The Health and Human Services (HHS) Department released a report detailing damaging information about the use of “gender-affirming care” on minors suffering from gender dysphoria.
Progressives are already slamming the report because it pokes gaping holes in progressive gender ideology.. The report explains how the prevailing “gender-affirming care” model is not adequately supported by the science. It questions the ethical basis for foisting irreversible treatments such as puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries on minors.
To put it simply, this is another damning report that destroys the arguments progressives use to push gender ideology on children instead of exploring other methods for alleviating their symptoms.
For starters, the report explains that the foundation for using “gender-affirming care” on children is about as strong as a wet paper towel. Using an “umbrella review” of the studies progressives use to bolster their arguments, the authors conclude that “the overall quality of evidence concerning the effects of any intervention on psychological outcomes, quality of life, regret, or long-term health, is very low.”
HHS further points out that each of these studies have numerous flaws. They note that the studies are often short-term, rely heavily on self-reported outcomes, and are rife with bias.
“Evidence for harms associated with pediatric medical transition in systematic reviews is also sparse, but this finding should be interpreted with caution,” the document reads.
Inadequate harm detection… may reflect the relatively short period of time since the widespread adoption of the medical/surgical treatment model; the failure of existing studies to systematically track and report harms; and publication bias.
The authors point out that organizations like the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) have dropped mentions of other approaches to treating children with gender dysphoria, such as giving them “time to think” before undergoing irreversible medical treatments like puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries.
Although WPATH’s 2012 guidelines stated… puberty blockers would ‘give adolescents more time to explore their gender nonconformity,’ this clinical rationale is absent in the latest version of the organization’s guidelines.
It further notes that a myriad of systematic reviews “concluded that the evidence supporting the benefits of pediatric transition interventions … is of ‘very low certainty,’” which means “findings from studies reporting mental health improvements are not considered reliable.”
HHS further argues that not only is the evidence showing the benefits of “gender-affirming care” on minors unreliable, but that these treatments can cause irreversible harm to children — especially after they become adults.
The risks of pediatric medical transition include infertility/sterility, sexual dysfunction, impaired bone density accrual, adverse cognitive impacts, cardiovascular disease and metabolic disorders, psychiatric disorders, surgical complications, and regret.
Proponents of the “gender-affirming” model often falsely claim these treatments are generally reversible, the evidence suggests that there is not sufficient data proving this to be true over the long-term. “The natural history of pediatric gender dysphoria is poorly understood, though existing research suggests it will remit without intervention in most cases,” the authors explain.
The risks of using these treatments on children “include impaired bone mineral accrual, disrupted neurocognitive development, and the interruption of reproductive maturation,” according to HHS.
Hormone treatments also carry great risk. “In females, testosterone can cause irreversible deepening of the voice, clitoral enlargement, and changes to sexual function,” the report notes. “In males, estrogen use has been associated with thromboembolic events and metabolic disturbances.”
The authors further explain that “There are no long-term studies tracking cardiovascular or cancer risk among individuals who began hormone treatment in adolescence,” which means these treatments could contribute to other maladies as time goes on.
There is also the fact that, in the vast majority of cases, children experiencing gender dysphoria grow out of it by the time they reach adulthood, meaning that these treatments are typically not necessary.
One of the primary arguments used by progressives to defend “gender-affirming care” is that only a small percentage of patients regret undergoing the treatments and decide to detransition. However, the report notes these studies “are limited by short follow-up periods and methodological flaws.”
“Regret may emerge years after intervention — often after the end of clinical contact,” HHS argues, later stating that “The true rate of regret is not known and better data collection is needed.”
There are also critical ethical concerns involved in these practices. The report points out that “When medical interventions pose unnecessary, disproportionate risks of harm, healthcare providers should refuse to offer them even when they are preferred, requested, or demanded by patients.”
The authors further insist that “Respect for patient autonomy does not negate clinicians’ professional and ethical obligation to protect and promote their patients’ health.”
The report not only highlights the problems associated with “gender-affirming care,” but also points out alternatives, such as a renewed focus on therapy and mental health — especially since most of those suffering from gender dysphoria also experience other severe mental health conditions. “Suicidal ideation and behavior are independently associated with comorbidities common among children and adolescents diagnosed with gender dysphoria,” the report notes.
The authors also point out that “There is no evidence that pediatric medical transition reduces the incidence of suicide, which remains, fortunately, very low.”
Folks on the hard left have already been trying to discredit the report. But there is growing evidence showing that HHS is right. Several European nations such as the United Kingdom, France, Sweden, Finland, and several others are moving away from the “gender-affirming care” after having employed these practices for decades before they gained popularity in the US.
People are waking up to the massive con job the left has carried out for years. This is why progressives have resorted to more authoritarian means to force their gender ideology on the rest of the population through institutions such as the education system, government, entertainment, and others. However, the good news is that the tide is gradually turning. If this trajectory holds, perhaps America will once again realize that men cannot become women and vice versa.
