UK Puberty Blocker Trial Paused Amid Safety and Bias Concerns
The UK's PATHWAYS clinical trial for puberty blockers was paused on February 21, 2026, following concerns from the MHRA regarding participant wellbeing and a recommended minimum age of 14 due to potential long-term biological harms. As of March 1, 2026, Professor Jacob George, chief medical and scientific officer at the MHRA, was removed from further involvement in the trial due to accusations of bias, despite his social media posts predating his appointment. Discussions are ongoing between the MHRA and King's College London, the trial sponsor, with recruitment halted until issues are resolved. This pause follows legal challenges from campaigners and NHS England's 2024 decision to restrict puberty blockers to research settings.
Timeline
Want updates on this thread?
Track this story2026
4 updates
2026
4 updatesProfessor Jacob George, chief medical and scientific officer at the MHRA, has been removed from further involvement in the Pathways puberty blockers trial due to accusations of bias. George had raised concerns that led to the trial being paused. The MHRA stated his removal was a precaution, despite his social media posts predating his appointment.
The UK's PATHWAYS clinical trial into puberty blockers has been paused following concerns raised by the MHRA about the wellbeing of young participants. The MHRA has advised a minimum age of 14, citing potential long-term biological harms. Discussions are ongoing between the MHRA and King's College London, the trial sponsor, and recruitment will not begin until these issues are resolved. This pause comes amid legal challenges from campaigners who describe the trial as an "unethical experiment."
via news.sky.com
The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) raised "new concerns" about the PATHWAYS clinical trial into puberty blockers, recommending a minimum age limit of 14 due to "unquantified risk" of long-term biological harms. Consequently, the Department of Health and Social Care announced that preliminary work on the trial has been paused.
via gov.uk·news.sky.com
Campaigners, including Keira Bell and the Bayswater Support Group, launched legal action against the Health Research Authority and the Department of Health and Social Care, seeking to suspend the upcoming clinical trial of puberty blockers. They argued that the ethical approval process was flawed and that the trial posed risks to vulnerable children due to potential irreversible damage to fertility.
2024
1 update
2024
1 updateNHS England confirmed that puberty blockers would no longer be available as routine treatment for children experiencing gender-related distress. This decision followed a public consultation and the recommendations of the Cass Review. The use of puberty blockers would be confined to research settings, with any exceptions requiring an "Individual Funding Request" to demonstrate exceptional circumstances.
2022
1 update
2022
1 updateNHS England announced the closure of the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock clinic, citing concerns that a single specialist provider model was "not safe" and that the clinic was overwhelmed with referrals. The service was to be replaced by a network of regional centres to provide more holistic care and reduce waiting times.
2021
1 update
2021
1 updateThe Court of Appeal overturned a High Court ruling that had made it harder for children to consent to puberty blockers. The Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust won its challenge against the previous ruling, which had stated that doctors might need court authorization for treatments for under-18s. The appeal judges found it "inappropriate" for the High Court to issue such guidance, which had placed patients, parents, and clinicians in a difficult position.
2020
1 update
2020
1 updateThe High Court ruled that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are experimental treatments and cannot be given to children under 13 without court application, and are "very doubtful" for 14 and 15-year-olds. The ruling, stemming from a case brought by Keira Bell, stated that children under 13 are highly unlikely to be able to give informed consent, and it is doubtful that older adolescents fully understand the long-term risks. This judgment highlighted concerns about the lack of robust evidence for the benefits of these treatments.
Story began · 5 years, 4 mo ago