Evan Urquhart

But we know PBs dont do that, bc they're used safely to treat precocious puberty. And we know they dont cause gender transition for the same reason- kids with precocious puberty dont transition. This is why it seems clear the court made some sort of mistake.

Puberty blockers stop development of body and brain. Normally a kid will work out their gender via the process of puberty. When you have a kid who’s convinced they are the other gender, and you stop puberty, you cement that identity. Why do this? Most of them are gay.

I'm sorry, but this just seems like an ideological set of beliefs. We were discussing facts and evidence. I have no response to this ideologically based rant.

The evidence shows that the majority of GD children who are not given blockers will grow out of their GD after puberty, becoming comfortable with their natal sex. On the other hand, 98% of children given blockers will continue to suffer from GD & progress on to CSH.

The same evidence even more so supports the hypothesis that PBs are used very sparingly, and only with young people who are highly likely to be trans. Your alternate, less likely hypothesis requires firm evidence. I'm open minded but must insist you provide some.

Why would a drug that doesn't cause children to transition when used in precocious puberty cause transition when used in children who are likely to be trans? You can't genuinely believe the drug is the primary factor here- it's an absurd, completely baseless belief.

Stop being so disingenuous. It's not the drug that makes them "be trans". The child has Gender Dysphoria. The drug stunts cognitive development, which prolongs the GD, leading to serious irreversible intervention that would otherwise be unnecessary.

What's your evidence that it stunts cognitive development? And, if the drug doesn't have any causal relationship to kids being trans what's the reason for preventing it being used? Why not focus on whatever is "making them be trans"?