Once blockers are suspended they will go through puberty. I'm not sure what other definition of "reversible" you think would be possible here, some sort of accelerated catch-up puberty? That would be incredibly traumatic and possibly harmful.

Keep in mind that blockers can be prescribed for reasons other than transgender identity, do you think that should be prohibited too?

Many advocates are essentially saying it moves the age range for puberty to a later range. As in "just delaying it"

And it makes no sense to me to ban the prescribing for what the medicine was actually developed for, too early puberty.

Also, why is it that almost always when I voice my dislike for puberty blockers as a form of trans treatment there is the "counter argument" that I want it blocked for all purposes? Just because I dislike one use of it, doesnt mean I dislike all uses.

The reason "do you want it blocked for all purposes" comes up is because when blockers are being prescribed as part of gender care, the purpose of the blocker is to prevent irreversible potential harm to the child. Your argument is that the blockers themselves somehow inflict irreversible harm - this is possible, to be clear, but as yet I've not seen it proven - and if that were so, it would make sense to always prohibit them unless the advantage seriously outweighs the irreversible harm inflicted by the blockers, no? The blockers are far more reversible by any standard than allowing the trans child to go through a puberty they view as traumatic, because that is irreversible by almost any measure I can think of.

Some people probably are just fully resistant to the idea that blockers shouldn't be used. I think guardrails are appropriate, but it's quite common to see people oppose a given treatment in gender care when it is freely used in other - often quite similar - circumstances and the opposition is ultimately rooted in discomfort with gender care and not based on any unusual or serious proven harms.

In the end a lot of this is between the child, their parents, and their physicians. It doesn't matter much how we feel about it as uninvolved individuals as long as safety processes are being followed and there's appropriate consent.

A good point of comparison for blockers, IMO, would be Spironolactone - frequently prescribed for trans HRT and other forms of gender care, but also used on-label for other purposes. This drug has lots of very inconvenient side effects, people dislike it, and it can in some cases cause serious harm due to the side effects. You could argue that it shouldn't be prescribed for any purposes due to those side effects, but at that point, you have to weigh one harm against another. Physicians have generally decided it's worth it.