The Transgender Movement is Anti-Science – HP/The Times

Last week, a scientific conference was held at Vrije Universiteit on the merits of current trans medicine, where irreversible physical interventions are performed at a young age. Proponents and opponents argued their case and argued (a little) with each other. The most critical politicians and journalists (myself included) were not welcome, and various pressure groups were involved in the organization. Activists stood outside the door, arguing that current trans care is scientifically sound and needs to be greatly expanded, and that critics are scientific cowards who should not be invited. Who is right?

There is a simple test to distinguish scientists from pseudo-scientists. A real scientist would rather be wrong about the truth than wrong about the false. At some point, pseudo-scientists say: That’s all I need to know. It’s always the skeptics who demand more research. Trans doctors have their theory and their practice, and they have no need for progressive insight. And if they also have a monopoly on data, like AUMC’s Gender Clinic, they can block unwanted research. Perhaps no gender clinic in the world has as much data as AUMC’s Knowledge and Care Center for Gender Dysphoria (KZcG), the cradle of trans medicine, but no one except a small circle of its own researchers has access to it. For example, when it comes to trans people with remorse, the clinic still relies on years-old research on a different patient population. As was emphasized repeatedly at that closed conference last week, many research opportunities are not being exploited by this famous clinic. No investment is made in long-term follow-up of former patients, because that would be “too difficult.” The gender clinic at AUMC is a black box.