in this case, inaction is not the neutral option. inaction has tremendous psychological costs, and causes irreversible changes which call for more serious and invasive interventions later blockers are the neutral option, because they ALLOW the decision to be deferred
-
-
"Well that kid's puberty wasn't a *natural* puberty we were interrupting You can tell because it happened too early"
-
The entire idea of age 9 being a *natural* age for little girls to start growing boobs and getting their period is itself a set point that is trending downward the more calories kids eat and the more endocrine disruptions we dump into in the general environment
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Right, because the side effects of precocious puberty are primarily psychological distress and social problems, which you've already established you don't see as compelling quality-of-life issues worthy of pharmaceutical intervention.
End of conversation
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.