Close the Curtain on PATHWAYS Child Experimentation

Come with me, and you’ll be in a world of pure imagination...

Imagine if you will, that when it comes to the puberty blocker trial, we put aside our righteous anger at what they are planning to do to mostly gay and autistic children at the hands of the state, Transing the Gay Away.

“Let us dissect it into its component parts for thorough scrutiny, and by scrutiny, I mean outright condemnation. Let us engage in unyielding polemics against its very foundation.”

Let’s forget the realm of the medical, which this entire gender identity and trans nonsense had no place being in in the first place, and position this where it rightly belongs, in a Utopian Ideological Ecosystem, one in which the PATHWAYS trial, for all its fancy medical terminology (it is nothing more than experimenting on children) is the Star of the show, whether it likes it or not.

For that is what we may be seeing, a show, pure theatre, and along with our Stars we also have a supporting cast and all the extras we need. The astonishing thing is that all of the players may well be unaware that they are in the show at all, for it is startling how intelligent people can lose their minds beneath contemptible systems in which they become complicit.

They do this, despite the fact that even the likes of Noam Chomsky, renowned and idealised philosophical lovey of the liberal and left brigade described it precisely in Manufacturing Consent, though I still contend he nicked that from Edward Bernays.

Ladies and gentlemen - Welcome to the Theatre of the Absurd

we are pleased to present a one and only performance, for this cannot be allowed to run and run, I give you...

PATHWAYS and the Utopian Ideological Ecosystem (UIE)

Starring

• King’s College London (KCL)

• South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM)

• National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR)

• King’s Clinical Trials Unit

The Supporting Cast

• NHS England

• Health Research Authority (HRA)

• London - City & East Research Ethics Committee (REC)

The Extras

• Stonewall

• Mermaids

• Athena SWAN (AdvanceHE)

• Race Equality Charter (AdvanceHE)

Here are a few clues to get us started in unravelling the plot of this macabre theatre, the theatre of Grand Guignol wrapped up in a pretty bow as if to all the world it was a performance of The Sound of Music replete with grinning happy children and an inoffensive governess.

1. The NHS is hopelessly woke, I mean drenched in the nonsense, and on multiple levels across multiple domains, it is off its tits on EDI/DEI.

2. The use of highly politicised and ideologically deranged external bodies to embed all things woke and push the agenda of EDI/DEI is incontrovertible.

3. Statutory policies and procedures have created the seedbed where the distorted and twisted the narrative of “Gender” so called care has not just thrived but feasted on the bodies of the mutilated.

4. The Utopian Ideological Ecosystem (UIE) is so pervasive that it is treated as some kind of new paradigm by all involved that it is now assumed to be correct in the same way that scientists would assume the use of the periodic table, or evolution as a given, in any hypothesis.

5. That number 4 is a far greater danger to us all than most will realise, or in many cases, across the battlefield, admit.

6. That sunk cost fallacy is front and centre for many and multiple reasons.

7. That the puberty blocker trial is not a discrete activity concerned with the children which it professes (in all good conscience) to want to help, but the result of the top-down Utopian ideological Ecosystem that confounds all involved in it.

8. That this moment calls for applying critical principles such as Hanlon’s Razor (never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity), Occam’s Razor (the simplest explanation is usually the correct one), and Hitchens’s Razor (what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence)

9. “Trans” does not exist, it is a created victimhood narrative to beguile the unwary, that is the essence of gender ideology, a lie, from its high heels to its wig.

10. Gender medicine is a phantom, a parasite, the (often unwitting) monetisation of harm in service to fetishism and mental illness.

Act 1: PATHWAYS - The Stars

This hideous act is the trial itself, devoid of safeguarding, steeped in belief and dangerous in its form, let us begin with the ethical considerations.

What are we playing at?

Ethical Deficiencies Undermining Viability

The protocols’ inclusion criteria, requiring a two-year persistence of gender incongruence and multidisciplinary team approval, ostensibly position the trial as cautious. It is not, this does not require caution it requires closing down, for it fails to mitigate fundamental ethical concerns, as it exposes children to known and documented risks.

• Compromised bone mineral density.

• Fertility issues.

• Cognitive development delays

• Messing with children’s bodies who have never experienced the joys of masturbation (this is the vilest cut of all).

The delayed-start design, where one group receives GnRHa immediately and the other after one year, introduces an element of randomisation that goes past exploitation and right into the wishful thinking of the quack.

Firstly, it assumes any of this is necessary, which it’s not, (that’s the UIE at work folks) drawing all the children into an unfulfillable fantasy and subjecting some to medical experimentation that would make an ardent eugenicist blush.

For all children, the result is harm, be it psychological, emotional, or physical, a harm that may well have been cheered on by an education system with its own UIE to contend with, a Transhausen mother or the social contagion of peers.

This violates core principles of non-maleficence, as the Cass Review already established the evidence base as “remarkably weak,” rendering further experimentation on children unjustifiable.

Moreover, the assent/consent process, while detailed, cannot fully address the power imbalances inherent in recruiting from a population characterised by neurodevelopmental traits, co-occurring mental health conditions, or simply being a Willy Woofter or Daisy Dyke, and having a social circle which hates homosexuals.

This naturally leads to coerced participation under the guise of care, which will be a devil to shine a light on, requiring of course endless lines of experts and bureaucrats to manage.

The exclusion criteria, such as unstable mental health or safeguarding concerns, appear comprehensive but are insufficient to prevent harm, given the protocol’s acknowledgment of potential adverse events like puberty staging disruptions and the simple fact that this is all predicated on fantasy, a predatory parasite that feeds on distressed children of all hues.

This structure perpetuates a cycle of medicalisation without proven benefits and prioritises ideological affirmation over child protection.

In essence, the ethical framework collapses under scrutiny, as it fails to justify subjecting minors to risks in a field marred by historical scandals and unreality, that we have known was a bunch of cobblers pushed by an array of tits since John Hopkins knocked it on the head in the late 70’s which we singularly failed to recognise then or admit to now.

Empirical Weaknesses Rendering the Trial Invalid

The trial’s objectives, to assess short- and medium-term benefits of a fantasy made flesh, in which social, clinical, and surgical outcomes all have a 100% failure rate or require the participants to engage in sex fraud against the general public, should be reason enough to quash it.

They plan to recruit just 226 children and follow them for only two years. That timescale is far too short to detect the most serious known risks of puberty blockers as I listed above.

Systematic reviews have repeatedly described these areas as ones of “profound uncertainty,” yet PATHWAYS simply stops looking before any of those harms would become visible.

The control group that does not receive blockers is not chosen at random; it is a separate, hand-picked group getting intensive therapy, opening the door to serious bias at its core, PATHWAYS is simply repeating the same drugging and the same weak methods that produced the low-quality evidence the Cass Review spent four years dismantling.

It is a small, short, non-randomised study using discredited tools and the same old protocol, designed in a way that almost guarantees it will see little harm and claim modest benefit, it is a scam.

But putting aside that for the moment, this clown show will rely on measures like the KIDSCREEN-10 questionnaire, yes, psychometrics, This appears to be main way the researchers will measure whether the drugs “help”.

The study is also split into tiny subgroups (boys versus girls, children with autism or ADHD versus those without), which will make the results from an already small trial even less trustworthy, a short, general questionnaire and a few extra mental-health scales, you would think they were kidding wouldn’t you.

These are the very same blunt tools that exist across society, they have time and again been shown to be unreliable on multiple dimensions. At the level of entertainment, they can be fun, I did two, which Star Wars character are you and which West Wing character are you.

I got Darth Vader, fascistic space dictator, and Jed Bartlet the most liberal president in fictional American history, and if that doesn’t illustrate the fundamental problem here, I do not know what will.

But even if we put all that aside as well, what we are left with is an attempt to reach an affirmative position, based on self-reported “feelings” of children, not known for being the most rational of beings, and drawn from the deranging UIE.

This is “Gender Affirming Care” reframed, that is all it is, complete with the 100% failure rate, again!

This is lived experience.

This is own truth.

This is not science, and it is not medicine.

It continues an experimental pathway that, in practice, leads almost every child on to cross-sex hormones and often to surgery, outcomes that carry lifelong consequences and, for many, deep regret.

A trial this poorly constructed has no scientific validity and should be halted before a single child is enrolled.

It is predicated on our inability as a society to say no to fantasy and anti-science.

I pause just to remind us that this should not be happening at all.

ACT 2 Oh What a Tangled Web We Weave

Our stars in Pathways, King’s College London (KCL), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM), National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), and King’s Clinical Trials Unit do not operate in isolation, nor in freedom, for they are tied to the UIE as sure as anyone else is in the NHS, and all the usual suspects are present.

Equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) activities, as well as entities such as Stonewall, Mermaids, Athena SWAN, and Advance HE have all added a chunk of their nonsense to this script.

These four organisations central to the PATHWAYS trial with reveal a pattern of institutional alignment with broader inclusivity agendas, an inescapable web of nonsense predicated on the vicious equity driven dribbling’s of the Woke tsars, their underlings and the heavily coded and febrile atmosphere of silencing and heresy this cult brings.

King’s College London (KCL) upholds a rigid EDI framework through dedicated offices focused on equality, diversity, inclusion, and wellbeing, promoting gender and LGBTQ+ equality via its institutional Silver Athena SWAN award from Advance HE, alongside departmental awards and action plans that integrate EDI objectives at every conceivable level, the template of the UIE with its sticky tendrils everywhere.

KCL has also engaged with Stonewall by achieving 14th place in its Top 100 Employers list in 2022 through the Workplace Equality Index, with academic promotion criteria encouraging support for Stonewall initiatives to advance careers.

We all know from the BBC how long that particular infection lasts, even when the organisation has left. KCL EDI strategies support LGBTQ+ inclusivity akin to Stonewall’s efforts. Yes, the men in dresses have carte blanche again, and oh how they need the trans child.

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM) maintain an active EDI programme, including inclusive mental health practices and Pride Month celebrations to foster acceptance of diverse identities. SLaM operates under NHS policies influenced by Stonewall, which has shaped gender-related guidelines in approximately 30 NHS trusts, particularly in mental health services.

It has interacted with Mermaids by scheduling gender diversity training in 2023, which was subsequently reviewed and cancelled amid public scrutiny.

No direct engagements with Athena SWAN or Advance HE by the look of it, but they are still stuck as it’s EDI work aligns with NHS-wide standards that overlap with Advance HE frameworks.

The National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) enforces a formal EDI Strategy from 2022 to 2027, requiring equitable practices in research, such as diverse participant recruitment to tackle health inequalities. NIHR’s EDI approach connects to Athena SWAN’s role in advancing gender equality in health research, with funding often linked to these standards.

King’s Clinical Trials Unit, as part of KCL, inherits its parent’s EDI framework, with related facilities like King’s Clinical Research Facility implementing a dedicated EDI strategy from 2023 to 2025 to promote inclusivity in clinical trials. It benefits from KCL’s institutional Silver Athena SWAN award and aligned EDI plans from Advance HE.

But what of our supporting players?

NHS England, The Health Research Authority (HRA), and London - City & East Research Ethics Committee (REC), just what are they up to in this arena?

NHS England implemented a comprehensive EDI Improvement Plan from 2023, influenced by Stonewall, which has advised on gender-related guidelines in approximately 30 NHS bodies, including trusts focused on inclusive practices for LGBTQ+ communities. Its EDI efforts overlap with every other example of the UIE template, how could it not, and then it cannot avoid the inclusion of the anti-science at the heart of all of this.

The NHS is a central point of the UIE in all of this, they are infested.

The Health Research Authority (HRA) maintains an EDI strategy emphasising diversity in research participation, with guidance on inclusion for underserved groups, including those related to gender identity. HRA has interacted with Mermaids, receiving a letter from the charity in August 2022, signed by multiple organisations involved in this ongoing boondoggle, raising concerns about a gender identity research study using the UIE template you would expect.

Did HRA dismiss them as cranks? No.

It has even referenced Stonewall in Pride Month celebrations, noting the charity’s historical role, though ordered to rethink such ties in 2023.

The London - City & East Research Ethics Committee (REC), operating under the HRA, inherits its parent’s EDI framework, ensuring ethical reviews incorporate diversity considerations in research approvals.

We can be damned sure that all of these organisations are playing on the same stage, that the policies and procedures are going to have an effect, whether directly by embedded ideologues wielding power, coercive behaviours or coded environments stifling dissent, they are still using the UIE template which in my mind is so pernicious that they cannot escape its influence and therefore its machinations.

ACT 3 All’s Not Well That Ends Badly

We can see the cascade, we can factor in the silencing, passive aggressive presentation that epitomises the EDI/DEI industry. Steeped in EDI/DEI frameworks as we have discussed here, this exposes a structural vulnerability where utopian ideals of inclusion may override ethical imperatives, and this requires the closest of scrutiny.

For they are not only passive receivers of the outer ring of players, but they are also steeped in the language, they are part of the same script, they cannot escape the UIE.

This ideological embedding erodes reliability, as decisions may favour aspirational equity over safeguarding, science, common sense, and due diligence, rendering the entire endeavour non-viable.

In conclusion, PATHWAYS fails on multiple fronts: ethically indefensible, empirically inadequate, and structurally biased, warranting outright rejection to protect vulnerable populations.

For nothing fundamental has changed except the addition of warm language about diversity, equity, and inclusion. That ideological framing risks pushing the study to find the “right” answer rather than the true one. In the end, PATHWAYS is not a genuine attempt to fill the evidence gap.

It is a small, short, non-randomised study using discredited tools and the same old protocol, designed in a way that almost guarantees it will see little harm and claim modest benefit. It continues a medical pathway that, in practice, leads almost every child on to cross-sex hormones and often to surgery, outcomes that carry lifelong consequences and, for many, deep regret. A trial this poorly constructed has no scientific validity and should be halted before a single child is enrolled.

The pernicious shadow of the UIE, it’s EDI/DEI and template loom large to the rear of the stage, nobody escapes it, and with the larger influence of the NHS and the grasping hands of the ever trans friendly unions that have it in their grasp, this can never be ethical, for it is built on ideological certainty that has blinded all involved.

I have no doubt that those at the heart of this really want to help distressed children, it is their desire and commitment to do so.

But they cannot, for they are as trapped as everyone else in this fetid turkey of a play, they are stuck on the stage, players of a larger script, imposed on them by the UIE which predicates on anti-science, anti-human and unethical games of identity politics, affinity groups, equity and a slavish belief in their own paradigm (which they see as superior) of anti-western and anti-enlightenment power and oppression game playing.

This play needs to end, and we must ensure that there will be no subsequent film deal, for this is no blockbuster-like Jaws, but believe me, what we are dealing with is most definitely a sharp toothed predator.

“Smile you son of a bitch.”

Join the Team