Children on puberty blockers saw mental health change - new analysis

www.bbc.co.uk...

The majority of children in a landmark study on puberty blockers experienced positive or negative changes in their mental health, new analysis suggests.

The original study of 44 children, who all took the controversial drugs for a year or more, found no mental health impact - neither benefits nor harm.

But a re-analysis of that data now suggests 34% saw their mental health deteriorate, while 29% improved.

The authors of the original report have welcomed the new evidence.

The re-analysis of the original data, seen by BBC Newsnight, questions some of the conclusions from the 2021 study about the potential mental health impact of puberty blockers on under 16s. It also sheds some light on this much-debated, but little understood, area of children's medicine.

The new study has not been in a peer-reviewed journal yet. The authors say they felt there was an urgency in getting the information into the public domain

So the story dates back to 2021 when the results of the landmark study which you can find here

journals.plos.org.../journal.pone.0243894

revealed that the use of 'puberty blockers' brought no changes in the psychological functions of children. Earlier findings from a Dutch study indicated a positive impact on young people's mental health and wellbeing.

But the re-analysis (probably not so much affected by politics and activism) show that 34% of children saw their mental health deteriorate while 29% saw their mental health improved. The rest 37% saw no change in their mental health.

So the story has evolved significantly over the last few years, from positive changes to mental health according to the Dutch study, to no changes at all according to the 2021 study, to a re-analysis at this point in time where a large number of kids saw their mental health deteriorate.

I am of the view if science and medicine are not influenced by politics and political activism then the results will be revealing what most of us know by now, that 'puberty blockers' are harmful for the mental and physical health of children. The same is true for the so-called 'gender affirming care' for minors now banned in many states and has been made illegal.

a reply to: AlienBorg

# politics, love Capitalism... Why do you want it to be illegal, it's freedom baby. We all like to have the freedom to do reasonably bad things to our kids... Of course we don't, it's all about protecting kids...
But then again ask about circumcision and suddenly people are awfully tolerant towards parents that mutilate their kids. Weird...

But let me ask... How was it made illegal if not by politics?

Actually it's the reactionary branch of the political devide that is using this topic to make politics. This thread is another perfect showcase of the political propaganda being pushed...

a reply to: AlienBorg

I would be very wary of any type of study or poll, particularly on the above mentioned. I'd say numbers can always be fiddled and in this case, I'd say 34% is a lie, its probably more and will increase over the coming years!

The new study has not been in a peer-reviewed journal yet. The authors say they felt there was an urgency in getting the information into the public domain

Nor will it. Activists and Accountants (sometimes the two form a hellish amalgamation) control the journals now. Narratives and profits are pushed before truth and care.

i think most people understand the way academia/state/media is massaging the narratives as the mood evolves.

most of us live in reality we're too poor to see the world through Champagne socialist lenses as we can't all live in the kind of world where we can hog the virtue by dictating all the harms fall on others.

harming kids is the easiest and most obvious place the whole edifice starts to crumble, an edifice the west built to mask its inaction to fixing the failings that led to the 2007/8 crisis.

we're in 2012 and verging on a new multi layered crisis.. one money printing and negative interest rates can't fix. and that's the stacked up harms the state/medical/academia/media have supported.

originally posted by: Ohanka

The new study has not been in a peer-reviewed journal yet. The authors say they felt there was an urgency in getting the information into the public domain

Nor will it. Activists and Accountants (sometimes the two form a hellish amalgamation) control the journals now. Narratives and profits are pushed before truth and care.

most of us live in the real world only those who cling desperately to this failed establishment reject the real world for the one the narrative imagines.

originally posted by: WorldxGonexMad
a reply to: AlienBorg

I would be very wary of any type of study or poll, particularly on the above mentioned. I'd say numbers can always be fiddled and in this case, I'd say 34% is a lie, its probably more and will increase over the coming years!

You can see how the story has evolved.

In a Dutch study prior to 2021 the conclusion was that children did benefit mentally and psychologically with the use of 'puberty blockers'.

In the 2021 study the findings were rather different with no change in the mental health state of children.

Now the re-analysis of the same 2021 study shows a large number of children with mental health deterioration.

And if these studies were free from activism and politics then we all know the results would be significantly different showing clearly how harmful these drugs are.

originally posted by: nickyw
i think most people understand the way academia/state/media is massaging the narratives as the mood evolves.

most of us live in reality we're too poor to see the world through Champagne socialist lenses as we can't all live in the kind of world where we can hog the virtue by dictating all the harms fall on others.

harming kids is the easiest and most obvious place the whole edifice starts to crumble, an edifice the west built to mask its inaction to fixing the failings that led to the 2007/8 crisis.

we're in 2012 and verging on a new multi layered crisis.. one money printing and negative interest rates can't fix. and that's the stacked up harms the state/medical/academia/media have supported.

The woke radical left either doesn't understand it or pretends it doesn't because it suits their narratives.

Do you see the implications of this re-analysis of the same study?!

There are more studies either peer-reviewed or pre-prints on the subject of 'puberty blockers'.

a reply to: AlienBorg

it was always going to be an issue when you capture so many different groups in one pot for the same treatment plan..

think about it they are treating proto gays and lesbians as if they are the opposite sex to make them straight, they treating autistics in the same way and the most obvious they are treating survivors of sexual abuse that way to

its a modern form of pseudoscience that prescribes a lobotomy for everything, coverting proto homosexuals is not going to makee them straight or happy nor will it fix autism or end sexual abuse.

come back in the few years and the positives will be the few actual transexuals caught up in this net..

that is if we survive this as a society, harming kids to mask other issues is the stuff of reformations, revolts and revolutions.

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: AlienBorg

it was always going to be an issue when you capture so many different groups in one pot for the same treatment plan..

think about it they are treating proto gays and lesbians as if they are the opposite sex to make them straight, they treating autistics in the same way and the most obvious they are treating survivors of sexual abuse that way to

its a modern form of pseudoscience that prescribes a lobotomy for everything, coverting proto homosexuals is not going to makee them straight or happy nor will it fix autism or end sexual abuse.

come back in the few years and the positives will be the few actual transexuals caught up in this net..

that is if we survive this as a society, harming kids to mask other issues is the stuff of reformations, revolts and revolutions.

I never has any doubts about what could happen when children are exposed to drugs and chemicals. It's usually a disaster.

Lupron is a drug given to chemically castrate serious sex offenders. Can you believe this was given to kids as a 'puberty blocker'?!?!

a reply to: AlienBorg

100% saw their physical health deteriorate.

Artificially induced chemical imbalances aren’t good for developing children.

Anyone who claims different shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a child.

a reply to: Terpene

It’s hard to digest your word salad.

A simple question, do you think children should be offered puberty blockers as a treatment?

Simplify your answer please. I know your crowd love to talk in riddles and dodge simple basic scientific fact but this one time try to provide an honest answer.

i wonder if the knowledge that a bunch of raging obsessive creeps on the internet will take absolutely any scrap they can find - even a non-peer reviewed re-analysis of an existing survey - and use it to try and demonise their very existence would effect the mental health of teens in a negative way?

it's kind of ironic in the most hideous way to sit here going "see they're DEPRESSED trans is BAD i TOLD YOU" when you're taking part in a constant campaign of cruelty against these people.



also while i'm here, i just want to point out that the article says 34% saw their mental health deteriorate, but if you go to the actual paper, right on the front page it says that BETWEEN 15 and 34% saw their mental health deteriorate, depending on which particular method was used to reinterpret the study. So right from the get-go we've got biased reporting, very cool. I haven't had time to read the abstract and i probably won't bother - because honestly why should i, you're all just going to sob like ugly babies no matter what i dig up - but it seems to be making the case that wider study is needed rather than the GRR TRANS BAD that you all automatically assume.

But hey, don't let facts stop you! Carry right on with the bullying children! And then being SIMPLY STUNNED when some of those children get depressed! Shocked Pikachu face! It can't be me, i'm the good guy, being trans is JUST. THAT. BAD.

loud farting noise

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Terpene

It’s hard to digest your word salad.

A simple question, do you think children should be offered puberty blockers as a treatment?

Simplify your answer please. I know your crowd love to talk in riddles and dodge simple basic scientific fact but this one time try to provide an honest answer.

Unlikely you will get a straight answer.

a reply to: Grenade

There is plenty that isn't good for the development of humanity but we love free markets over everything.

Failing to acknowledge something as part and parcel of human nature and setting the necessary legal boundaries will give opportunist the opportunity to take advantage of legal loopholes.

There is an easy way out, but suppression and denial isn't it.

Good luck

originally posted by: continuousThunder
i wonder if the knowledge that a bunch of raging obsessive creeps on the internet will take absolutely any scrap they can find - even a non-peer reviewed re-analysis of an existing survey - and use it to try and demonise their very existence would effect the mental health of teens in a negative way?

it's kind of ironic in the most hideous way to sit here going "see they're DEPRESSED trans is BAD i TOLD YOU" when you're taking part in a constant campaign of cruelty against these people.



also while i'm here, i just want to point out that the article says 34% saw their mental health deteriorate, but if you go to the actual paper, right on the front page it says that BETWEEN 15 and 34% saw their mental health deteriorate, depending on which particular method was used to reinterpret the study. So right from the get-go we've got biased reporting, very cool. I haven't had time to read the abstract and i probably won't bother - because honestly why should i, you're all just going to sob like ugly babies no matter what i dig up - but it seems to be making the case that wider study is needed rather than the GRR TRANS BAD that you all automatically assume.

But hey, don't let facts stop you! Carry right on with the bullying children! And then being SIMPLY STUNNED when some of those children get depressed! Shocked Pikachu face! It can't be me, i'm the good guy, being trans is JUST. THAT. BAD.

loud farting noise

It's not wise to support the use of harmful drugs that are given to kids in the name of a delusional ideology.

Do you think Lupron that was used to chemically castrate serious sex offenders should be given to gender dysphoric kids or kids who are not sure about their gender and sexuality?

Do you really need peer reviewed papers or pre-prints to determine this is a harmful drug?

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Grenade

There is plenty that isn't good for the development of humanity but we love free markets over everything.

Failing to acknowledge something as part and parcel of human nature and setting the necessary legal boundaries will give opportunist the opportunity to take advantage of legal loopholes.

There is an easy way out, but suppression and denial isn't it.

Good luck

The question you were asked was easy to answer but you decided to dodge it...

a reply to: continuousThunder

I don’t have a problem with trans people.

Unless they advocate for mutilating and drugging developing children to normalise their sexually driven fantasies.

a reply to: Terpene

As I suspected, you’re unable or unwilling to answer a simple question.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

Do you really need peer reviewed papers or pre-prints to determine this is a harmful drug?

That's uhhhh...... look i hate to break it to you buddy but that's what peer reviewed papers are for. It's called the scientific method and i know it's name is mud around here at the moment but if you looked at it objectively you would find that the vast, VAST majority of scientists and doctors who abide by it are firmly in agreement that gender affirming care is safe, important, and in many cases, necessary.