Great news: our critical appraisal of the Cass Review is now available as a pre-print.
In it, we demonstrate that the Cass Report's application of evidence-based medicine to gender affirming care for children and young people is deeply flawed.
Read here:
"Who runs a hospital at 2am in the morning?" asks the Health Secretary, trying to win over nurses with a polemic against doctors.
All of us, Hancock. We all work together in an interdisciplinary team. The only person not there at 2am is our lame arse Health Secretary.
Worked 19 hours straight yesterday. Saw so many NHS staff working so hard and risking their own health to save lives. Heartening to hear they're getting *checks notes* real terms pay cuts this year so we can afford Serco, Hancock's pub mate, and some management consultants.
First year doctor salaries:
๐ฌ๐ง UK ยฃ29,384 (FY1)
๐ณ๐ฟ NZ ยฃ37,460 (HO)
๐จ๐ฆ Canada ยฃ37,774 (PGY-1)
๐ซ๐ท France ยฃ43,909 (L1)
๐ฆ๐บ Australia ยฃ47,215 (L1)
๐บ๐ธ USA ยฃ63,988 (PGY-1)
Junior doctors in the UK face having to take strike action after 26% pay erosion over 14 years.
Meanwhile in australia the standard work week is 37.5 hours, no strikes and a WHAT IS THIS a retrospective pay rise
ยฃ23.76 vs ยฃ14.12 for a first year doctor
Just to clarify, I'm not worried about my pay, I'm worried about the pay of those staff at the bottom of the pay scales, who usually work the hardest and are the most marginalised and vulnerable.
Dr Davie has added clarification about the call he had with Cass in 2020. He recalls:
- Cass was sceptical about affirming care and recommended he read a 'gender critical' polemic.
- Dr Davie, who felt affirming care was appropriate, was not invited to join the Cass Review.
This footnote alone is enough to harpoon any credibility that the Cass Review might still have.
The only conclusion I can make is that Hilary Cass, when entrusted with a review of trans kids' healthcare, already held 'gender critical' views.
Source:
I've seen a letter is being pushed by BMJ and others who don't want
@theBMA
to critique the Cass Review.
The letter's main argument is that the Cass Review was sound and "got it right". But if that's the case, what do they have to worry about? Why are they afraid of the BMA?
Another multidisciplinary group critiqued the Cass Report. They confirmed our working group's findings re: poor methodology and unsupported assertions. This is damning stuff, folks.
An interdisciplinary group of scholars (including myself) worked with The Integrity Project
@YaleLawSch
to contextualize, and where appropriate critique, the UKโs โCass Reportโ on medical treatments for adolescent gender dysphoria.
This footnote alone is enough to harpoon any credibility that the Cass Review might still have.
The only conclusion I can make is that Hilary Cass, when entrusted with a review of trans kids' healthcare, already held 'gender critical' views.
Source:
This expert opinion from a paediatrician and psychologist, who have actual experience working with GIDS, is a useful addition to the growing evidence critiquing the Cass Review. ๐งต
Govt minister says contract tracing is difficult as it's "an entirely new infrastructure which there's no precedent for".
Smallpox was eradicated by exhaustive contact tracing, a technique that has been around for decades. The govt need to find a better excuse!
Hi
@doctor_oxford
, I'd like to give you some context as to why our democratic professional body,
@theBMA
, would decide to undertake an evaluation of the recently published Cass Review, with a view to recommending improvements to trans healthcare in the UK. ๐งต
The BMJ have released a piece criticising
@TheBMA
for daring to critique the controversial Cass Review.
This is hardly surprising, when you realise how much of Cass is driven by the BMJ. ๐งต
A 96-hour
#JuniorDoctorsStrike
is due to start on Tuesday, but Health Secretary
@SteveBarclay
has yet to offer junior docs anything.
We've lost 26% of our real terms pay, thousands are leaving for Australia & NZ/Aotearoa. This isn't going to fix itself, Steve.
#PayRestoration
The government: the data doesn't support any additional public health measures to control COVID.
Also the government: let's build 800 extra hospital beds in car parks and get the coroners ready to work extra shifts.
I think this is sensible from
@TheBMA
:
- BMA will evaluate and critique the Cass Review ๐ง
- Their task and finish group will also make recommendations to improve trans healthcare ๐
- BMA calls for pause in Cass implementation while work is done ๐
I doubt the government will sort things out quickly enough for me to benefit before I CCT. But this is for the next generation of doctors in training, for recruitment and retention, and ultimately for patient safety.
So it's a yes from me.
#PayRestoration
#JuniorDoctorsStrike
Unlike the Cass team which intentionally excluded transgender individuals and organisations, as well as experts in transgender health, from its assurance group, our working group is inclusive of trans professionals and appreciates their personal and professional expertise. /4
Our working group, led by
@Chris_Noone_
, consists of clinicians and academics from multiple disciplines including psychology, sociology, biology, law, bioethics, psychiatry, neuroscience, sexual health, general practice, nursing, pharmacy, and medical education. /2
Official govt papers leaked to The Sun show that a No Deal Brexit this winter will lead to shortages of food, water, fuel, electricity, and essential medicines. It would see the army on our streets to control civil unrest. It's time they got a deal, or an extension.
Hadley Freeman warps the Cass Report into an inquest into whether trans people should be allowed treatment, allowed to exist. In the 2020 terms of reference, Cass was meant to make recommendations for NHS services. That was it. Trans people's lives weren't meant to be on trial.
@cassesque
Multi-year waiting lists are effectively a denial of care. Much of mental health services is like this, which is why it was doubly ridiculous that NHSE wanted trans kids to go via CAMHS/secondary care in order to reach the new GIDS.
This expert opinion from a paediatrician and psychologist, who have actual experience working with GIDS, is a useful addition to the growing evidence critiquing the Cass Review. ๐งต
That's the thing, there is no one measure that defines all women. Trying to define anyone by just their gametes, genitals, genes, chromosomes, physicality, ability, ethnicity... it's all dehumanising nonsense that belongs in the 20th Century, along with patriarchy and eugenics.
If everyone with XY chromosomes is a man, which is suddenly what GCs are saying, then by their own definition some men can give birth.
This is the opposite to what GCs have been claiming for years - having a mardy whenever someone suggests not only women need reproductive care.
The Observer is shouting loudly about how the BMA will ruin its reputation by ensuring there is proper scrutiny of the controversial Cass Review.
But once again it's all just the opinion of BMJ stalwart Jacky Davis, who has already made her views clear on the matter.
2 anti-trans articles in The Observer today and neither involve Sonia Sodha.
The 2nd article here is based on the first article.
Jacky Davis is a radiologist whose opinion is as relevant to this discussion as mine is on radiology.
Our thoughts go to Dr Davie, who has experienced a backlash for revealing this important context about Hilary Cass. Dr Davie's account suggests that Cass' 2024 interview with Hannah Barnes, in which Cass claims she had no fixed views before the review, was not entirely accurate.
The UK.
0.87% of the global population
10% of the global COVID-19 deaths
This is not a "good outcome".
We need widespread testing, contact tracing, case quarantine, border screening, and effective procurement of equipment including PPE.
#Covid_19
BMJ editor Kamran Abbasi has denied holding gender critical views, but has repeatedly criticised affirming care for trans kids and supports "holistic care" (which in my view is a euphemism for conversion practices and for the denial of affirming care).
The BMJ have been churning out pieces undermining affirming care for trans children, stoking the concerns of readers not familiar with trans healthcare. Notably, there was this piece in April last year:
What were you thinking when you funded this piece,
@bmj_latest
? We will be writing to you in due course, but we need to call this out now. This 'investigation' reflects current prejudices and alarmism about trans people, treating their treatment and survival as a mere debate.
Can't believe Boris Johnson is running late for an announcement he's delayed twice, to announce a lockdown that he's delayed for so long.
Wait actually I can completely believe it.
Hey UK folks. Hope you're ok.
You need to start social distancing *right now*.
Work from home if you can. Avoid public spaces and meetings. Postpone social and business events. Avoid hospitals and the GP's if at all possible. Use 111.
Please.
Ultimately, the BMA wrote to the BMJ about the piece to express concerns "that alongside criticisms made by LGBTQ+ organisations such as GLADD and neurodivergent doctors, in our view, it lacks equality, diversity and inclusion awareness and patient voice."
So we have the Cass Review, cheer led by the BMJ editor, supported by consensus articles in the BMJ, its review papers reviewed and published by a BMJ journal, with a BMJ Group editor quoted to give legitimacy, and BMJ columnists criticising those who express valid concerns.
That Abbasi uses the Cass Review to support his views against affirming trans care is somewhat circular, as the BMJ Group are not just a key vocal opponent of care... they also have ownership of the journal that peer reviewed and published the review papers that support Cass.
Surely the Cass Review did all this? Well, actually, no. Cass is not an expert on trans healthcare. Subject matter experts were intentionally not included on the team, except for one who was (in my opinion) biased against affirming care. Experts who were trans were excluded.
Young people seeking to transition deserve much better than the
#CassReview
. In this preprint, we show that Cass relied on poorly conducted systematic reviews & primary resarch, & made unsupported claims that should together undermine her recommendations.
Having a trans kid undergo their natal puberty is not a neutral or desirable act just because it is a natural occurrence, in the same way that continuing an unwanted pregnancy or having intrusive menopausal symptoms should not be considered the default option.
To be clear, these are my own thoughts and do not represent those of the BMA. I am a doctor, BMA member, EDI Advisory Group member, author on a paper critically appraising the Cass Review, I have lived experience, and I have done work on trans inclusion in healthcare.
Puberty blockers were meant to be the safe, reversible, compromise provided to stabilise things whilst trans kids worked things through. Banning them does not reduce risk, but increases it. This is analogous to bans on reproductive care.
Yes, the journal publishing the Cass review papers is jointly owned, by both BMJ Group and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health. But, guess which royal college Cass used to be president of? Yup.
The BMA has already had to write to the BMJ about its previous output on care for trans children, which lacked EDI awareness and patient voices, and has been used by transphobic lobby groups around the world.
...we're talking about cรญs kids with central precocious puberty (CPP). As the BMJ says, "Treatment of CPP is usually straightforward with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists."
Yes, puberty blockers.
Yes, "straightforward".
Yes, the BMJ.
Fundamentally, there are concerns that the Cass Review was methodologically flawed, did not represent the current evidence base, ignored the wider context, viewed trans people through a pathologising, patriarchal lens, and is being used inappropriately to withdraw access to care.
And ultimately this is about political interference in a matter that is for patients, parents, and clinicians, and not for the state. All individuals have the right to make decisions regarding their own reproductive care and must have access to services that support that right.
Now weโve flattened the curve & reduced new infections, from tomorrow, the 2.2 million people who have been shielding can safely go outside
I know how much those shielding have sacrificed. Thank you to everyone who has protected our NHS & saved lives
This footnote alone is enough to harpoon any credibility that the Cass Review might still have.
The only conclusion I can make is that Hilary Cass, when entrusted with a review of trans kids' healthcare, already held 'gender critical' views.
Source:
@SteveBarclay
The
@BMA_JuniorDocs
team already let us know how the meeting went, and that's not what happened.
@SteveBarclay
came to talks without any offer, presumably expecting us to accept 2%. He demanded 'media silence' from the team but briefed the papers himself immediately afterwards.
There were also concerns that the Cass Review had (a) shown cisnormative biases, (b) misrepresented contributions from trans patients, (c) involved discredited and questionable input from anti-trans sources.
(An aside: strictly speaking, trans kids could also, in theory, go straight onto cross sex hormones, as this would avoid them experiencing a puberty contrary to their gender. Puberty blockers are a compromise that allows "time to think" first.)
The NHS staff who have lost their lives during this pandemic have given so much to their communities and will be sorely missed by friends, families and colleagues.
For their sake, please stay at home. Help us avoid more deaths.
#COVID2019
This happens elsewhere in the article: Jacky Davis is quoted as a BMA Council member, without also mentioning that she is a long time columnist for the BMJ.
Why not keep banning puberty blockers for trans kids until things are cleared up by a trial, several years from now? Seriously? Ok. Because the harm this will cause these children is excessive. Few children get to receive blockers, but the evidence shows that they need them.
The Labour govt has renewed the ban on new scripts for puberty blockers for trans kids, and extended the ban to Northern Ireland.
Non-trans kids still have access to these medications, which are not considered dangerous and are still in use in kids.
I just spoke for the first time at
@TheBMA
ARM, in support of the motion calling for the govt to reinstate
@RainbowNHSBadge
funding. I had to counter a member of the RB who opposed the motion, claiming the scheme was too expensive. 1/
#ARM2024
Well, kids *are* still receiving puberty blockers to reduce the psychological distress caused by puberty, allowing them time until they can start a puberty that is appropriate for them. The evidence says this is safe, and it isn't banned. Oh, but wait...
It is telling that the ban on all new puberty blocker scripts (at least outside of a trial that Cass proposed but doesn't yet exist) is only for trans kids; the safety and efficacy of these same drugs, for essentially the same treatment aim, is not in question for cรญs kids.
Given concerns about Cass, political overreach, the risk of harm to trans kids, and the specific limiting of trans people's rights to access care (whilst cรญs kids continue to have access to blockers), it is entirely reasonable to call for care to continue whilst this is sorted.
Hey
@SteveBarclay
, we're still waiting for you to come to the table and sort things out. Folks on the street get that we're not worth less than we were in 2008. We're professionals, not students as you said, and we will keep telling you until you listen.
#FullPayRestoration
We know from data on trans kids on waiting lists that 45% report attempting suicide and 84% report self harm (Stonewall, 2017). Affirming care is associated with a 73% reduction in odds of suicidality and 60% reduction in odds of moderate or severe depression (Tordoff, 2022).
Hi
@doctor_oxford
, I'd like to give you some context as to why our democratic professional body,
@theBMA
, would decide to undertake an evaluation of the recently published Cass Review, with a view to recommending improvements to trans healthcare in the UK. ๐งต
Not to mention there is also data on the use of puberty blockers in trans kids too, including qualitative data that was excluded from the Cass Review. Cass deemed this evidence insufficient, but it exists and is bolstered by all the data on cรญs kids.
First, you were critical of the BMA Council for making a strategic decision to evaluate the Cass Review. Surely, you thought, it is for the BMA's Representative Body (RB) to decide policy at ARM and for the Council to act strategically based on this policy.
So it is entirely reasonable that the BMA evaluates the Cass Review, as empowered to do so by policy set by the Representative Body in 2020, and that it does so in an evidence-based manner including trans expertise which Cass excluded.
The 2020 ARM, the RB passed a resolution including a call to govt to "ensure that under 18s are able to access healthcare in line with existing principles of consent established by UK Case Law and guidelines published by the public bodies which set the standards for healthcare;"
UK govt votes to break international law.
UK govt votes to keep starving children hungry.
UK govt votes to keep migrant children from their parents.
UK govt votes to authorise undercover police to commit murder, torture and rape.
Folks I think we need a better government.
It is also appropriate as there has been international, multi-disciplinary criticism of the Cass Review. This included criticism of the Cass systematic review papers, published in a journal of the BMJ Group, which is wholly owned by the BMA but which has editorial independence.
We have an old copy of the Australian
@WomensWeeklyMag
birthday cake book in the cupboard, so of course the "duck cake from Bluey" has been requested this year ๐คฏ wish me luck!
So, will the BMA be able to bring sufficient expertise in its evaluation of the Cass Review? Certainly, as per the press release, the BMA is already aware of two international multi-disciplinary papers providing critical appraisal of the Cass Review and its scientific programme.
So we already have policy from the RB. But why not vote on this specific matter at the 2024 BMA ARM? Well, the Cass Review final report was published on 10th April, a week after the deadline to submit motions to ARM. Colleagues therefore submitted an emergency motion to ARM.
The press release also states that the BMA Board of Science, Medical Ethics Committee, Equality and Inclusion Advisory Group, and Patient Liaison Group will be involved. Appropriate expertise should be drawn upon from multiple angles.
The BMJ have released a piece criticising
@TheBMA
for daring to critique the controversial Cass Review.
This is hardly surprising, when you realise how much of Cass is driven by the BMJ. ๐งต