Major Medical Society Announces Opposition to Pediatric Transgender Surgeries

Two major developments in the last week relating to gender transition surgeries on minors. Yesterday, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons announced its opposition to carrying out breast removal and similar surgeries on those under 19 years old. This comes on the heels of a first-of-its-kind jury verdict against medical professionals awarding a young woman $2 million. Landmark verdict out of New York held a surgeon and psychologist liable for malpractice. The pair had facilitated the double mastectomy for then-16-year-old Fox Varian, a young woman with gender dysphoria. To discuss the significance of these developments, we're bringing in our panel today. Colin Wright, editor-in-chief of Reality's Last Stand and fellow at the Manhattan Institute. And we have Dr. Jared Ross, physician and senior fellow with Do No Harm. First of all, gentlemen, good afternoon. Thank you so much for joining us today. And Colin, I want to start with you. I would really like to get your reaction to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons coming out and opposing these kinds of surgeries on minors. What do you say? You know, this is just an absolutely massive development in pediatric gender medicine as a whole. So this society, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, they represented about 11,000 surgeons and more than 90 percent of all plastic surgeons in the U.S. and Canada. So they issued this formal statement that there is insufficient evidence, they think, to justify these so-called gender-affirming surgeries for people under 19. So the ASPS, they grounded this position in major systematic evidence reviews that were performed, such as the U.K.'s CAST review, the most recent review by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, that exposed really the low-quality nature of these studies and how their causal claims were extremely weak and how there was lack of outcome data over the long term. So immediately after this announcement, the American Medical Association also signaled agreement with the ASPS on these surgeries. So it's important to highlight, as you mentioned too, that this came all after this $2 million settlement of medical malpractice for a detransitioner. So I don't think the timing of these things are necessarily random. I think these would be all combined together. But this is just a massive, massive achievement. So Jared, let me go to you now. As a doctor who's been fighting against what has up to until very recently been the so-called standard of care for minors with gender dysphoria, what was your reaction to this news? It's wonderful, as Colin says, that American Society of Plastic Surgeons came out against this. We have several smaller medical groups that have spoken out against it in the U.S., and we have several groups internationally that have spoken out. But ASPS is the first major U.S. medical association to speak out against this. And then today's statement from the AMA gives us some hope, but we'd really like to see a stronger statement from them. We think that their statement is vague and leaves wiggle room for them to continue to perform these procedures. So Colin, here's what I'm thinking. Some journalists and analysts think litigation like this New York case may succeed in turning the tide much better than regulation could. Can I just get your view on this? What do you think? I always thought this is going to have to end in the courts. We've had the evidence in the systematic reviews that have been done, not just in the U.S., but in many countries in Europe, that have really just exposed and laid bare the fact that there's no good evidence for these. So we've won the evidentiary argument for many years now, actually, and yet a lot of the medical organizations still have not relented and admitted that they have been at fault in recommending these procedures where there's no good evidence base for them. So we figured that this is probably going to have to end up in lawfare, and that's exactly where we are right now. I think it's really significant here because, you know, for years we were told that there was this overwhelming medical consensus behind the pediatric transitions. You know, the go-to statement had always been that every major medical body agrees and recommends these procedures. But what we're kind of finding out now is that, or revealing here, is that this consensus-based medicine is not the same as evidence-based medicine. And when you finally get these organizations that are finally breaking ranks, I think we might have this domino effect, like this preference cascade where the cost of being, you know, the first to move is really high. But now that we've had the ASPS move and the AMA move, you know, the cost of joining in this and breaking even more ranks, I think, is something we really need to keep our eye on because it could just be this waterfall cascading moment. So Jared, I saw you nodding over there. You know, dozens of similar lawsuits across the country are already underway, and I want to mention one in particular, one filed by Chloe Cole, and this is a high-profile detransitioner in California. Jared, I understand you know Chloe very well. Can I just ask, how is she and how are other detransitioners reacting to these recent developments? Yes, I work with Chloe very closely, and so I know her very well. You know, Chloe's amazingly brave, and she's been able to translate this serious psychological and physical harm that's been done to her into massive forward progress to save future children from suffering from the same fate that she did. So yes, she has a very big public profile, and I think we're seeing more of these, and dozens is an understatement. I mean, there are really suits all over the country here, and this is going to become a major issue for physicians and for medical malpractice carriers as well moving forward, and I hope that that's just one more nail in the coffin that can help stop these procedures from being done. So Colin, I want you to really hammer home the importance of this. To appreciate, you know, the significance of all this, I think we should go back in time and discuss how things have been in the medical and academic spheres for the last several years. Can you tell us about that? Well, for the last several years, there's been basically this blackout. People have been put on the blacklist from publishing responses to major articles that are claiming all the benefits of gender-affirming care. It's only been really just in the last few years where journals have started opening up to publishing dissenting opinions, because, you know, this really had to take place over in Europe first, where the evidence reviews were taking place, and they had to change their policies. And then increasingly, you know, the U.S. has become this international outlier, so they could no longer refer to this sort of world consensus. It had to just be, okay, well now it's just a consensus of U.S. medical bodies. And now, you know, zero is like a very interesting number, because when no medical bodies are breaking ranks and all suggesting that this is evidence-based, now that's a very powerful statement you can make, that, you know, all major medical bodies agree. But now that we have not just one, but two that have broken ranks, they can no longer state that this is, you know, all medical bodies agree. We now have two major medical bodies that have broken ranks, and, you know, their talking point is now completely annihilated. So we need to move forward with this. We need to make sure that, and really put pressure on the remaining medical organizations, like the Endocrine Society, for instance, to make more firm statements and really just ask them to show the evidence, or to join, you know, the American Academy of Plastic Surgeons and the American Medical Association in their agreement with the statement. Okay, Jared, what do you think? Yeah, I agree with Colin. I think we need to really see this suicide myth go away, and I think that's something that we saw with Fox Varian, that not only was she suffering with mental health issues, but that her mom was repeatedly told that if she, you know, her mom didn't want to go along with this mastectomy, but her mom was told that if she didn't, she would have a dead daughter. And this is this common myth that we hear, would you rather have a, you know, living son or a dead daughter? And this suicide myth has been disproven. We've seen evidence out of Sweden. We've seen evidence out of the UK, out of the Tavistock Clinic. So the evidence is on our side, as Colin said. This has clearly been disproven, and this is a major legal win, and also a major win in the policy front with two major medical organizations coming out against this, and I hope to see more of that. So Colin, Elon Musk, who has a child who identifies as a transgender, says the tide here is finally turning. Can I just ask you, is it turning, or is there still a long way to go? There is such a long way to go. I mean, so this lawsuit with the detransitioner, this didn't result in an admission that, you know, quote-unquote gender-affirming care has no good evidence behind it. It was awarded because the clinicians who provided these types of surgeries, they broke from what is considered the standard of care in gender medicine. But that standard of care itself is actually not evidence-based. So we're going to get these organizations that are going to claim, okay, this was one example of one rogue doctor that sort of didn't align with our standards of care, and if they had, then everything would have been great. But that's really not the case. You know, there's no good evidence for the normal standard of care of, you know, the gender-affirming pathway. So it's a win, okay? I'm not going to try to deny that this is a win, but we really need to go after the standards of care itself, because it is just on a foundation of sand. So it's a good win. We need to put on the pressure big time right now, because they're on their heels, and we need to make sure that they just, you know, they need to put up or shut up. Where's the evidence? And we also need to make sure that we go after the other types of gender-affirming care they go after. This was just a statement about the surgeries, but there's just equally no good evidence for the hormones, for the puberty blockers, etc. So it's far from over. We need to keep at it in the journals to give judges and lawyers things that they can cite, so we can actually put the final nail in this coffin. Okay, Jared, I just want to get your final thoughts on if the tide is turning. Yeah, I echo Colin's thoughts. You know, this is a major win and a great start in the right direction, but we have a long fight ahead of us. And I think, you know, square in the middle of that fight is WPATH, or the so-called World Professional Association for Transgender Health, who sets these so-called standards of care, which are not evidence-based. We've seen their behind-the-scenes files, thanks to Michael Schellenberger's organization, and we know what they're spewing, that this is financially and ideologically motivated. And we need to, you know, get them to change their ways. And really what we need to see is all of these major medical organizations that have signed on to their so-called standards of care to sign off of that, that if they are not endorsed as setting this so-called standard, which Colin mentioned has no basis in evidence. We have great evidence from the UK's CAS review and from the HHS review here in the US. If we can get them to so-called de-platform WPATH, that will make a big difference here. Okay, Jared, Colin, I just want to thank you guys for your contributions. This win couldn't have happened without you guys. Thank you so much for speaking with us today.