Most people thought puberty blockers were no longer permitted in this country.
Their use was dealt a heavy blow by the report of Dr Hilary Cass into ‘gender identity services’ in April last year. She concluded they were powerful drugs with unproven benefits and significant risks.
She warned of a general lack of reliable information, saying: ‘This is an area of remarkably weak evidence, and yet results of studies are exaggerated or misrepresented by people on all sides of the debate to support their viewpoint.
‘The reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.’
She also noted: ‘Based on a single Dutch study, which suggested puberty blockers may improve psychological wellbeing for a narrowly defined group of children with gender incongruence, the practice spread at pace to other countries.’
The Commission on Human Medicines, an independent expert body that advises UK ministers on the safety of medicines, concluded that prescribing puberty blockers to children for gender dysphoria represented an ‘unacceptable safety risk’.
An emergency ban was imposed by the then Tory government in May 2024. The Labour Health Secretary, Wes Streeting, made it permanent in December. Announcing the move, Mr Streeting said: ‘It is a scandal that medicine was given to vulnerable children without the proof that it was safe or effective.’
And so it is. But what was little noticed at the time was a clause through which the use of these drugs is now set to return, quite legally, in the guise of research.
Protestors marching through central London last year and showing their support for Transgender freedom
Labour Health Secretary, Wes Streeting (pictured) announced a planned clinical trial by NHS England would go ahead on puberty blockers
Mr Streeting said that a planned clinical trial by NHS England would go ahead. The ban would then be reviewed in 2027 in the light of any new evidence that emerged.
No doubt this trial is lawful, and those who favour it argue that we do not know enough about the effects of these drugs. This is only a live question if the drugs are still being used at all.
But given what we already know, can this be justified? The testing of drugs or safety measures is a complex and sometimes risky business.
To give an extreme example of the problem of safety versus knowledge, we use crash-test dummies because it is far too dangerous to use actual humans. We test drugs on animals, to the distress of many, because we are not sure it is safe to test them on people.
Those on whom puberty blockers would have to be tested are necessarily so young that it is hard to see how they can give fully informed consent. And what if, despite all precautions, lasting damage is done?
Among other things, the new study will examine any effect upon brain development. The mention of such a possibility is surely alarming in itself.
It illustrates just how powerful the chemicals used in this procedure are.
How can we know whether all the effects are reversible? And without knowing, is it safe to test? Many will ask why this is truly needed and whether it can possibly be justified.
At the very least, we need more of a debate on the balance between known risks and possible benefits before a trial of this kind is allowed to go ahead.