed to go through natural puberty.” <– You won’t quote here citing any facts which back up that assertion.
“The oft-quoted regret rate of 1% is drawn only from gender clinics in the US.” <–No, that was world-wide data.
“Since their is no medical insurance to cover detransitioning” <– A falsehood outright, you made that up.
“the vast majority of regretters cannot afford to express their regret to their surgeons.” <– They do not express it to anyone in the numbers you claim, because they do not exist in the numbers you claim — not even by several orders of magnitude.
“Regret rates are becoming higher in Europe as a consequence of clinics introducing affirmation only care.” <- No, they are not — that is why you cannot cite anything backing you up.
“In the past, patients were much more thoroughly vetted, so that those who transitioned were less likely to experience regret.” <– Nonsense, no clinical criteria have been relaxed for between 20 and 30 years, depending on where you are.
“Affirmation Only means children are started on PBs” <– Which have no — that’s zero — negative side effects known to be caused by them. What are cited are theoretic side effects not actually seen.
“and 80% of those who do will continue on to wrong sex hormones” <– No, the HRT of their gender, which is right for them. The 20% who do not continue to HRT are examples of the screening criteria working.
HRT does not cause infertility by itself, only surgery can and in the US at least all youth are counseled on gamete banking.
“It’s the PB-to-cross sex hormone treatment that is irreversible.” So what? You need to demonstrate it is commonly in error.
And you can not, because that is not real, it is only what you wish was true.

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Zero side effects you say? Here’s some evidence, from the British National Formulary (the highest authority in the UK on medicines) https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drugs/leuprorelin-acetate/#side-effects

Note that some of these side effects can be fatal, such as lung clots, long QT interval (a cardiac arrhythmia) and seizures. Increased risk of fractures including spine fractures are debilitating, potentially disabling, side effects to inflict on a healthy child.

You keep refuting my statements but provide no evidence for your refutations.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

You are still not providing any evidence for what you claim.
And like all such lists of side effects, they are not actually known to be caused by the drug, but are listed to try to make sure rates of incidence are captured — so side effects actually caused are not missed by the trial period.
None of the adverse effect data collected supports the idea the drugs are causing any such problems.
What you need and do not have would be a table showing which side effects are seen in the population taking the drug, above baseline, by to what degree.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

Puberty blockers are already known to be reversible. They have been in use for 40+ years without any such problems.

Mint Julip
Mint Julip
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

No, not destroy the human race – only the Westernised portion of it.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

Only 1 in 150 people are transgender. How does that destroy a generation, and how does immiserating that small fraction help anyone?

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

One of the people drawing up these guidelines wants ALL children placed on PBs as a matter of course. If that were adopted, the fertility of an entire generation could well be destroyed. It seems unlikely this would be adopted, but 5 years ago I never imagined that all primary school children would be taught that their biological sex was optional and changeable, yet here we are.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

“One of the people drawing up these guidelines wants ALL children placed on PBs as a matter of course” <– No, they are making the perfectly valid rhetorical point that if children are too young to know, then so are cisgender children too young to know.
Puberty blockers also have no effect on fertility whatsoever, which is why you cannot cite any examples to the contrary.
The biological sex of a person can be changed just exactly as described — the frauds are all on the transphobic side of things — and doing so will be of benefit to as many as 1 in 150.
What you are trying and failing to do, is to justify forcing some girls to have beards and deep voices, and to force some boys to have breasts and a period.
You support grotesque child abuse.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

What is a “cis”gender child? Sounds like a disease of some kind. Is there a cure?
Puberty blockers affect bone density (eventual outcome osteoporosis) and there is a possibility they also negatively affect cognitive development.
No human being can change sex. Human beings can change their gender-behaviour (i.e. whether or not they abide by sex-role stereotypes), but they cannot change their sex.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

“What is a “cis”gender child” <– One who is not transgender.
“Puberty blockers affect bone density (eventual outcome osteoporosis) and there is a possibility they also negatively affect cognitive development.” <– No, there is no evidence whatsoever they do so. That is why you can not cite any evidence that they do so.
“No human being can change sex. Human beings can change their gender-behaviour (i.e. whether or not they abide by sex-role stereotypes), but they cannot change their sex.” <– They may in fact do so exactly as described by those who undertake it and those who help them. You are a liar.
No more, no less.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

Which is evidence of nothing, since it did not compare people post puberty who did vs did not take blockers. I know the frauds you love and trumpet already. I am already on to your games.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  A J

And like all such lists of side effects, they are not actually known to be caused by the drug, but are listed to try to make sure rates of incidence are captured — so side effects actually caused are not missed by the trial period.
None of the adverse effect data collected supports the idea the drugs are causing any such problems.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Huw Parker
Huw Parker
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

You can’t berate people for not providing evidence if you’re also going to berate them for providing evidence you don’t like.

Last edited 6 months ago by Huw Parker
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

I certainly will “berate” people for providing irrelevant “evidence”. That fact you or they do not understand how the side effect reporting system works doe snot exempt you from correction.

Alison Wren
Alison Wren
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Talia, could you please declare your interest in this issue so you are prepared to deny the evidence of extreme harm caused by this ideology. I lectured teenagers and adults in a range of biology based disciplines for years as well as having observed child development at close quarters. That’s my interest declared in getting rid of the money-generating harm causing ideology that this is.

Last edited 6 months ago by Alison Wren
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Alison Wren

You have yet to demonstrate there is any ideology such as what you complain of. You should go be a socialist child abuser elsewhere.
The biological facts are that gender exists and is unchangeable, and the idea it is always perfectly congruent to the sex is a laughable stupidity.

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Boys can only become fertile men by going through male puberty. If a boy starts puberty blockers, then wrong sex hormones, he will never become fertile. He cannot bank sperm because he will never produce sperm.

Someone suggested in a recent NYT article that boys could bank testicular tissue, and that this could somehow be made able to produce sperm in the future, but this is a mere hypothesis. It has never been tested and zero cases of boy transitioners have become fertile adults without detransitioning while they are still young enough for male puberty to happen.

Children can only complete the puberty of their birth sex. No child can complete the puberty of the opposite sex. Sure, they can develop secondary sex characteristics, but they can’t mature their primary sex organs by taking wrong sex hormones.

Children who transition will also never experience full sexual pleasure as adults either. But I suppose they won’t know what they’re missing, as they will be trapped in a child-like state of no sexual desire.

It is deeply saddening to me that you and other trans activists have not learned crucial truths about child sexual development.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

You have yet to say anything real and relevant about child sexual development.
The fact is that in developed nations people who may be deprived of reproductive capability by foreseeable medical problems and the treatments for them are offered gamete banking and that works as described. It is not experimental.
A transgender girl does not generally want to father children, a transgender boy does not generally want to mother them. The fact you have not learned that and that you want to force any boys to have breasts and periods and to force any girls to have beards and deep voices is how you are a grotesque monster. Merely the fact you are referring to transgender girl as “he” shows how abusive you are, and are proud to be.
There is no more to you.

Chris J
Chris J
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

There is no point responding to Talia Perkins.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Chris J

Not without any actual facts which support a viewpoint contrary to mine. And you have none.

Mike Doyle
Mike Doyle
6 months ago

Defund the WHO!

Right-Wing Hippie
Right-Wing Hippie
6 months ago

Another panellist, Teddy Cook, described the “actual side effects of gender-affirming medical care” as “a significantly improved quality of life, significantly better health and wellbeing outcomes, a dramatic decrease in distress, depression and anxiety and a substantial increase of gender euphoria and trans joy”,
Medicine is in the health business, not the euphoria or joy business.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

It is in the business of ameliorating or avoiding medically avoidable misery.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
6 months ago

Who takes WHO seriously since the Wuhan lab leak?

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
6 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

All of the wrong people.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

Unfortunately our governments do. Governments sign up to WHO edicts.

AC Harper
AC Harper
6 months ago

Climate change activists promote the ‘precautionary principle’ – yet the activist ‘everybody gets puberty blockers’ approach throws the precautionary principle overboard. Strange that.

Jim Veenbaas
Jim Veenbaas
6 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

Yet so predictable.

Steve Jolly
Steve Jolly
6 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

They’d probably twist it and say they were using the precautionary principle, because we don’t know which kids will be trans, and since the risks of suicide and what not are so much greater if trans kids are denied transition, we should block all kids until they decide for sure, you know, just to be safe and all.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Steve Jolly

“because we don’t know which kids will be trans” <– We know the only who might be and benefit from blockers are those who say they are and ask for them — and that is about 1 in 450 people.

H W
H W
6 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

Put blockers in the drinking water?

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

It is the people wanting to abuse transgender youth who are throwing away the precautionary principle.
For the sake of the <1% who regret transition, you want to force the other 99%+ to be boys with breasts and periods and girls with beards and deep voices.
You are actively embracing — you are trying to mandate — exactly that grotesque child abuse.

Stuart Bennett
Stuart Bennett
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

So now they aren’t individuals with value, it’s just a numbers game, is that right?

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Stuart Bennett

No, they are individuals with value — you are the one claiming transgender people have no value, or at least so little 99 aren’t worth as such as 1 cisgender person.

Stuart Bennett
Stuart Bennett
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Can you please enlighten me as to when exactly did I say that?

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Stuart Bennett

You oppose gender affirming care for youth, don’t you?

Mint Julip
Mint Julip
6 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

They want to destroy Western civilization and culture any which way possible, so expect anomalies, contradictions, lies and obfuscations everywhere.

R Wright
R Wright
6 months ago

I had always had an inkling that some of these people were just depraved degenerates so it is nice to have that confirmed.

David Morley
David Morley
6 months ago

letting this stage of human development progress uninterrupted “strongly favours cis embodiment by raising the psychological and medical toll of transitioning”. 

In a sense this argument was already lost when we ceased to consider some human outcomes as normal and others not. What was once considered normal is now considered just one possible outcome amongst many.

Once upon a time it would have been plain to all that allowing nature to run its course would, as a general rule, lead to a normal outcome.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Abusing people in law and policy for morally meaningless differences in biology is not excusable. Abandoning doing that no more than no longer burning witches.

William Cameron
William Cameron
6 months ago

Social media has given power to fringe people with extreme views. fifty years ago these folk would have been irrelevant. Now the politicians are terrified of them. They fear being called transphobic by ill informed hysterics.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

50 years ago you would have been able to abuse “these folk” with impunity. Try proving that is better.

Andrew Thompson
Andrew Thompson
6 months ago

I think these severely mentally unbalanced people should be able to get all the life saving medications and procedures they demand providing they pay for it out of their own pocket (or handbag) with not one single penny coming from the NHS

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

You don’t think at all, you are only emoting. You have no facts justifying your views.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
6 months ago

Of course, it was done quietly. It’s how the worst people in any society work. More curious is why anyone listens to the WHO, given its glorious record during the pandemic and its ongoing desire to gain ever-more power. Apparently, sacrificing a few thousand (million?) children along the way constitutes the eggs needed for this horrific omelet.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

The only one trying to sacrifice any children are your like.

Shrunken Genepool
Shrunken Genepool
6 months ago

Time to withdraw from WHO and UN

Matthew Jones
Matthew Jones
6 months ago

I try not to be angry with these people, because they are declaring war on God, and that’s a death sentence.

Huw Parker
Huw Parker
6 months ago
Reply to  Matthew Jones

Let’s not bring God into it. They’re declaring war on nature, on biology, on evidence-based science. They’re throwing women under the bus and arguing for the indoctrination of schoolchildren. That’s more than enough without invoking the unproven existence of a supreme being.

Archibald Tennyson
Archibald Tennyson
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

I think it relevant to mention. So many of those pushing this madness abhor the very thought of Christ. Do you consider this mere coincidence?

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

What do you think Christ has to do with supporting your opinions. He is without doubt looking fearfuly for you at the millstone you are making for yourself.

Huw Parker
Huw Parker
6 months ago

I don’t think it’s the best strategy to use one unsubstantiated belief system as the basis for attacking another.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

Except there is no evidence for your position, and you can defend it only by ignoring what you prefer not to be real.

Huw Parker
Huw Parker
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

‘Except there is no evidence for your position.’

On the contrary, there is plenty. You just refuse to acknowledge it.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

No, there is none. That is why when you try to provide it, you only have mights, maybes, and fraud on your side.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Matthew Jones

Thank you for admitting it is really only about you getting to burn your witches.

james elliott
james elliott
6 months ago

This would be the same WHO that is seeking the irrevocable authority to *lock us down* for anything *they* deem a ‘pandemic’??

Hmmm…

V R
V R
6 months ago

It would be great if this article included a link to this WHO trans advisory group. Apart from that, excellent work as usual Eliza Mondegreen.

Tonis Arro
Tonis Arro
6 months ago

And if you follow the link you will find that there is an opportunity to say what you think about the committe. Deadline is on January 8. Let’s act: In line with WHO policy on conflict of interest, members of the public and interested organizations can access the biographies of the GDG members for this guideline and inform WHO of their views about them. The list comprises 21 members. All comments should be sent by email to hiv-aids@who.int by 8 January 2024.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

“excellent work as usual Eliza Mondegreen.” <– Propagandist extraordinaire, and liar — but then I am redundant.

laurence scaduto
laurence scaduto
6 months ago

I wonder two things:
First; how many people actually pay attention to this sort of nonsense? I’m pretty certain, for instance, that the next time the WHO calls for a total lockdown they will be widely ignored. Covid 19 will be their crowning success; future efforts will bring diminishing returns.
And, what we really should be doing is trying to shake the rest of the West out of their intellectual slumber. Most people I know are totally happy to ape the MSM line on any given topic. Reading between the lines is “just too much effort”. That’s not normal. It has to change.

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago

They’re here, they’re queer, they’re coming for your children.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  starkbreath

Some children are them. That is how some people are born. The only thing this is really about is whether you get to abuse them in law and policy, and you should be denied.

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Thanks for making my point for me, sicko.

Last edited 6 months ago by starkbreath
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  starkbreath

You want to force some boys to have breasts and periods and some girls to have beards and deep voices. The finger here is pointing at you!

Catherine Conroy
Catherine Conroy
6 months ago

I remember the time when I was horrified at D. Trump saying the US would be leaving the WHO. Shocking to see now that he had a point.

Nanda Kishor das
Nanda Kishor das
6 months ago

This is beyond appalling, and very scary. Specially because it’s not getting anywhere near enough attention – not even in the pages of Unherd, which is fortunately one of the few places you can read about such things, with rigour and equanimity. But it’s too big a topic; the author’s highly commendable work should find it’s way to bigger exposure, media content, essay series, etc.

Chris J
Chris J
6 months ago

Print media in UK has run many articles on gender.

Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden
6 months ago

The WHO supported and facilitated the CCP’s repression of information on Covid-19 over winter 2019-20. Their organisational aim seems largely to be one of damaging if not destroying societies outside of the PRC.
As regards these cult-like medical interventions on minors, Fascism always operated as a quasi-religion and now it’s reaching its full transhumanist potential with this warped take on futurism.

V R
V R
6 months ago

I bet the “parent of a trans child” in the advisory group is Susie Green

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

I bet you never have a relevant and factual thing to say about it.

Viv M
Viv M
6 months ago

I am looking for a way to respond to the ‘ public comment’ before the period elapses but am having trouble locating this online- has anyone found it?

S Wilkinson
S Wilkinson
6 months ago
Reply to  Viv M

Here’s the page. The link to the biographies is at the bottom with just a general email link for responses.
https://www.who.int/news/item/18-12-2023-who-announces-the-development-of-a-guideline-on-the-health-of-trans-and-gender-diverse-people

Last edited 6 months ago by S Wilkinson
Viv M
Viv M
6 months ago
Reply to  S Wilkinson

Thank you!

Jonathan Story
Jonathan Story
6 months ago

Lobbies like this have long since learnt to besiege distant global or regional institutions. They do so because they remain out of sight, because they are relatively easily penetrated, they are highly bribable, and because the bureaucrats employed there are probably militants anyway. They then claim legitimacy. This is the point when governments responsive to mass electorates must say No, ie exert their sovereignty. If the bad ideas keep flowing, then the organisation must be closed down.

Tonis Arro
Tonis Arro
6 months ago

Let’s try to do something:
In line with WHO policy on conflict of interest, members of the public and interested organizations can access the biographies of the GDG members for this guideline and inform WHO of their views about them. The list comprises 21 members. All comments should be sent by email to hiv-aids@who.int by 8 January 2024.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
6 months ago

Absent from the “experts” recommendations at the WHO are of course legal considerations resulting from likely lawsuits brought by regretters against health systems, and those under 18 who cannot give legal consent.

Michael Cavanaugh
Michael Cavanaugh
6 months ago

“whatever risks puberty blockers have do not foreclose future life paths as much as undergoing puberty does . . .” Might as well say: undergoing birth forecloses the possibility of an individual’s possible transhuman future. We like to think of liberty as an increased range of life-chances but at some point, however elaborated or restricted, life-chances will have to remain bounded. Expanding an Overton window is not the same as just smashing all windows.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Cindy Jarvis
Cindy Jarvis
6 months ago

Would be good to have article updated with link to this petition to WHO for all to sign to communicate how appalled we are at the length of public consultation & the individuals they’ve selected to create policy https://who-decides.org/home?val_dt=260ca9dd8a4577fc00b7bd5810298076#sign.

Bettina Reiter
Bettina Reiter
6 months ago

There is a petition to the WHO to halt the whole process and return to due diligence: https://who-decides.org/

Andrew H
Andrew H
6 months ago

Even by the standards of the trans lobby, these people seem completely unhinged. Where are the levers to rein in supranational organisations like the WHO to stop them actively doing harm? Children’s health and wellbeing are at stake here.

CF Hankinson
CF Hankinson
6 months ago

How else in the great meditating universe could Gaea stop the destructive anthropocene? .. self sterilization is perfect. Just too big for their boots. It might take a while.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

Why can’t any of you Social Conservative progressives find and cite any facts which back up your opinions?
What makes you think this is a mental illness instead of a physical variance of birth?
What makes you think it is caused after birth?
What makes you think gender does not exist, or, that it is created by upbringing?
What makes you think being transgender is commonly mis-diagnosed?
What makes you think the regret rate is higher than about 1%, at medical transition?
What makes you think cisgender people are worth more than transgender people?

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins
V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Start here:
https://bnf.nice.org.uk/drugs/leuprorelin-acetate/#side-effects

Note that Lupron is not even licensed as safe to be given to children; the BNF is listing the harms it causes to adults when used to treat sex-based cancers, such as prostate and breast cancer. It’s not considered safe to be given as treatment for endometriosis for more than six months, because of the risk of infertility, yet children are taking it for several years.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

Don’t lie to me, Lupron was specifically developed among other things for the purpose of combating precocious puberty, and was approved for that purpose in 1993. You have yet to produce any evidence any “side effect” of any puberty blocker is actually caused by the puberty blocker — which would mean you have to show that without any confounding factors a side effect occurs. in the population using the drug at above baseline. The family with bone loss has a familial history such issues.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago

“Ashley believes that “puberty blockers ought to be treated as the default option” for all youth, as opposed to “letting puberty runs its course”.” <– Of course. Anything else is forcing some boys to have breasts and periods, and forcing some girls to have beards and deep voices.
“Besides being absurd” <– Absurd to an idiot who loves a certain sort of child abuse, certainly. It is perfectly true however.
“We don’t yet know how suppressing the sex hormones that spur cognitive development during puberty affects factors like impulse control, emotional regulation, critical thinking, and decision-making. What’s more, evidence suggests that blocking puberty may “lock” children into a trans identity, rather than buying time and space to think.” <– Except in the 40+ years they have been in use no such thing has ever happened — and — why do you dismiss the idea youth are carefully screened in the first place?
“Ashley has argued elsewhere that clinical assessment does not predict or prevent regret (so why bother?) ” <– Uhuh. Cite it, so context can be examined.
“and dismissed concerns about the rapid increase in adolescent and young adult females seeking transition. ” <– There are no more rational concerns about that than that 30 years ago so many people were suddenly stating they were gay. The fact is, when you stop abusing unto death those who have a characteristic, more people admit to having the characteristic.
“concluding that “we are not at risk of harm by affirming our gender.” ” <– An obviously factually true conclusion.
“Panellists with WPATH-heavy … but balance matters” <– So of course we have to let Nazis onto a panel debating what to do about Jews. That is what your claimed principle demands.
” One won’t find … starting from scratch. ” <– There are not now and after 70 years of trying to gin them up, should not be thought likely ever to be, any facts which support your claimed “concerns”.
The chief thing the <1% of people who detransition claiming it was all a mistake, have by their examples to bring to the table, are object lessons as to why people should not lie to one’s therapist or clinician, or dissemble to them in any way.
No more, no less.

Lisa Hurley
Lisa Hurley
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

You keep repeating “Anything else is forcing some boys to have breasts and periods, and forcing some girls to have beards and deep voices” how do you feel about eugenics?

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Lisa Hurley

Eugenics has nothing to do with it, because eugenics is government forcing people not to reproduce against their will, it has nothing to do with freely chosen healthcare.

David Morley
David Morley
6 months ago

But who else are WHO supposed to listen to? These people are at least sympathetic – others are actively antipathetic, even hating. I’ve yet to see anybody providing a balanced view which the WHO could call on.

Even K Stock fails, at the end of her book, to offer a compromise which isn’t just the radfem view in a new guise. I’m not sure where a balanced credible view on the issue is to come from. So it’s left to the extremists.

Huw Parker
Huw Parker
6 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

How is society supposed to ‘compromise’ on a belief system that is at right-angles to evidence-based science? It’s like asking people to develop a compromise between driving on the right and driving on the left.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

Thing is it is your views which are antithetical to evidence, logic, history, compassion, and empathy.
You can cite no relevant fact which supports you in any way.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

All these downvotes, and not even a single fact justifying any of them.

You are all proud child abusers.

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

So tell us ‘Talia’, have you had the ‘bottom surgery’?

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  starkbreath

Tell us, anonymous, why that is any of your business.

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

You’re so big on children being mutilated, seems only fair to ask if you’ve had it done to yourself.

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago
Reply to  Huw Parker

If this was the 1930s, Morley would be arguing for a balanced, ‘both sides have their good points’ attitude toward the Nazis. Crazy fanatics will always be with us; it’s their cowardly enablers who are truly stomach-churning.

Terry Raby
Terry Raby
6 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

there must be a few clinical psychologists left (perhaps retired) who haven’t been cancelled.

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  Terry Raby

Stella O’Malley is one such, a gender critical child psychologist who has started an organisation seeking to provide children with talking therapy instead of drugs and surgery.

Martin Templer
Martin Templer
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

Its the super rich pushing this agenda and whilst the citizens are distracted they can quietly push their real agenda i.e. destroying family life, communities, religion. Our whole culture so they can eventually rule us “the serfs” Brave New World its all happening.
We need to be united and highly aware of what is happening behind the scenes.
God bless.
♥️

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Martin Templer

Uhuh, I ‘m sure you also really think the world is flat.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

You mean she attempts conversion therapy — that same approach which for 70+ years has produced that 40%+ suicidality rate. She should be jailed for malpractice.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Eh? I don’t recall anyone ever attempting to gender transition children seventy years ago, let alone anyone claiming that those not “properly” transitioned killed themselves. In fact, the term “gender” was used as a grammatical term until John Money used it to refer to sex-role stereotypes in the 1950s, which is not quite 70 years ago.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

Try learning to read for comprehension. Gender affirming care was first employed about 50 years ago, and became commonplace about 20 years ago as the failures of the competing conversion therapy approach were un-ignorable. Gender in English has always referred to the masculinity and femininity of people since it’s adoption into English in the 13th century, it has never been a linguistic term only.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

The first person to attempt to change a child’s “gender” was John Money, and that boy, forced to live as a girl, eventually killed himself with a gun.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

Yes, and the fact Money was exposed as a fraud is why gender affirming care was widely adopted when it was. Money’s hoax was that last domino to fall propping up the falsehood that transgender people were mentally ill or that gender was created after the birth of a person.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

It is perfectly execrable the arbitrariness by which this site censors posts.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

It is perfectly execrable the arbitrariness by which this site censors posts.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

And the fact Money was and when he was revealed to be a fraud is why gender affirming care was then immediately afterwards widely adopted. Money’s big idea was the people were raised to be their gender, and his “work” in fact proved otherwise. It proved it is how people are born.
It meant a transgender girl was a girl, a transgender boy was a boy.
A person is the gender between their ears, not the sex between their legs.

Last edited 6 months ago by Talia Perkins
A J
A J
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

No, his work meant that a boy whose pe-nis is lost due to botched surgery is still a boy, even if he is raised as a girl. His work shows that people are the sex they are observed to be at birth.

Some adults may prefer to live as if they were the opposite sex, but since gender ideology has been taught in schools, with all the rainbows and glitter, children are being mislead into believing they are trans when they are not. Social conformity can cause harm in different ways. We already know it can influence gay people to try and live heterosexual lives (Philip Schofield, eg,), so why wouldn’t a drastic change in social conformity influence children into believing their trans when they’re not? Teachers are seeing entire friendship groups declare trans identities. It’s statistically impossible for a whole group of friends to be born transgender,and all realise it at the same age.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  A J

“No, his work meant that a boy whose pe-nis is lost due to botched surgery is still a boy, even if he is raised as a girl.” <-because that is how their brain is wired. Not because of what is between their legs or how they are raised.
It is a bullet to the brain of the “gender critical” stupiidty.
There is no such thing as “gender ideology”. There are only the measured facts of biology proving gender exists and you are in denial of it.
“Teachers are seeing entire friendship groups declare trans identities. It’s statistically impossible for a whole group of friends to be born transgender, and all realise it at the same age.” <– A), no you are not, B) it is still true only 1 in 150 say they are transgender and meet the actual diagnostic criteria.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

“Conversion therapy” is a term originally used to describe attempts to change the orientation of homosexual people. Yes, it was cruel, and it failed in most cases.
The term “conversion therapy” has been adopted by the transactivist movement as an attempt to enforce the “affirmation” model of “care”. In some states in Australia it is illegal to fail to apply “affirmative care”.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

Conversion therapy done on transgender people is equally fraudulent, and cruel. It is good that fraud is illegal anywhere — only gender affirmative care has success in reducing human misery.

Janet G
Janet G
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

And then there is the issue of lesbian and gay adolescents being told they are trans and put on the path to medical transition. Many parents feel more comfortable having a trans child than a homosexual one.
That is a form of conversion therapy. It is known as “transing away the gay.”

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

“And then there is the issue of lesbian and gay adolescents being told they are trans and put on the path to medical transition.” <– There is no such issue, because that is a myth.
“Many parents feel more comfortable having a trans child than a homosexual one.” <– So what? No care provider would authorize transition on such a basis.
“That is a form of conversion therapy. It is known as “transing away the gay.”” <– No it is not, because it is made up.

A J
A J
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

Not only people; objects too, even in English (eg ships being “she”)

starkbreath
starkbreath
6 months ago
Reply to  Janet G

Yeah, and look at what a sick son of a b***h he was.

A J
A J
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

One type of conversion therapy is telling a gay or lesbian child they’re “really” transgender. Homophobic parents love it (eg Susie Green, disgraced CEO of Mermaids, who is on record saying her husband didn’t want a gay son)

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  A J

“One type of conversion therapy is telling a gay or lesbian child they’re “really” transgender.” <– Which does not exist. You will not find anyone claiming they can “make” a gay cisgender child into a straight transgender one.
“Homophobic parents love it (eg Susie Green, disgraced CEO of Mermaids, who is on record saying her husband didn’t want a gay son)” <– So what? For that mater, prove it at all. The known frauds are all on your side of this.

A J
A J
6 months ago
Reply to  Talia Perkins

No, she wants children to receive evidence-based treatment rather than be prescribed off-licence medicines intended for adults. Here is a link so you cans we for yourself

https://segm.org/

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  A J

Clicking three links deep, there is no evidence there which supports any restrictions of the use of gender affirming care.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  Terry Raby

Uhuh. Those like Bailey, Blanchard, McHugh, and Zucker are proven frauds and charlatans. Good luck.

A J
A J
6 months ago
Reply to  Terry Raby

https://segm.org/

This is the Society for Evidence-based Gender Medicine and all clinicians who want children to receive safe treatment for gender dysphoria are welcome to join.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  A J

They are transeliminationist fanatics who ignore the overwhelming evidence that refutes them.

V R
V R
6 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Here is a balanced view from a psychotherapist who works with gender distressed children and their families:

https://open.substack.com/pub/stellaomalley?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=qup6z

The WHO would benefit from listening to Stella O’Malley and her colleagues. They all give thoughtful, caring and evidence-based treatment. In her latest piece, she considers the harms caused by the polarised views of both trans rights activists and gender critics.

Talia Perkins
Talia Perkins
6 months ago
Reply to  V R

Uhuh, “leading doctor” is whatever quacks agree with her.