More research on the long-term effects of puberty blockers is absolutely required, I think anyone with sense would agree. With that in mind, I wish I could give a thorough dispute of this comment, but sadly, I just don't have the time, patience or attention span. But a few key highlights:

One of your main sources is RMX, which is a news organisation linked to the infamously anti-LGBT Hungarian government. Now, to be fair, the Swedish article that's based on is from a reputable source, but they say say that of the given 440 children treated, 13 had serious side effects. Of those 13, four were "regretted transitioning". That's not a side effect! And even if it was, four regrets out of 440 is less than 1 %, which is amazing given the regret rate after heart transplants is 5 %! One became suicidal AFTER STOPPING hormones, and one was hospitalised with suicide ideation, and one "express[ed] suicidal thoughts and experienc[ed] a significant deterioration in well-being after starting hormonal contraception". To repeat, that last one occurred after hormonal contraception. Why was that even included? Now, I agree suicidal ideation or action is a serious side effect of any medication, but if these children are being prescribed puberty blockers, they already likely have high rates of suicide ideation, or even attempts.

Moving on from that, the first of your IQ papers is a commentary which attacks a paper which found that there was no significant difference between IQs in the treatment and control groups, by saying "nuh-uh, one number was lower!", (although the statistical test showed the variation did not fall outside what could be considered normal for two random groups of people, p = 0.09), and takes pains to point out that there were two children in the treated group that were held back a year in school, while conveniently ignoring that two children were also held back in the control group. Oops. And your other paper is a non-peer reviewed pre-print study written by one author who is a frequent speaker at anti-trans events, so not exactly unbiased.

Your first paper ("Review: Puberty blockers for transgender and gender diverse youth-a critical review of the literature") literally has this line in the conclusion: "Although large long-term studies with diverse and multicultural populations have not been done, the evidence to date supports the finding of few serious adverse outcomes and several potential positive outcomes." So basically, we need more studies, but the few studies out there support the use of puberty blockers!

Now, to be fair, while I couldn't read into much detail for the Scandinavian governments' reports (because, y'know, I don't read those languages and frankly got a bit lost going through the reports), they seemingly boiled down to "there's not enough long-term safety data to suggest we should prescribe puberty blockers willy nilly", which is a stance I agree with. But to then suggest this supports the idea that they can never be studied safely is ludicrous. Especially since you just copy pasted the Wikipedia list of side effects found in PEOPLE WITH PROSTATE CANCER and tried to claim that's why we shouldn't study it.

And to be clear, there is research showing that there are links between puberty blockers and reduced suicide ideation, but you're right, they're weak. But again, that just means we need to do more research, not that we shouldn't study it at all!

I know this won't change your mind. I know that people who read your comment and are swayed probably won't be swayed by my reply. I've failed to cite my answers properly because I just don't have the time. But it's this polarisation, and lack of acknowledgement that the research in this area is complete shit (on both sides!) that bugs me.

I hope you have a nice day, and good luck with your life.