It has only taken all the years from 2017 to have the documented email evidence revealing the FDA in the U.S. was then ( and presumably remains) ideologically captured from within , when the senior endocrinologist within the statutory body’s policy determinations can advise support for puberty blockers in minors, after being informed by an empathetic “ listening “ by others. To not be wanting to pursue official blessing from the current “ off label” status of the use of GnR agonists might be in the knowledge that there would be predictable difficulties in obtaining evidence for benefit, over potential harm. Our own TGA is likely, for the same reasons, to not be approached by the activists to obtain approval for use by the same gender affirming clinicians. Best not to test the regulatory bodies in both countries! . Bernard , I remain curious about any role which might have been played in the NHS England’s challenge and closure of Tavistock. I don’t recall any such discussion during the recent NAPP hosted webinar with Hillary Cass. We know our AHPRA is but an agency of government and only able to respond to complaints ( rather than act as an independent investigatory body) , perhaps a more proactive response might be expected from our TGA? Just a , likely naive, thought ?
Just yesterday (8/2/24; https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-deposition-of-meredithe-mcnamara) Leon Sapir wrote of "Yale report" co-author Dr. Meredith McNamara: "The transcript of that deposition [in the case brought against an Alabama age-restriction law] reveals that McNamara’s many public and under-oath statements about her clinical experience are fundamentally misleading, if not outright false—and even perjurious."
It has only taken all the years from 2017 to have the documented email evidence revealing the FDA in the U.S. was then ( and presumably remains) ideologically captured from within , when the senior endocrinologist within the statutory body’s policy determinations can advise support for puberty blockers in minors, after being informed by an empathetic “ listening “ by others. To not be wanting to pursue official blessing from the current “ off label” status of the use of GnR agonists might be in the knowledge that there would be predictable difficulties in obtaining evidence for benefit, over potential harm. Our own TGA is likely, for the same reasons, to not be approached by the activists to obtain approval for use by the same gender affirming clinicians. Best not to test the regulatory bodies in both countries! . Bernard , I remain curious about any role which might have been played in the NHS England’s challenge and closure of Tavistock. I don’t recall any such discussion during the recent NAPP hosted webinar with Hillary Cass. We know our AHPRA is but an agency of government and only able to respond to complaints ( rather than act as an independent investigatory body) , perhaps a more proactive response might be expected from our TGA? Just a , likely naive, thought ?
“ any role which might Hansen played”, by their CQC , ( their equivalent to our AHPRA.
Just yesterday (8/2/24; https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-deposition-of-meredithe-mcnamara) Leon Sapir wrote of "Yale report" co-author Dr. Meredith McNamara: "The transcript of that deposition [in the case brought against an Alabama age-restriction law] reveals that McNamara’s many public and under-oath statements about her clinical experience are fundamentally misleading, if not outright false—and even perjurious."
“ might have been played”