The Cass Review has also said that children should have easier access to cross sex hormones - they're considering removing the requirement for children to have spent time on puberty blockers before moving onto CSH.
The alternative explanation is that it was almost impossible for trans children to access healthcare in the UK and the only people making their way through the pipeline of GP to GIC to hormone centre were those who were undeniably trans.
Double check those bone density results, because new research shows they're present before treatment with puberty blockers starts. Some theories are that some children have reduced access to sporting activity.
Puberty blockers have a long use in children. Unlike a lot of paediatric medications puberty blockers are licensed for use in children, and are used for their licensed use (blocking puberty), albeit for a different population (gender incongruent children with strong trans indicators, instead of children with precocious puberty).
This - being licensed in children, and being used mostly in line with the license - is better than many paediatric meds.
We have a lot of research about use in precocious puberty - they meds are mostly harmless. We don't have a huge amount of research in trans children, but that's for exactly the same reason we don't have research in a bunch of different meds for children.
> they wheel you into the procedure room, and then you pass out.
This is the bit that a lot of people have a problem with, and there's usually some choices in the amount and type of sedation you get.
In the US they use much heavier sedation than other countries - use of propofol is not uncommon in the US - and it's one of the things that makes colonoscopy more risky than it needs to be.
> One thing is clear: Screening works. If you’re of the appropriate age, please get screened. If your tubes are acting funny, please get screened without delay.
Screening is for people without symptoms.
If you have symptoms it's not screening, it's diagnostic testing. Diagnosis is important - if you bleed from anywhere you need it to be explained - but there are big differences in how you look at a test that's done for screening vs diagnosis.
Shaun Lintern is an experienced health system journalist. This piece, written by him and Danny Fortson, is a comprehensive take down of Babylon.
Lots of people had serious concerns about Babylon Health - mostly around obviously false claims of accuracy - for years, and it was baffling to see them keep getting money.
And the real story is pretty grim - copious amounts of corruption and deception, and a system not holding them to account.
It's notable that a key feature of their model - quick access GP appointments to push patients to private secondary care (where the people providing the GP appointments and the people providing the hospital care are in the same company) did not work, and could not work because the finances didn't make any sense even with the corruption and deception.
There are often discussions around NHS models of care, and people will suggest moving to a mix of public and private, or private but non profit insurance models. The simple fact is the model doesn't matter: healthcare doesn't work unless you fund it.
We do have the money to fund the NHS. Successive Conservative governments have made the choice to defund the NHS, along with public health, and social care. And they did all of this on top of Brexit.
One pushes mainstream evidence based treatment, the other pushes socially conservative, Christian values, based "treatment".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Academy_of_Pediatrics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_College_of_Pediatrici...