Evan Urquhart

Great! What physical- not social or psychological- issues does puberty cause to a 5 yr olds body that it doesn't cause to an 8 year olds?

Oh, related question- for this 5 yr old who you'd recommend blockers for, would you remove them swiftly at 8, or a more normative age for onset of menses like 10 or 11?

(assuming of course the child is tolerating them well, parent and child not eager for the child to start menses)

The normal range for menarche is 9-17. I personally started my periods at age 10. Once a kid is on PBs, they are out of my hands and thus I wouldn't make these decisions, but if asked, my answer would depend more on bone age than anything else.

So, it sounds like you're in favor of dangerous experimental drugs for very young children and in favor of keeping them on them longer than the absolute minimum?

That's very interesting! I guess you know what physical (not social or psychological) damage menstruation does to 5 yr old bodies that it doesn't do to 8 yr olds!

I *think* you're deliberately ignoring my point. (I hope that's the case, anyway.) The damage done to 12-16 yr olds by PBs is not theoretical anymore. We have data. Menstruation is not damaging. The concern is bones, their growth and their density.

I'm definitely confused. Does puberty cause bone density issues or is it PBs? And, is shortness a cause of physical health problems?