iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Jess O'Thomson @jessothomson.co.uk · 03/07/2026

Over 6000 signatories in just a few hours. I am hoping we could make a massive statement with this. This is the kind of thing you need to get your mum to sign 👇

118688

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Abigail Thorn @theabigailthorn.bsky.social · 25/06/2026

As I’ve said before, any serious attempt to ban conversion practices in Britain has to confront the fact that the NHS never stopped doing it. This draft bill not only fails, it explicitly gives “healthcare providers” permission to continue.

101355423

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 25/06/2026

This was the @prismsurgery.bsky.social statement on conversion practices. No exemptions for consent, adults, or religion. But I'd add no exemption for applying conversion practice torture on the NHS. That was done historically, and will be done more and more in the present following Cass.

PRiSM statement about Conversion therapy:
"The Royal College of Surgeons of England's Pride in Surgery Forum (PRiSM) considers Conversion therapy to be a harmful practice with zero efficacy which we believe should be banned by law in the UK. A ban should not be delayed further by claims that a debate is needed or that the matter is too complex given the implications of it continuing and any ban must protect all LGBTQ+ individuals from attempts to change their gender identity and/or sexuality. We consider that a ban must apply in all cases, with no exemptions for informed consent, for adults or for religious organisations. PRiSM also advocates that the Royal College of Surgeons of England recommends to qualified practitioners, fellows and members that they should not undertake or facilitate conversion therapy. In addition, we recommend that undergraduate and postgraduate curricula should not include or allow participation in conversion therapy and should instead promote a positive and inclusive view of LGBTQ+ individuals and culture while highlighting the historical stigmatisation of LGBTQ+ individuals."

011

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 25/06/2026

We now know that research on trans patients in Norway has involved ethical violations and that Cass is saying the harms of puberty blockers are overstated, yet trans kids are being forced into a research trial to access them. How about treating trans people as humans, not involuntary test subjects?

060

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Olly Glover, MP 🔶 @ollyglover.bsky.social · 18/06/2026

I don't think that. I wanted to take some time to properly understand what the EDM is asking for and what it would mean in practice, before deciding whether or not to sign. Having done that this week, I will be signing, and my name will appear as a signatory shortly.

3122

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 18/06/2026

Thank you, that is greatly appreciated.

010

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 10/06/2026

Can't see that @ollyglover.bsky.social has signed EDM 240, presumably he thinks it's good for businesses to have to spend money on extra facilities and be sued over who gets segregated from their toilets?

230

Reposted by Alex Ashman

CN Lester 🏳️‍⚧️ @cnlester.bsky.social · 04/06/2026

88 signatures so far - if you live in the UK PLEASE email your MP about adding their name - it will take you less than 5 minutes with the form below. Yes, even if your MP is a transphobe - it's good for them to know how many of their constituents disagree with them.

47667

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 04/06/2026

@ollyglover.bsky.social please sign this EDM to reject the EHRC Code of Practice. Have emailed you to explain how damaging the Code is, both to trans people and to anyone who doesn't match the ideals associated with their gender.

072

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Pride in Surgery Forum @prismsurgery.bsky.social · 30/05/2026

Join LGBTQ+ surgeons and allies for an evening with people who understand working in surgery, with space to share experiences, build your network and learn about our work supporting the LGBTQ+ community ❤️ 📍 Rondo Bar, Holborn 📅 Fri 3 July, 6pm Book your free ticket now: ow.ly/cFJe50Z5y4n

012

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Ok, so here's the real headlines from the newly-published BMA critique of Cass: 1) the evidence being weak means it does not clearly support treatment withdrawal either; 2) the policy decisions by NHS and government went beyond what Cass recommended;

7438141

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

DHSC and Streeting strongly oppose trans kids accessing puberty blockers, but: - the evidence doesn't support a ban - Cass Report didn't support a ban - BMA critique depicts it as political overreach - non-trans kids are still receiving blockers DHSC is discriminating against trans kids.

39929

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

39929

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

Thanks Natacha And the full BMA critique is here: cdn.intelligencebank.com/eu/share/qMb...

cdn.intelligencebank.com

010

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Natacha @natacha.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

Reposting this THREAD 🧵 by @alexashman.bsky.social as an image because it is probably the most accurate summary of the BMA findings; includes alt text so use that if you want a tidied-up text version. This is what it REALLY said without all the editorialising.

Ok, so here's the real headlines from the newly-published BMA critique of Cass:

1) the evidence being weak means it does not clearly support treatment withdrawal either;

2) the policy decisions by NHS and government went beyond what Cass recommended;

3) the Report did not undertake timely engagement with patient groups and failed to use co-production;

4) some recommendations (46% of those examined) in the Review were only partially supported or not supported by the cited evidence;

5) there is potential for patient harm given the lack of established replacement provision following the closure of GIDS.

‪
The BMA critique is a compromise between 'viewpoints' (you know the ones) but these themes shine through. The key thing is that a ban on affirming treatment was not supported and represents a policy creep/extension by government.

Just waiting on a link to share the full report, but don't believe what The Times or BMJ say, it's not that simple.

12510

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Oh you're assuming there was timing.

010

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Emmy D @emmydee50.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

I'll just put it out there - For the BMA to critique and negatively criticise a government-commissioned review and its implementation in this way and to this extent is quite something in itself.

0222

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

This is one of those areas where Cass insinuates something and we'd love to have had the BMA critique rubbish it, but given the reality of the way the group consisted of a *cough* diverse range of views meant that wasn't going to happen.

130

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Don't give them ideas... This was indeed a key discussion point in our Noone et al paper: pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC...

GAC should instead be considered through a similar lens as reproductive healthcare, akin to how healthcare providers and the public think about contraception, HRT, or fertility treatment [82]. Reproductive care requires not just the absence of illness, but “a state of physical, emotional, mental, and social well-being in relation to all aspects of sexuality and reproduction” [89]. All individuals have the right to make decisions regarding their own reproductive care and must have access to services that support that right. Having a young person with gender dysphoria undergo their natal puberty is not a neutral or desirable act just because it is a natural occurrence, in the same way that continuing an unwanted pregnancy or having intrusive menopausal symptoms should not be considered the default option. Aside from supporting self-determination, intervention in such situations is also required to support emotional, mental and social wellbeing. The presence of treatment side effects, and the possibility that competent individuals may later seek to change their trajectory, are not unique to GAC and should not be used to justify exceptionalism when compared to reproductive healthcare.

030

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

No that's not the point made there, it's about risks not efficacy. The argument is that risk of treatment and risk of non-treatment are symmetrical, because yes treatment may have risks re: bone density and fertility, but you can't have good bone density if you're dead.

100

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

The argument then is that treatment should be based on shared decision making and risk benefit balance, on a clinical basis, and not based on politics.

010

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Obvs there's recognition that the drugs actually do what they do, this is about pushing back on the cis narrative that the risks of treatment are great enough to warrant not treating. Saying there is symmetry of risk for treating vs not treating removes this obstacle to treatment.

240

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Screamliner Ontario @mostlyharmless.northsky.social · 07/05/2026

The BMA: Cass is flawed in various ways The U.K. media: BMA vindicates Cass Review 🙄

14711

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Indeed, this was more about producing new assessments of the Cass process, output and downstream effects. See it as an addition to the critiques of Cass rather than a meta-analysis

2200

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Right, here we go: BMA Cass critique document cdn.intelligencebank.com/eu/share/qMb...

Key Findings
1. The evidence base for puberty suppression and gender affirming hormones
is limited, predominantly observational, and characterised by substantial
uncertainty. Importantly, this uncertainty is symmetrical: with signals of
moderate level of certainty for the risk of osteoporosis and fertility issues in
those treated, and less certain evidence for the more higher stakes outcome
of significant mental health issues, but neither can be quantified with high
confidence.
2. Many of the statements in the Cass Review were supported by the cited
literature, but a proportion were only partially substantiated or not
substantiated.
3. In several cases, there was a tendency for statements to simplify complex
findings or to emphasise potential risks without equivalent contextualisation of
potential benefits.
4. The BMA Task and Finish Group identified clear agreement on the need for
improved research, better data, and more robust multidisciplinary services.
5. Lived experience stakeholder groups who were consulted as part of the
Cass Review felt that their contributions were nuanced at source but often
experienced as condensed or reframed in the final outputs, and engagement
was perceived as late and insufficiently influential on conclusions. Stakeholders
also reported tangible impacts following implementation, including reduced
access, longer waits, and disrupted continuity of care.
6. There was substantive disagreement between Task and Finish Group members
on whether the restriction of access to puberty blockers represents a
proportionate response to the evidence.
7. While service redesign broadly aligns with the Review’s recommendations,
restrictions on prescribing and the extension into statutory regulation represent
policy decisions that go beyond the explicit recommendations.

610131

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Right, here we go: BMA Cass critique document cdn.intelligencebank.com/eu/share/qMb...

610131

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

I know, but bear in mind doctors are upset about loss of clinical autonomy in this area, it's a slippery slope from here to RFK-style vaccine bans etc if government can just wade in on clinical matters. (Yes they're not necessarily worried about patient autonomy as much as clinician autonomy 🙃)

110

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Along with BMJ and The Times. Who would have thought it huh The real picture isn't all that simple. But if they do say Cass wasn't that bad, but we should get blockers and affirming care reinstated, that might still significantly reduce the current harm, despite our obvious misgivings

180

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

It's not the whole story, there were some issues with Cass and more vitally with the policy decisions that followed bsky.app/profile/alex...

1142

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

That's not the whole story, there were some issues with Cass and more vitally with the policy decisions that followed bsky.app/profile/alex...

110

Alex Ashman @alexashman.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

That's not the whole story, there were some issues with Cass and more vitally with the policy decisions that followed bsky.app/profile/alex...

100

Reposted by Alex Ashman

Screamliner Ontario @mostlyharmless.northsky.social · 07/05/2026

You’ll be hearing a lot about Cass being vindicated by the BMA. It’s not that simple 👇🏻

2244