Martin Hanson cites me briefly in his column on the Cass Review, but not the reasons why there is widespread disagreement amongst clinicians in the disciplines of pediatrics and developmental psychology over this document.
One of the primary caveats that many critics have with the Cass Review is the use of the questionable evaluative tool known as the Newcastle/Ottawa Test, which has been found to produce disparities between evaluations. This tool was misused to eliminate numerous positive peer-reviewed journal studies from pediatrics and developmental psychology.
Let me refer Mr Hanson to two alternative sources of cumulative, replicable and verifiable evidence on adolescent access to puberty blockers. One is an annotated letter from prominent figures at the Yale School of Medicine (July 2022), criticising the severely flawed Florida Agency for Healthcare Administration study which similarly prevented access to puberty blockers. Dr Cass is known to have had contact with one figure associated with that study, affiliated with the conservative Catholic, anti-transgender Catholic Health Association.
The other is an amicus curiae from the Academy of American Pediatrics and numerous other federal US and state organisations condemning a similar puberty blocker ban in Alabama (June 23, 2021). This document cites numerous research papers that testify to the efficacy of puberty blockers and the consequences of premature and abrupt disruption of medical care for trans adolescents.
I would invite Mr Hanson to consult the studies and then reassess earlier comments.
Craig Young
