Trump's HHS casts doubt on evidence supporting gender-affirming care for youth
The roughly 400-page, unsigned review states there is a 'lack of robust evidence' supporting interventions such as puberty blockers, hormone therapy and the rare surgeries to treat gender dysphoria in minors. It advocates for a greater reliance on psychotherapy to treat the condition, which is characterized by severe psychological distress that stems from a mismatch between a person's gender identity and sex at birth.
The document contradicts guidance from major medical organizations including the World Professional Association for Transgender Health and the American Medical Association, which opposes statewide bans on gender-affirming care for youth. Neither group immediately returned a request for comment on the report.
'Our duty is to protect our nation's children — not expose them to unproven and irreversible medical interventions,' National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya said in a news release accompanying Thursday's report.
The review's release comes at the direction of an executive order President Trump issued days into his second term to end federal support for gender-affirming care for minors, which his administration has said includes children and adolescents up to 19 years old. Two federal courts blocked parts of the order that sought to withhold funding from hospitals providing transition-related services to youth.
The names of the new review's contributors would not initially be made public, HHS said Thursday, 'in order to help maintain the integrity of this process.' A department spokesperson did not immediately return a request for additional comment on the decision to withhold the authors' names.
In a fact sheet released earlier this week, the White House said HHS had coordinated with 'a team of eight distinguished scholars' to publish the review. HHS said Thursday that contributors include medical doctors, ethicists and a methodologist and represent 'a wide range of political viewpoints.'
The report was subject to peer review before publication, the department said, and a post-release peer review, set to begin in the coming days, will involve 'stakeholders with different perspectives.'
Transgender rights advocates decried the review as one-sided and politically motivated. Some pointed to Trump's campaign promise to ban gender-affirming care for youth, which he has equated to child abuse.
The Trump administration has also broadly denied the existence of trans people.
Sinead Murano Kinney, a health policy analyst at Advocates for Trans Equality, a Washington-based nonprofit, called the review 'a willful distortion' of medical evidence 'intended to stoke fear about a field of safe and effective medicine that has existed for decades.'
She said the report is meant to 'justify dangerous practices which amount to conversion therapy,' a discredited practice that aims to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity to align with heterosexual or cisgender norms.
'Today's report seeks to erase decades of research and learning, replacing it with propaganda,' said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. 'The claims in today's report would rip health care away from kids and take decision-making out of the hands of parents. It promotes the same kind of conversion therapy long used to shame LGBTQ+ people into hating themselves for being unable to change something they can't change.'
Minter, himself transgender, has litigated cases on conversion therapy across the country for more than 30 years. He testified in support of access to gender-affirming care at a 2023 congressional hearing chaired by now-Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on the alleged 'dangers and due process violations' of such care for minors.
'Like being gay or lesbian, being transgender is not a choice — it's rooted in biology and genetics,' Minter said Thursday. 'No amount of talk or pressure will change that.'
Others applauded Thursday's review.
Stanley Goldfarb, chairman of the organization Do No Harm, which advocates against gender-affirming care for youth, said it 'rightfully exposes a number of serious risks in the medical transition of young people,' which he called 'misguided.'
'Do No Harm, its fellows, researchers, and members have been warning about the experimental and irreversible sex change interventions on children, and we are grateful and encouraged HHS is bringing needed scrutiny to the gender industry,' said Goldfarb, a retired kidney specialist and former associate dean at the University of Pennsylvania's medical school.
Goldfarb and Do No Harm, which he founded in 2022, have been influential in arguing that transition-related treatments are medically harmful to minors, supplying model legislation banning such care to state lawmakers and lobbying conservative leaders in Congress.
Half the nation since 2021 has adopted laws that ban or heavily restrict access to gender-affirming health care for transgender youths — and adults, in some cases.
Trump has called for federal legislation to that effect, telling Congress during his joint address in March to pass a bill 'permanently banning and criminalizing sex changes on children and forever ending the lie that any child is trapped in the wrong body.'
In its fact sheet released Monday, the White House said HHS had eliminated approximately 200 grants totaling $477 million in research or education on gender-affirming treatment since Trump took office in January.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump signs executive order making it easier to remove homeless people from streets
President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday making it easier for local jurisdictions to remove homeless people from the streets. The order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to 'reverse judicial precedents and end consent decrees' that limit jurisdictions' abilities to relocate homeless people. It also redirects federal resources so that affected homeless people are transferred to rehabilitation and substance misuse facilities. It also directs Bondi to work with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to fast-track federal funding to states and municipalities that crack down on 'open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders.' 'President Trump is delivering on his commitment to Make America Safe Again and end homelessness across America,' Leavitt said in a statement Thursday. 'By removing vagrant criminals from our streets and redirecting resources toward substance abuse programs, the Trump Administration will ensure that Americans feel safe in their own communities and that individuals suffering from addiction or mental health struggles are able to get the help they need.' Advocates for the homeless condemned the executive orders with some saying that it will make homelessness worse for communities. 'These executive orders ignore decades of evidence-based housing and support services in practice. They represent a punitive approach that has consistently failed to resolve homelessness and instead exacerbates the challenges faced by vulnerable individuals,' said Donald Whitehead, executive director of the National Coalition for the Homeless, in a press release. The National Homelessness Law Center said the order 'deprives people of their basic rights and makes it harder to solve homelessness' in a statement on Thursday. The group said the order will expand the use of police and institutionalization in response to homelessness, while increasing the number of people living in tents, cars and on the streets. Order follows high court decision The order comes a month after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of an Oregon city that ticketed homeless people for sleeping outside. Justices rejected arguments that such 'anti-camping' ordinances violate the Constitution's ban on 'cruel and unusual' punishment. The case had been watched closely by city and state officials who have struggled to respond to a surge in homelessness and encampments that have cropped up under bridges and in city parks across the nation. It was also followed by people who live in those encampments and are alarmed by efforts to criminalize the population rather than build shelters and affordable housing. Homelessness in the US soared to the highest level on record last year, driven by a lack of affordable housing, a rise in migrants seeking shelter and natural disasters, which caused some people to be displaced from their homes, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. More than 770,000 people experienced homelessness in 2024, an 18% increase from 2023. It was the largest annual increase since HUD began collecting the data in 2007 (excluding the jump from 2021 to 2022, when the agency didn't conduct a full count due to the Covid-19 pandemic). As a candidate, Trump railed against the nation's homeless crisis, telling supporters during a September campaign rally it was 'destroying our cities.' 'The homeless encampments will be gone,' Trump said in remarks from North Carolina. 'They're going to be gone. Oh, you have to see, you have to – some of these encampments, what they've done to our cities, and we've got to take care of the people.' CNN's Shania Shelton contributed to this report. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How the Trump–Musk relationship complicates Tesla's future
Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk's close ties with President Trump initially gave many investors hope for faster progress on initiatives like robotaxis and autonomous driving. Barron associate editor Al Root explains why that optimism was overblown and discusses the risks the Musk–Trump relationship still poses. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination here. Al, you know, it's interesting because I had some bulls on this program, Al. And part of their bullishness, full stop, was the relationship between Trump and Musk. Their thinking being, listen, it is a great thing for Musk to have this good friend in the White House who can perhaps foam the runway on some of these initiatives like robo taxis. Yeah, I mean, so the primary you just reiterated it or I'll just reiterate it. The primary benefit from the trust Trump Musk relationship was supposed to be nationwide uh autonomous driving standards, uh which would speed the adoption of this trillion dollar valuation that Dan Ives has for Dan Ives, for instance, and others have for robo taxis. Um, that was a bit Listen, I mean, you know, should I said it then? Maybe we did, maybe we didn't. It was a bit euphoric, right? The idea that just a relationship between the President and Elon Musk could create, you know, a trillion dollars in value, which it basically did overnight, right? Tesla stock, I can't remember, but we're talking like 480 in December. Um, so that was a bit euphoric. Uh so we probably overcooked that, just like we overcooked it on the downside when we thought the world was ending. I think the Trump Musk relationship is just sort of a risk for Tesla investors, and it kind of goes back to Musk's time, right? Is he going to stay involved in politics? Is he going to form a new political party? That's sort of like the downside risk. Uh, but if things sort of blow over and we just have to deal with like losing tax credits, then I think that, you know, we'll we'll sort of we can move on from the bromance and just sort of focus on whether they can sell cars and whether they can expand the robo taxis.
Atlantic
7 minutes ago
- Atlantic
Food Aid in Gaza Has Become a Horror
Capping off all the other horrors in wartime Gaza is the food-distribution situation that has prevailed since late May. Famished Palestinian civilians must approach one of very few aid-distribution locations under the auspices of the Israeli and United States governments. A shocking number of civilians seeking aid have reportedly been shot dead by Israeli soldiers or shot at by U.S. contractors on their way to these sites. According to the United Nations, more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed in this scramble for sustenance since May 26. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu broke the last cease-fire in the Gaza war on March 18 by launching air strikes that killed more than 400 Palestinians in 36 hours, a reported 183 of them children. He had also imposed a total blockade on March 2, allowing no aid whatsoever into the Strip from March until late May. The resulting situation was untenable. But the Israeli government did not trust any of the international institutions with experience in humanitarian-aid distribution, so together with its U.S. backers, it cooked up an alternative: the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a nonprofit registered in Delaware and funded with $30 million from the Trump administration. According to one report, GHF has billed itself as seeking, among other aims, to ' facilitate President Trump's vision ' for the Gaza Strip. Trump has said a variety of things about that vision, but one prospect he has articulated includes the forced removal of all Palestinians from the territory and its transformation into a 'Riviera' for 'international people.' According to The Washington Post, some for-profit companies are behind GHF, including McNally Capital, a Chicago private-equity firm. Among the entities initially involved with the group, some have since withdrawn, including the Boston Consulting Group. The foundation's initial head, Jake Wood, resigned on account of humanitarian concerns. GHF is now run by Johnnie Moore Jr., a pro-Israel evangelical activist and former aide to Jerry Falwell, and John Acree, a former USAID official. GHF began operations on May 26 in the south of Gaza, near Rafah. Since then, it has operated four main aid-distribution centers (compare this to the more than 400 that the UN and other traditional aid agencies once ran). The aid boxes themselves have been described by Palestinians as woefully inadequate as Gaza continues its slide toward outright famine. The food distribution points have practically become shooting galleries. Israeli troops told reporters from the newspaper Haaretz that they had been ordered to open fire on Palestinians with live ammunition as a means of crowd control. The newspaper quoted one soldier as describing the zones as a 'killing field.' The report singled out Brigadier General Yehuda Vach, commander of Division 252, which operates in northern Gaza. Vach reportedly told his men that ' there are no innocents in Gaza.' Some suggested that using live fire to disperse crowds in northern Gaza, for fear they would rush UN aid trucks, was Vach's policy more than that of the Israeli military command or government. But reports have also circulated about U.S. contractors deliberately shooting Palestinians and boasting about direct hits. Israel refuses to allow outside journalists into Gaza, making these and other related accounts difficult to confirm or disprove. What is indisputable is that GHF has an effective monopoly on delivering humanitarian aid into an ever more desperate Gaza Strip. Virtually all of the traditional distributors of aid have been barred by the Israeli authorities. And by most accounts, the results are ghastly. The UN relays that a third of the more than 2 million Palestinians in Gaza go days without eating, and credible reports suggest that infants and the elderly are dying of malnutrition and dehydration—according to one issued by a group of international nonprofits, more than 100 people have died of hunger, including 80 children. Agence France-Presse says that its local journalists are now in danger of imminent death from starvation. Israel claims that it is allowing ample food, water, and medicine into the Strip, but if that's the case, the supplies are apparently not reaching those who need them most. Much of the world is appalled by these conditions. On Monday, 30 governments, many friendly to Israel, plus the European Union, demanded an end to the war and condemned 'the drip feeding of aid' to the Palestinians in Gaza whose suffering, the group noted, had 'reached new depths.' More than 100 aid agencies have signed a letter demanding that Israel allow additional food, water, medicine, and other supplies into Gaza immediately. Far from ameliorating Gazans' suffering, GHF has instead established a system that presents them with an impossible dilemma. Palestinians are drawn in desperation to four centers, where they must risk their lives in order to gain the supplies they need to live. Many also walk away disappointed but uninjured. There is no evidence that GHF, its founders, or its backers intended to create death traps rather than alternative distribution centers. But for many weeks, this is how the sites have functioned, and GHF's response has been to simply carry on as before. What GHF may have begun inadvertently, it now perpetuates without correction and with full awareness. Palestinians face a Hobson's choice between starvation and the real possibility of being shot down for no intelligible reason. For that there is no excuse—and quite possibly criminal culpability.
