Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX) tore into Yale School of Medicine assistant professor Meredithe McNamara— a pediatrician with expertise in gender-affirming care— over her support for disfiguring children.
During a House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Crenshaw addressed the "elephant in the room" by asking McNamara about his proposal to remove funding from hospitals that perform surgeries and provide puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone medication to transgender minors.
Crenshaw echoed Republican talking points, calling transgender treatments "barbaric" and the "issue of our time."
On the contrary, McNamara argued that gender-affirming care for minors is essential for the well-being of their health.
Crenshaw argued against McNamara's claims, saying that most studies lack evidence of any benefit of transgender procedures for minors.
McNamara then admitted that data is cherry-picked, adding that it is "unscientific and flawed to pick a single study or a single statistic and discuss it in isolation."
"The British Journal of Medicine looked at 61 systematic reviews with the conclusion that, quote, 'There is great uncertainty about the effects of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries in young people,'" Crenshaw said. "The Journal of the Endocrine Society came up with the same conclusion, even the American Academy of Pediatrics. They all cite the lack of evidence."
The Republican continued to grill McNamara on the fact that no studies state strong evidence of the benefits of permanent physiological changes regarding gender-affirming care.
In response, the "doctor" refused to cite a study that proves her point.
"You're not telling me any study, don't say 'standards of care,'" Crenshaw stated. "Tell me one."
"So, um, the standards of care," McNamara said.
"The standards of care," Crenshaw questioned. "That's not a journal; that's not a study. That's not an organization. That's not an institution. You're just saying words. Name one study."
However, McNamara failed to name a specific study before Crenshaw's time was up.
"It is indeed compassionate to stop kids from being permanently physically altered based on little to no evidence that it will improve their underlying mental condition," Crenshaw concluded.