There are many nuances and complexities within the realm of transgender issues, and Americans are generally very accepting and welcoming people. Lots of recent polling reflects the public's opposition to discrimination or bigotry towards trans people -- but there are also limits to people's tolerance for certain elements of the LGBT agenda on these fronts. For instance, there's a strong consensus that biological men shouldn't compete in women's sports, despite what activist and soccer player Megan Rapinoe is saying on her way into retirement. There's also clear opposition to indoctrinating children with sexual or gender ideology in schools, as well as to leaping into the brave, untested new world of gender transitions for minors.
As we've noted previously, even other socially 'progressive' foreign nations have pulled back from this precipice, based on insufficient evidence in support of these dramatic (and often irreversible) medical interventions. In a letter to the editors of the Wall Street Journal, a group of foreign clinicians and researchers from nine countries are pushing back against assertions -- and one in particular -- made by one prominent advocate of the emerging orthodoxy on this subject among American leftists. Here's a Manhattan Institute fellow explaining the significance of this public expression of dissent:
BREAKING:
— Leor Sapir (@LeorSapir) July 13, 2023
21 leading experts on pediatric gender medicine from 8 countries have written a Letter to the Editor of @WSJopinion expressing disagreement with the @TheEndoSociety and its new president @StephenHammes over the treatment of youth gender dysphoria.
This is huge. 🧵
Dr. Kaltiala had previously called the affirm-or-suicide narrative "purposeful disinformation" and its promotion (given the contagious nature of suicide) "irresponsible."https://t.co/YfmRwSx4vM
— Leor Sapir (@LeorSapir) July 13, 2023
Here's the letter itself:
As experienced professionals involved in direct care for the rapidly growing numbers of gender-diverse youth, the evaluation of medical evidence or both, we were surprised by the Endocrine Society’s claims about the state of evidence for gender-affirming care for youth (Letters, July 5). Stephen Hammes, president of the Endocrine Society, writes, “More than 2,000 studies published since 1975 form a clear picture: Gender-affirming care improves the well-being of transgender and gender-diverse people and reduces the risk of suicide.” This claim is not supported by the best available evidence. Every systematic review of evidence to date, including one published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society, has found the evidence for mental-health benefits of hormonal interventions for minors to be of low or very low certainty. By contrast, the risks are significant and include sterility, lifelong dependence on medication and the anguish of regret.
For this reason, more and more European countries and international professional organizations now recommend psychotherapy rather than hormones and surgeries as the first line of treatment for gender-dysphoric youth. Dr. Hammes’s claim that gender transition reduces suicides is contradicted by every systematic review, including the review published by the Endocrine Society, which states, “We could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide.” There is no reliable evidence to suggest that hormonal transition is an effective suicide-prevention measure. The politicization of transgender healthcare in the U.S. is unfortunate. The way to combat it is for medical societies to align their recommendations with the best available evidence—rather than exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks.
The signatories include experts from Finland, Sweden, Norway, the United Kingdom, Belgium, France, Switzerland, South Africa, and the United States. For those who prattle on about The Science, and The Experts, and The Evidence, shouldn't the science, these experts, and this evidence matter -- a lot? We're talking about little-studied, life-altering treatments for children, after all. Society should proceed with extreme caution, and draw bright lines. Other countries' practitioners are setting up major guardrails, while doing so here at home is often attacked, self-righteously, as bigotry. One of the typical lines of 'argument' on this score is that any opposition will result in suicidal or dead trans kids. As the clinicians and researchers quoted above note, however, that emotionalist demagoguery "is not supported by the best available evidence." Again, this ought to matter greatly. I'll leave you with this:
YouGov survey, on trans issues: "The most popular position of the three is the most draconian: that medical treatments for transgender children should simply be banned, as should discussion of gender ideology in public schools."https://t.co/ApzHHrjtYD
— Josh Kraushaar (@JoshKraushaar) July 13, 2023
Join the conversation as a VIP Member