Telling parents and children that puberty blockers are 'reversible' at the very least conveys assurance that no permanent harm or change will occur,” it reads. “But that claim cannot be made in the face of the unstudied and ‘novel’ use of puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria.”20 state AGs challenge American Academy of Pediatrics over puberty blockers guidance
KCBY Ch 11
by JACKSON WALKER
September 24th 2024Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador on Tuesday led a coalition of 20 state attorneys general in demanding the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) retract recommendations to give puberty blockers to children diagnosed with gender dysphoria.
The letterincluded signatures from, among others, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost. Also signing on were Arizona state Senate President Warren Petersen and Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma.
The letter condemned AAP's president Benjamin Hoffman and president-elect Susan Kressly for issuing “misleading and deceptive” statements claiming the use of puberty blockers is "reversible." This claim, the letter reads, is “beyond medical debate.”
The state officials also called out the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which AAP cites to back up its advice. WPATH recently came under scrutiny for allegedly removing age restrictions for a variety of transgender procedures at the request of the Department of Health and Human Services.
Ah yes, just like other right-wing conservatives they lie through their teeth. “Medical experimentation” even though it has been used for over forty years to stop early puberty they still call it “experimental.”'Abusive': Pediatrician group's support for trans therapies rebuked by state AGs
'Parents should be able to trust that a doctor’s medical guidance isn’t just the latest talking point from a dangerous and discredited activist agenda,' Idaho AG
Fox News
By Jamie Joseph
September 24, 2024A group of attorneys general across the country are demanding that the nation's leading pediatric organization rescind its support for transgender procedures – such as puberty blockers and surgeries – on children.
Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador sent a letter Tuesday to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) accusing the organization of abandoning "its commitment to sound medical judgment."
"That halt on what is fairly described as medical experimentation on children is long overdue – particularly since the majority of children initially diagnosed with gender dysphoria desist and 'grow out' of the condition by the time they are adolescents or adults," the letter reads. "It is abusive to treat a child with biologically altering drugs that have an unknown physiological trajectory and end point. It is also inhumane to endorse such experimentation without a confident safety profile, especially if more times than not, it proves to be medically unnecessary."
The Catholic News Agency writes,
Sent on Tuesday, the eight-page-long letter criticizes the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for renewing its 2018 policy statement in support of cross-sex treatments for children.
“When it comes to treating children diagnosed with gender dysphoria, the AAP has abandoned its commitment to sound medical judgment,” the letter claims.
In particular, the attorneys general, all Republican, assert that the AAP’s promotion of hormonal puberty blockers as a “reversible” treatment for children suffering from gender dysphoria violates state consumer-protection laws.
According to the attorneys general who signed on to the letter the claim that puberty blockers for children are reversible “is misleading and deceptive and requires immediate retraction and correction.”
In a statement shared with CNA by the Idaho attorney general’s office on Tuesday, Labrador said: “It is shameful the most basic tenet of medicine — do no harm — has been abandoned by professional associations when politically pressured.”
Notably, the state attorneys general are also demanding that the AAP turn over all its guidance to pediatricians and parents regarding gender dysphoria and suicide. The letter also requests that the AAP turn over all its communications with the Biden administration regarding its 2018 policy statement as well as any communications regarding cross-sex hormonal treatments and transgender care.
As researchers and pediatric clinicians with experience in the field of transgender healthcare, we read the Review with great interest. The degree of financial investment and time spent is impressive. Its ability to publish seven systematic reviews, conduct years’ worth of focus groups and deeply investigate care practices in the UK is admirable. We hoped it would improve the public’s awareness of the health needs of transgender youth and galvanize improvements in delivery of this care. Indeed, statements of the Review favorably describe the individualized, age-appropriate, and careful approach recommended by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) and the Endocrine Society. Unfortunately, the Review repeatedly misuses data and violates its own evidentiary standards by resting many conclusions on speculation. Many of its statements and the conduct of the York SRs reveal profound misunderstandings of the evidence base and the clinical issues at hand. The Review also subverts widely accepted processes for development of clinical recommendations and repeats spurious, debunked claims about transgender identity and gender dysphoria. These errors conflict with well-established norms of clinical research and evidence-based healthcare. Further, these errors raise serious concern about the scientific integrity of critical elements of the report’s process and recommendations.
In the short time since its release, the Review has been used to justify restrictions on healthcare for transgender youth. In March 2024, the NHS announced that it would deny puberty-pausing medications to those under age 18 outside of a research setting. In June 2024, the NHS Health Secretary cited the Review as the rationale for emergency regulations that criminalize the supply of puberty-pausing medications to new patients under 18 in England, Scotland, or Wales. This ban, which applies only to the treatment of gender dysphoria, labeled these medications as a “serious danger to health.” These medications remain freely available for other pediatric health needs, of which precocious puberty, endometriosis, and fertility preservation prior to chemotherapy are some.
The Cass Review has already been cited in U.S. legal battles over transgender rights. It is likely to feature heavily in the months and years to come. From 2022 through 2024, twenty-five US states enacted legislation that bans gender-affirming healthcare for transgender youth. Litigation is ongoing in at least ten states, and the nation’s highest court has agreed to hear one case, United States v Skrmetti, in the fall 2024 term. Other nations’ health ministries are anticipated to use the Cass Review to inform their own policies on access to youth gender care.
Readers may be surprised by this novel approach to the policy debate over gender transition procedures for minors, as the AAP surely was too. After all, what connection is there between state attorneys general and the AAP to make this letter anything more than a hollow messaging stunt?Of course their claim of “puberty blockers are ‘reversible’ is ‘scientifically unsupported and contradicts what is medically known’” is the false claim 40 years of using puberty blockers for precocious puberty disproves their claims that they are not reversible. Science for Georgia writes,
Helpfully, the letter makes the connection: the claim that puberty blockers are “reversible” is “scientifically unsupported and contradicts what is medically known,” it states. Therefore, it “raises questions under most state consumer protection laws.” For example, Idaho law prohibits “[e]ngaging in any act or practice that is otherwise misleading, false, or deceptive to the consumer.” This law directly applies to “statements made by medical trade associations, like the AAP,” and it indirectly applies to AAP statements that “are connected to commerce and reach consumers,” the letter explains.
Puberty blockers are irreversible.This is not true.
Puberty blockers are reversible and once the use stops, puberty resumes. Puberty blockers are also not meant to be taken permanently and are just one treatment in a standard of care.
Using puberty blockers for gender-affirming care is “highly experimental”
This is not true.
Off-label uses of medication are extremely common in medicine and pediatrics. For example, 85% of more than 55,000 children admitted to pediatric intensive care units in the USA were treated with at least one off-label medication (the average number was 4·5), and these medications included neurological, antimicrobial, and cardiovascular drugs.
For puberty blockers more specifically, the FDA approved their usage for precocious puberty in the 1990s. Currently, one in every five to ten thousand children experiences early puberty.
[…]
Puberty blockers cause irrevocable harm to bone density.
A reduction in bone density is a possible side effect of puberty blockers that some people experience, but with medical care, bone density can be addressed.
Hormone changes during puberty are a significant catalyst in bone growth and mineralization. There is a long-term detriment to bone density as an impact of long-term pubertal suppression. This is because pubertal suppression is not supposed to last throughout the entirety of adolescence. When patients shift from pubertal suppression to cross-sex hormone therapy, problems of bone density are mitigated.
This is a serious medical concern that is monitored by the patient’s medical team, but physicans are primed to be aware of new or worsening bone density issues. There are also other protective regimens such as exercise, Vitamin D, and calcium that can be used to combat any serious side effects.
No comments:
Post a Comment