The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) announced that it is pausing the Pathways puberty blocker trial for trans youth healthcare.

A week later, the MHRA announced that it was recusing Professor Jacob George from the trial due to his social media posts. Although the medications watchdog didn’t go into detail, it turns out that George has a history of posting transphobic bile.

Except, George isn’t just some guy who was working on the trial. He’s the chief medical and scientific officer of the agency – a role that was created just one month ago. George also happens to be the one who raised the ‘concerns’ that led to pausing the trial.

Are we even pretending that this isn’t a fucking stitch-up any more?

Puberty blocker trial

As a quick recap for the situation – we’re testing puberty blockers in the first place on the recommendation of Dr Hilary Cass. The government appointed Cass to review trans youth healthcare in the UK in spite of the fact that she has no experience in trans care whatsoever.

Her review has been roundly criticised as bunk science based on the foundational assumption that being trans is a bad thing. Nevertheless, her conclusions were used as an excuse to justify the continued halt of the use of puberty blockers in the UK.

That gutting of trans youth healthcare caused a massive spike in suicides. The government lied about it repeatedly.

Meanwhile, the same puberty-blocking medications are still used routinely for children with precocious puberty. For some reason, we’re not at all concerned about the safety of these medications when they’re not given to trans people. Funny, that.

When Cass’ recommended trial rolled around, it was criticised for coercing trans kids to participate in a study in order to access healthcare. Likewise, advocacy group TransActual highlighted that the senior personnel of the study were a who’s who of medical transphobia.

Cue Professor Jacob George.

Anybody checking for bigots?

George entered his position as the MHRA’s chief medical and scientific officer on 5 January, just two months ago.  The newly-minted civil service role would have him oversee the agency’s scientific, research, and innovation activities.

George’s posts characterised trans people as a “militant minority” opposed to women’s rights, and urged:

Citizens, wake up and smell the coffee.

He called the inclusion of Imane Khelif – a cis woman boxer – in the sport a:

denial of biological reality [who] means that women are being put at risk of brain injury

Likewise, George also fawned over notable transphobes like JK Rowling and Ted Cruz, calling the former “a treasure of our time”.

On 27 February, the MHRA quietly announced that it was removing George from overseeing the puberty blocker trial. The agency stated that:

Following the identification of social media posts made prior to his appointment, Professor Jacob George is recused from further involvement on the Pathways clinical trial as a precaution.

Because the abundance of caution in trans youth medicine apparently only extends to making sure an open bigot isn’t in charge once it gets aired on the fucking radio.

Suddenly, the MHRA has issues

On George’s recommendation, just a month into his new job, the MHRA paused its puberty blocker trial. A letter from the agency to the Department of Health and Social Care ( DHSC) cited a need for more stringent bone density monitoring, among others. It also stated that:

Since potentially significant and, as yet, unquantified risk of long-term biological harms is present to participants and biological safety has not been definitively demonstrated in this proposed cohort, at the very least, there should be a graded/stepwise approach starting with those aged 14 as the lower limit of eligibility.

In spite of George’s recusal, the pause is still in place. King’s College London, the trial sponsor, is now in talks with the MHRA to address the ‘concerns’. A DHSC spokesperson said:

‘Political pressure’

To be clear: the MHRA previously approved the Pathways trial methodology, before George was appointed (and before his job even existed). However, the study later met with objections from vocal transphobes in society. Even Hilary Cass identified the fucking stitch-up:

There are no new research findings and the MHRA hasn’t presented any new evidence. It feels to me like they are responding to political pressure rather than to science.

She added that raising the age limit to 14 made no sense:

will make the results invalid. It would make the design really, really flawed and you should not be subjecting children to a flawed study.

And highlighted other, even more nonsensical points in the MHRA’s letter:

There were some bizarre things, that children won’t be able to tell you if they’re bleeding. Well, anyone who can’t tell you if they’re bleeding can’t consent to this treatment. That seemed completely bizarre.

‘No compelling scientific reason’

Likewise, Dr Max Davie, a paediatrician with experience at the NHS Children and Young People’s Gender Service, was more direct in naming Prof George as the issue:

The tweets by Professor George give a clear indication of his personal views on the topic. He is quite at liberty to hold whatever views on gender identity he may, but what he cannot do is allow these views to affect the fulfilment of his public duty.

He added:

To be clear, there is no compelling scientific reason to halt the Pathways trial. While Prof George’s personal convictions are not the only possible explanation for the MHRA’s abrupt volte-face, it is the only one for which we have evidence.

The current pause on the Pathways trial is just another chapter in this whole sordid and biased affair. Trans healthcare is being held to an impossible double standard.

Transphobes know that the government will seize on their every criticism, no matter how spurious. If they can’t halt gender-affirming care entirely, they’ll delay and reduce it, causing death by a thousand cuts.

First, we needed to deny hormone therapy in favour of puberty blockers. Then, we needed to stop blockers in favour of a trial. Now, we need to stop the trial in favour of sweet fuck all.

Meanwhile, it’s the UK’s trans youth paying the price for this open bigotry.

Featured image via the Canary

Prime Minister Keir Starmer addressed the House of Commons on Monday afternoon (Alamy)

4 min read21 min

Over the weekend, the US and Israel carried out military strikes deep inside Iran, killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior officials.

Iran has retaliated by firing missiles and drones across the Middle East, targeting Gulf states and military positions. The states targeted by Iran are UK allies, and where thousands of Brits are based.

British officials publicly stated the UK military did not participate in the US/Israeli strikes and did not endorse the offensive military actions.

However, on Sunday evening, Starmer announced that the UK had agreed to grant the US permission to use British military bases for “limited and specific” defensive strikes against Iranian missile sites and launchers.

The government says that it is protecting British people in the region by targeting Iranian military capability “at source” to stop Tehran releasing missiles. 

Since the conflict escalated, the RAF has intercepted an Iranian drone that was headed for a base in Iraq where British military personnel are based. Iran has also launched a drone at a British base in Cyprus. The latter, which took place before Starmer’s statement on Sunday, caused minimal damage but no casualties.

Speaking to MPs on Monday, Starmer said: “President Trump has expressed his disagreement with our decision not to get involved in the initial strikes, but it is my duty to judge what is in Britain’s national interest; that is what I’ve done, and I stand by it.”

He added that the UK would continue its “defensive actions” in the region, which he described as the “collective self-defence of long-standing friends and allies”.

“We believe that the best way forward for the region and for the world is a negotiated settlement in which Iran agrees to give up any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon and ceases its destabilising activity across the region,” he said, adding that this had been the “long-standing position of successive British governments”.

He said that any UK action must have a “lawful basis and a viable thought-through plan”, adding that “we all remember the mistakes of Iraq and have learned those lessons”.

There is a belief among British security officials that Iran has the capacity to continue attacks on British allies in the Gulf for at least a week. So far, Tehran has launched attacks on states including Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

The government estimates that there are around 300,000 British people in the region.

“Iran has hit airports and hotels where British citizens are staying. It is deeply concerning for the whole house and the whole country,” he told MPs.

“I’ve been speaking to our Gulf partners over the weekend, they’re outraged by Iran’s acts, particularly as they played no part in any strikes, and they’ve asked us to do more to defend them. Moreover, it is my duty, the highest duty of my office, to protect British lives.”

Starmer urged all British citizens in the affected areas to register their presence so they can be given support. He said that the government was in close contact with the travel industry and governments in the region to help them “return home as swiftly and safely as possible”.

“We’re looking at all options to support our people,” the PM said.

Starmer said that there would not be a parliamentary vote on the action taken by the government so far, as it has been limited to defensive, rather than offensive, action.

He added that the government was also reaching out to communities across the United Kingdom, including Muslim and Jewish community organisations, amid concern that the conflict in the Middle East could impact community tensions in the UK.

“We’re making sure that sites across the country, including places of worship, have appropriate protective security in place,” Starmer said.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch criticised the government for not offering more support to US strikes on Iran, highlighting that the UK’s allies in Canada and Australia “immediately backed the action taken by America against this despotic regime in Tehran”.

“I have made it very clear that the Conservative Party also stands behind America taking this necessary action against state-sponsored terror,” she said, accusing Starmer of hesitating over the decision to allow the US to use British air bases. 

US President Donald Trump has said that while it was “useful” that the UK had agreed on Sunday evening, “it took far too much time” to come to the decision.

Badenoch continued: “It took Iranian missiles hitting allies in the Gulf before he finally made a decision, and even after that, the foreign secretary said this morning that the government has put limits on the actions of our allies, operating from our bases.

“Unbelievably, in his statement today, the Prime Minister still cannot say whether he backs the strikes or not.”

Lupita Nyong’o is using her platform to champion a cause close to her heart with the Make Fibroids Count campaign.

Lupita Nyong’o shares her story

Over the weekend, actress and activist Nyong’o spoke about living with Uterine Fibroids. This is a condition that causes lumps to grow inside and on the walls of the uterus.

This is a massively painful condition, but due to medical misogyny, it’s one that isn’t talked about or recognised enough.

Last year, Nyong’o revealed she has had 77 growths, with 50 still growing inside her. The largest was the size of an orange. As she said recently on Instagram, this inspired many other people to come forward to tell their stories.

She said:

Last July, I ended a decade-plus of suffering in silence and publicly shared my diagnosis for the first time. Women worldwide responded with their own stories. I felt less alone, and more convinced than ever that this is not something we should accept.

There’s something deeply wrong when a condition this widespread is this poorly understood. Do you accept this as the status quo? Neither do I.

As she said on Instagram, Fibroids aren’t rare, but thanks to periods and gynaecological health still being seen as a taboo, it’s very rarely spoken about. Millions of people are living their lives in excruciating pain because they’re told period pain is normal.

Nyong’o wants to #MakeFibroidsCount

Nyong’o is sharing her own story in the hopes of raising awareness and fundraising for research into the condition.

Fibroids are often represented by fruit because it’s the easiest way to make size comparisons. Whilst some are the size of blueberries, some uterine fibroids can be the size of a cantaloupe. To raise awareness of this. Nyong’o posed with 77 pieces of fruit to represent each of her fibroids.

Nyong’ has partnered with the Foundation for Women’s Health to promote the  #MakeFibroidsCount campaign. It encourages others share their story of living with uterine fibroids and donate to better research. The campaign aims to raise $200,000 dollars, which will aid better research, training and understanding of Uterine Fibroids.

Nyong’o said of the campaign

Fibroids may be common, but they are not normal.

I was told they were just something women live with. I refuse to accept that. Millions of women are suffering in silence, and we deserve better answers, better care and better options

Advertisement

How you can #MakeFibroidsCount

You can take part in the campaign in the following ways:

Donate: You can donate to the FWH x Lupita Nyong’o Uterine Foundation Grant here.

Share: If you live with uterine fibroids, post an image of you with fruit to represent the invisible weight you carry. If you don’t live with it, share people’s stories. Use the hashtag #MakeFibroidsCount.

Raise funds: as well as donating, you can also start your own fundraiser. 

It’s incredible to see someone with a platform such as Lupita’s speaking up for a condition which is often disregarded or ignored. We need more of this from Hollywood.

Featured image via the Canary

Good nutrition is a cornerstone of health at every age. It supports immune function, energy levels, recovery after illness, and overall well‑being. Yet for many people, access to structured nutritional care through traditional healthcare settings isn’t always straightforward. Barriers like limited appointment availability, geographical distance, cost considerations, and time constraints can make it difficult for patients to get personalised dietary guidance from dietitians or nutritionists.

That’s where alternative and accessible options play an increasingly important role. Today, many online platforms allow people to find nutritional products, supplements, and support tailored to specific needs. For example, individuals seeking therapeutic nutrition options — whether for recovery, weight maintenance, or chronic conditions — can explore products such as fresubin, which provide ready‑to‑use formulas designed to support diverse nutritional goals. These options add convenience and broaden access beyond traditional clinical channels.

Why nutritional care matters beyond the clinic

Traditionally, nutritional advice is delivered through appointments with healthcare professionals, such as general practitioners or registered dietitians. While this model works well for many, not everyone has easy access to these services. In rural areas, clinic schedules may be full, and specialised dietetic services might be limited. Even in cities, waiting lists can be long, or consultations can be expensive for those without comprehensive insurance coverage.

Beyond access, people’s lives are fast‑paced. Many juggle work, family commitments, travel, and social obligations, leaving little time for in‑person visits. The result is that individuals may struggle to implement nutrition plans or find interventions in a timely way when they need support most — such as during recovery from illness, managing a chronic condition, or adjusting diet for aging‑related needs.

Digital solutions for nutritional support

In response, digital and online services have made it easier to take proactive steps toward better nutrition. These services come in many forms, including:

• Online educational resources, such as articles, videos, and guides that explain nutritional principles and healthy eating habits;
• Virtual dietitian consultations, allowing people to discuss dietary concerns without traveling;
• Home delivery of targeted nutrition products, such as high‑calorie supplements, fortified drinks, and specialised formulas suited to individual requirements;
• Apps and tracking tools that help users monitor their diet, nutrient intake, weight changes, or food reactions.

This flexibility means that nutritional support is no longer limited to traditional appointments — it can be woven into daily life in manageable, practical ways.

The role of convenience and personalisation

One of the key drivers of online nutritional care adoption is convenience. Rather than spending hours researching which products might help or traveling to a store only to find limited stock, people can browse trusted platforms from home, read product descriptions, compare ingredients, and order what they need for delivery.

Customising nutritional care doesn’t stop at product choice. Many online services provide personalised recommendations based on age, health status, dietary restrictions, and lifestyle factors. Such tailored approaches help people feel more confident in their decisions and more engaged with their own health outcomes.

Nutrition in everyday life

While specialised formulas and supplements are useful tools, good nutrition is ultimately rooted in daily habits. Understanding balanced meals, portion sizes, and nutrient diversity is important for everyone, not just those with specific conditions. Online platforms often offer educational content and meal planning ideas that help users integrate healthy eating practices into their routines.

By having both educational resources and easy access to targeted products, individuals can build a foundation of sound nutrition while addressing specific needs as they arise. This dual approach makes nutritional care more attainable for a wider audience.

Supporting caregivers and families

Access to nutritional care isn’t just about individual needs — it also benefits families and caregivers. Parents managing children’s dietary needs, adult children supporting aging parents, or caregivers assisting individuals with chronic conditions all gain from having easy, reliable access to both information and products.

Rather than juggling multiple physical trips to pharmacies or relying solely on memory of product names, caregivers can use online services to reorder familiar items, track delivery dates, and ensure that nutritional support is consistent and reliable. This peace of mind can significantly reduce stress and improve the quality of care provided at home.

Looking ahead

The trend toward improved access to nutritional care online is likely to continue as technology evolves and consumer expectations shift. Key developments may include:

• More interactive virtual consultations with nutrition professionals;
• AI‑assisted recommendations based on uploaded health metrics;
• Seamless integration between online platforms and clinical records;
• Expanded educational libraries tailored to diverse health conditions.

These innovations will support a future where nutritional well‑being is more integrated, accessible, and actionable for people in all walks of life.

Conclusion

Accessing nutritional care outside traditional healthcare systems has transformed how individuals and families approach diet, wellness, and recovery. Online resources, targeted products, and flexible delivery options help people meet their nutritional needs even when in‑person options are limited. By combining education, personalisation, and convenience, online nutritional support empowers individuals to take charge of their health in practical and meaningful ways — ensuring that good nutrition remains a cornerstone of well‑being across different stages of life.

What is “covert avoidance”?

What are the signs of “covert avoidance”?

What should I do if I notice “covert avoidance”?

State-run QatarEnergy has announced it is shutting down its production of liquefied natural gas (LNG) after Iran’s retaliation to US-Israel attacks. The US-Israel axis has murdered Iranian leader Ali Khamenei and his family, along with more than 150 schoolchildren, as well as attacking Iranian hospitals and infrastructure.

QatarEnergy’s Ras Laffan and Mesaieed facilities supply 20% of global LNG. Gas prices in Europe have rocketed.

Along with other Gulf states housing US military facilities, Iran has hit Qatar – including destroying a power plant water tank in Mesaieed and an energy facility in Ras Laffan. No casualties were reported in either attack.

Saudi Arabia has also announced a partial shutdown of its Ras Tanura oil refinery, one of the world’s largest oil processing facilities. This announcement comes as Iran hit a second oil tanker for ignoring its closure of the vital Hormuz Strait. Oil prices have also soared as a result.

This is not the first time US warmongering has put the global – and particularly the European – economy into crisis. The Biden regime is now widely recognised to have destroyed the Nord Stream gas pipelines, allowing oil companies to enrich themselves with massive energy price rises that impoverished millions. Western media continue to ignore investigative journalist Seymour Hersh’s exposé.

Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE all joined Keir Starmer and Donald Trump in condemning Iran for daring to retaliate to an unprovoked attack.

Featured image via the Canary

Labour home secretary Shabana Mahmood has announced a plan to limit refugee stays to 30 months. Instead, they intend to force people to reapply for the right to remain every two and a half years. This cruel policy mirrors the hostile environment Labour has created and will leave thousands of already traumatised people in a never-ending limbo.

In sickening remarks, Mahmood said:

We must ensure our asylum system is not creating pull factors that draw people on dangerous journeys across the world.

Mahmood has purposely got this wrong; she knows full well that refugees are created not because of where they flee to, but where they are fleeing from.

Labour enacting a racist regression of refugee rights

Labour is framing this cruelty as a way to manage the asylum system. However, Mahmood is effectively ending any kind of sanctuary desperate people can find in the UK. This is a massive regression that sees human beings as temporary burdens, rather than actual living, breathing humans running from the worst kind of tragedies. Tragedies we are most often implicated in. Under these ridiculous rules refugees will never truly be able to build a life and put down roots. How the fuck are people meant to ‘assimilate’ if they’re eternally wondering if they’re going to be kicked out?

Mahmood continued her depraved comments:

Genuine refugees will find safety in Britain, but we must also reduce the incentives that draw people here at such scale, including those without a legitimate need for protection. So, once a refugee’s home is safe and they are able to return, they will be expected to do so.

This use of language suggests that some survivors of war and persecution are inherently a suspicious and deceiving. This creates a vile hierarchy of suffering that serves the vile right-wing rhetoric that Labour has been leaning into. By using this framing the government is openly validating the prejudices of the far-right.

And, for many refugees there is no way for them to return to their countries of origin; it will never be safe. And, expecting it to be so is another tactic Labour is using to make asylum cruel and unforgiving.

State sponsored cruelty for cheap political points

Refugee charities were quick to condemn the move as inhumane and unworkable. The Refugee Council warns that temporary status prevents vulnerable people from healing from trauma. When you’re constantly looking over your shoulder, wondering if you’re going to be deported, it’s nothing but state-sponsored psychological torture.

Mahmood is turning a blind eye to the actual plight of refugees to appease a hostile press and people. Shockingly, it’s not the first time she’s done it. This cruel policy will do nothing but lead to more poverty, more homelessness, and crushing mental health problems for people who have already been to hell and back.

At the end of December 2025, 64,426 people were still awaiting an initial asylum decision and of these, 35% had already been waiting for more than a year. And I really doubt that Labour are going to sort out these processing issues before they roll out this policy.

Labour have gone full right-wing

The Ministry of Justice is now following the same path as the Tories. Instead of actually fixing the backlog, Labour is creating a fucking nightmare. The UK already has some of the most restrictive asylum laws compared to our European counterparts. And, we have some of the lowest rates of immigration compared to them too.

This move will hit Black, Brown and other marginalised communities the hardest. Roughly 75% of people seeking asylum are granted protection on their first application. These people have had to fight to get here, travel thousands of miles and they’ve been through untold trauma. Historical data shows average wait times for initial decisions can be over 449 days. Can you imagine waiting that long after literally running for your life? After having to abandon everyone and everything you know just to survive?

The Labour party is now choosing to ignore human dignity for the sake of a few more fucking votes.

A future with no stability

We must ask what kind of a nation treats survivors of the worst kind of horrors as nothing more than temporary visitors. Do we really want to be seen as that cruel? This policy will tear apart families and leave children in permanent instability. Research shows that 61% of asylum seekers experience serious mental distress.

If the government continues down this disgusting path, the UK will become a place where safety and stability are a luxury. We can’t stand by and let this happen whilst the state turns its back on the most vulnerable.

It is time to demand a system which treats people with respect and kindness, not fear and suspicion.

Featured image via the BBC

Keir Starmer has hit back at Donald Trump after the US president criticised the UK for not initially helping America bomb Iran.

Trump said he was “very disappointed” in the prime minister for refusing the US permission to use the Diego Garcia military base to launch air strikes against the regime in Tehran.

He told the Daily Telegraph it “sounds like” Starmer was “worried about the legality” of using the base.

But in a Commons statement on the conflict, the PM said: “We believe that the best way forward for the region and the world is a negotiated settlement in which Iran agrees to give up any aspirations to possess a nuclear weapon and ceases its destabilising activity across the region.

“That has been the longstanding position of successive British governments.

“President Trump has expressed his disagreement with our decision not to get involved in the initial strikes.

“But it is my duty to judge what is in Britain’s national interest. That is what I’ve done, and I stand by it.”