Because giving hormone suppressors to developing kids could have massive implications to their physical and mental development? Has there really been enough research on the subject to come up with a valid cost-benefit analysis?
> How can there be any emphatically-cogent argument…?
Because drugging little kids should be a last resort. Using big words doesn't change the need to be extremely cautious in doing something as serious as blocking puberty.
> How can there be any emphatically-cogent argument…?
Because drugging little kids should be a last resort. Using big words doesn't change the need to be extremely cautious in doing something as serious as blocking puberty.