Settled Science?
 
Settled Science?
Written By Thomas Hampson   |   02.07.23
Reading Time: 3 minutes
image_pdfimage_print

During the mid-90’s, international condemnation was directed at the practice of female circumcision, a euphemism for female genital mutilation. When people became aware of this barbaric procedure practiced in some countries, people all over the world, including the people in the United States, quickly responded by passing legislation outlawing the procedure for minors. The U.S. Law, The Female Genital Mutilation Act of 1996, outlawed the procedure in all 50 States and it made it a crime to take a child to another country for that purpose as well. It passed with substantial bipartisan support.

The surgery was common in some Muslim countries to prevent young girls, and women, from becoming sexually aroused. This mutilation of young girls surgically created sexual disfunction in hundreds of thousands of girls and woman across the globe. Tens of thousands of immigrant girls were affected in the United States before it was stopped.

People everywhere abhor harming children.

So where is the outrage over the practice of chemically and surgically mutilating children under the euphemism of “gender affirming care?” This kind of care is even more destructive than “female circumcision.”

Gender affirming care is not care at all.

Recipients of such treatment are forever rendered incapable of having children or even experiencing a normal sexual response. Once started on the path of changing their sexual identity, which is biologically impossible, the boy or girl will be dependent on medical intervention for the rest of his or her life. In addition, these interventions cause other, sometimes very serious, medical issues that have to be addressed as well.

Despite the investment of tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of dollars, the patients remain the same. If they were born male, they will die male. If they were born female, they will die female. Any change is merely cosmetic, a series of very expensive chemical and/or surgical distortions of their bodies.

In the United States, it is full speed ahead on promoting transgender medical interventions for children. The American Academy of Pediatrics promotes “an affirm only/affirm early policy.” And the current administration claims that “gender affirming care” is settled science, the preferred method to treat gender dysphoria.

But that is a lie. It is far from settled science. There is a growing body of evidence that medical interventions are exactly the wrong thing to do.

The organization, Do No Harm, “a diverse group of physicians, healthcare professionals, medical students, patients, and policymakers” takes issue with this claim. A recent study they conducted compared treatment approaches between the United States and European Countries.  The study found that:

“Northern and Western Europe, which share the United States’ broad support for transgenderism, reject the gender-affirming care model for children . . . [T]hese countries now discourage automatic deference to a child’s self-declarations on the grounds that the risks outweigh the benefits, while also calling for months-long psychotherapy sessions to address the co-occurring mental health problems.”

The Tavistock Gender clinic for children in London, which was a model for the establishment of other such clinics around the world, actually shut down last year. Meanwhile gender clinics for children are opening up and expanding all over the United States.

Not only the Do No Harm group is pushing back against the medical interventions. A study just released this year by Abbruzzese, Levine and Mason on “The Myth of ‘Reliable Research’ in Pediatric Gender Medicine: A critical evaluation of the Dutch Studies—and research that has followed” found that there is very weak to no empirical support for chemical and surgical treatments for pediatric transgender patients. Their conclusion is that no such treatments should be administered unless and until there is empirical evidence the treatments work. Currently there is no such evidence. There is no empirical evidence sufficient to justify medical interventions.

So I ask again, where is the outrage over the practice of chemically and surgically mutilating children under the euphemism of “gender affirming care?” Why has this become a political issue instead of purely an issue of what is best for the child? Why are so many doctors perfectly willing to perform surgery on children to remove their ovaries and testes, to destroy the penises and vaginas, to remove the uterus and breasts of girls—all healthy organs, sterilizing them forever. Even the chemicals sterilize them.

Why? And how can anyone remain silent about this legally sanctioned horror show?


Thomas Hampson
Thomas Hampson and his wife live in the suburbs of Chicago, have been married for 48 years, and have three grown children. Mr. Hampson is an Air Force veteran where he served as an Intelligence analyst in Western Europe. He also served as an Chief Investigator for the Illinois Legislative Investigating Commission and served on the Chicago Crime Commission as a board member. His work as an investigator prompted him to establish the Truth Alliance Foundation (TAF) and to dedicate the rest of his life to the protection of children. He hopes that the TAF will expand to facilitate the...
Related Articles
The Trans Divide
The Trans Divide
The “Trans”-Cult’s Diabolical Quest for Cultural Hegemony
The “Trans”-Cult’s Diabolical Quest for Cultural Hegemony
IFI Featured Video
The Push to Limit “Choice” to Abortion in Illinois
Get Our New App!