Phase One: Puberty Blockers

Even George Orwell who warned about the political abuse of language to obscure truth and promote evil might be shocked by the egregious nature of the Newspeak daily encountered in purportedly civilized countries. Human slaughter is called “choice.” Humans at 8.75 months gestation are called “gestators” and “non-persons.” Wombs are “workplaces.” Pregnancy is “gestational work.” And human gestation is “violence.” If the tiny humans whose mothers’ whims can result in their extermination survive the treacherous waters of the womb, they face yet another pernicious threat: the “trans” ideology that too relies on Newspeak.

Cross-dressing persons with anatomically correct, properly functioning congenital penises are called “women.” The recognition and identification of biological sex at birth is called “assigning gender.” Pronouns no longer correspond to and denote objective, immutable biological sex; rather, they correspond to and denote subjective internal feelings about maleness, femaleness, both, or neither—feelings that are now called “gender identity.” Elective amputations of healthy body parts, and sterility-inducing chemical interference with natural biological processes are called “health care.”

Closer attention is due to a controversy resulting from criticism by Oxford University sociologist Dr. Michael Biggs of England’s leading “gender identity” clinic, the Tavistock Centre’s Gender Identity Development Service, for its “experiment with puberty-blockers” to treat gender dysphoric pre-pubescent children. 

Prior to 2011, Tavistock did not prescribe sex-hormone suppressing drugs to children younger than 16, the age at which clinicians believed children could give informed consent. In 2011, Tavistock announced the commencement of a research study to look at the effects of these drugs on children ages 12-15. The study concluded in February 2019, but as of this writing, neither annual progress reports nor results have been published.  

While the pro-“trans” community has been promoting the use of puberty-blockers as a harmless means to “buy time,” Dr. Biggs reveals a troubling finding buried in the Tavistock report’s appendix—a finding he accessed through a Freedom of Information Act request:

Diligent searching has uncovered unpublished results on the psychological effects. Most revealing is an appendix to Carmichael’s report…. “Natal girls showed a significant increase in behavioural and emotional problems”, according to their parents…. One dimension of the Health Related Quality of Life scale, completed by parents, “showed a significant decrease in Physical well-being of their child”. What is most disturbing is that “a significant increase was found in the first item ‘I deliberately try to hurt or kill self’” (in the Youth Self Report questionnaire).

For years, endocrinologists in the United States have been prescribing puberty-suppressing drugs for off-label use to gender-dysphoric children—some as young as 8 years old—drugs that have not been rigorously tested to determine their efficacy or safety for treating gender dysphoria in pediatric patients.

Pro-“transition” physician Dr. Norman Spack, co-director of the Gender Management Service (GeMS) program at Boston Children’s and one of America’s leaders in the medical abuse of children, jubilantly proclaims that “One of the great advantages of the drugs we use is that they’re totally reversible. All we’re doing is delaying puberty. It’s fantastic.” 

But are these drugs “totally reversible”? Does suppressing puberty for two or more years alter social experiences? If so, do those altered social experiences affect brain development? 

Dr. Polly Carmichael, director of the Tavistock Centre, admitted this in 2015:

“The blocker is said to be completely reversible, which is disingenuous because nothing’s completely reversible. It might be that the introduction of natal hormones [those you are born with] at puberty has an impact on the trajectory of gender dysphoria.”

In addition to the troubling absence of research proving that hormone-blockers are safe and efficacious, another reason their use is controversial is that the best research to date suggests that upwards of 80% of gender-dysphoric children will outgrow their gender dysphoria and come to accept their biological sex (i.e., “desist”), unless they socially and chemically “transition.” Social and chemical “transitioning” reduces desistance rates to almost zero. Remarkably, whether children accept their sexed bodies or not is irrelevant to “trans”-activists, as Marie Verite and Brie Jontry writing for 4thWaveNow make clear: 

[T]rans activists consider it “transphobic” for anyone to believe that a child’s desistance from trans-identification would be preferable to persistence.

In a paper published in 2017, Dr. Guido Giovanardi from the Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology at Sapienza University of Rome questions the sanguine assertion that puberty-blockers innocuously “buy time”:

From a psychological perspective, the main dilemma is to understand whether buying time at such a precocious age truly enables children to explore deep personal meanings, or whether it freezes youngsters in a prolonged childhood, secluding them from certain aspects of reality and isolating them from peer groups. 

Dr. Kenneth Zucker, one of the world’s leading authorities on childhood gender dysphoria who advocates  against premature social, chemical, and surgical interventions (and, therefore, has been targeted by the “trans” cult for professional destruction) warns that,

[P]arents who support, implement, or encourage a gender social transition (and clinicians who recommend one) are implementing a psychosocial treatment that will increase the odds of long-term persistence.

And long-term persistence means long-term cross-sex hormone-dependence.

According to the Guardian, the eager hormone-interventionist Dr. Spack confirms Zucker’s concerns but seems to have no qualms about it: 

Spack has, he says, put “about 200 children” on to hormone blockers at the onset of puberty. Of these, 100% have gone on to take cross-sex hormones because “no one changes their mind”. 

Lupron, the chief puberty-suppression drug prescribed to children to interfere with normal, healthy biological processes can result in these side effects: 

Common side effects of Lupron Depot Pediatric include acne, increased growth of facial hair, breakthrough vaginal bleeding in a female child during the first 2 months of Lupron Depot Pediatric treatment, dizziness, weakness, tired feeling, hot flashes, night sweats, chills, clammy skin, nausea, diarrhea, constipation, stomach pain, skin redness, skin itching or scaling, rash, joint or muscle pain, vaginal itching or discharge, breast swelling or tenderness, testicle pain, impotence, loss of interest in sex, depression, mood swings, sleep problems (insomnia), memory problems, headache, or injection site reactions (redness, burning, itching, swelling, or abscess).

Two years ago, Kaiser Health News reported on the then over-10,000 “adverse events reports filed with the FDA” on Lupron prescribed for pediatric conditions. Physicians report seeing osteopenia (bone thinning) and degenerative disc disease—conditions found in the elderly—in young women who were prescribed Lupron as children for precocious puberty or merely to grow taller.

is the Cultural Analyst at the Illinois Family Institute. Her cultural commentaries have been carried on a number of pro-family websites, and she has spoken at the Council for National Policy and at conferences sponsored by the Constitutional Coalition.

Copyright © 2019 Salvo | www.salvomag.com https://salvomag.com/post/trans-child-abuse