Evan Urquhart

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?

These are drugs you recommend using in children of 5 years of age- I just want to know why something so dangerous would be ok for a 5 yr old?

You really are this dense. OK. Precocious puberty in a 5 yr old is rare and serious. The cost/benefit analysis works out at that age, because you withdraw the suppression and allow normal puberty to commence. It's not more dangerous to younger kids, it's less dangerous.

I'm sorry, I have to block people who engage in personal attacks. Interesting convo, but I do insist people behave civilly.

Tone policing is bullshit