Johanna Olson-Kennedy talks about the study on puberty delay blockers

Forget about following science.

Now it’s about hiding the science – at least when it comes to experimental medical procedures related to gender reassignment in children.

“American study on puberty blockers not published for political reasons, doctor says,” reports the New York Times heading earlier this week.

The study, which involved administering puberty-blocking drugs to 95 children struggling with gender dysphoria, was led by Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, a doctor at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, has long been involved in promoting experimental treatments for minors.

The study, which followed the children for two years, appears to have failed to produce the results Olson-Kennedy expected.

“The director of a long-term study finds that drugs do not improve the mental health of children with gender-specific disorders and that the finding could be exploited by opponents of the care,” the article’s headline reads.

This is an important discovery – and one that the public deserves access to.

After all, the argument for providing experimental treatments to children is that they will help children’s mental health. This was seen as an advantage that outweighed the disadvantages for some puberty blockersthat pose health risks, as well as unknowns regarding the long-term effects of delaying a young person’s development.

The data won’t be published, however, because “the findings could fuel the kind of political attacks that have led to youth gender bans in more than 20 states, one of which will soon be heard by the Supreme Court,” writes the York Times’ New Reporter. Azeen Ghorayshi, summarizing Olson-Kennedy’s reasoning.

In other words, when it comes to treating children with gender dysphoria, it’s not about science. It is about ideology and ensuring its triumph in American law and in all states.

At the beginning of December, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments regarding USA v. Skrmetti, case over whether Tennessee’s ban on experimental treatments for children suffering from gender dysphoria violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Attorney General of Tennessee Jonathan SkrmettiRepublican, is the defendant. The Supreme Court’s decision in this case will likely have implications for other state bans.

Olson-Kennedy may want to smear these bans as political. But listen to the stories of non-transitioners – who now regret having undergone experimental transmedical treatment as minors that will permanently impact their lives – and it becomes clear that this is not about politics.

The idea is to prevent vulnerable minors from making life-changing medical decisions after being encouraged by activist doctors.

Take the story of Clementine, who recently spoke with Billboard Chris, a Canadian activist who goes around carrying “billboards” that encourage conversations about gender ideology and its impact on children. While talking to Clementine, he was wearing a billboard that read, “Children cannot consent to puberty blockers.”

I’m at UCLA and I just met Clementine, who recently went through a transformation.

When she was 12, Johanna Olson-Kennedy at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles prescribed her puberty-blocking drugs.

At the age of 13, she was given testosterone.

She underwent a double mastectomy at the age of just 14!… pic.twitter.com/J9MMSPXc6e

— Billboard Chris ???? (@BillboardChris) October 22, 2024

Clementine said she was on puberty blockers at age 12 and testosterone at age 13, and at age 14 she had the “best surgery” – a double mastectomy. “I completely screwed up my life,” she said.

“I was sexually abused as a child and it was completely ignored,” Clementine recalls. “During puberty, I started having a lot of negative feelings about my body.”

“Some guidance counselors encouraged me that I might be transgender, and then I decided that I was actually a boy,” she added, “and my life would be so much easier because of all the abuse I experienced because of being a woman and completely rejecting femininity, because I thought it only meant pain for me.

Later, Clementine was able to discuss her sexual abuse in therapy and began to change her mind about gender reassignment.

“The loss of my fertility and my body started to get to me and I thought, ‘Oh my God, I’ve built this whole persona around misogyny,’” Clementine told Billboard Chris.

Her doctor when she was put on puberty blockers at age 12?

Johanna Olson-Kennedy. (Children’s Hospital Los Angeles did not respond to an emailed request to Olson-Kennedy for comment on Clementine’s claim.)

“Politics” could have saved Clementine from losing her fertility. (She admits she’s not entirely sure she can’t have children, but it doesn’t seem likely.)

“Politics” could also have saved her from stopping her natural puberty and suffering from the effects of taking testosterone, which she believed had caused her “psychosis” for years.

Don’t today’s Clementines – and their parents or guardians – deserve the latest scientific data as they grapple with this issue?

This is also not the first time that politics, rather than science, has driven the gender activism movement.

In an amicus briefing supporting Tennessee in U.S. v. Skrmetti, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, a Republican, details how an influential Biden-Harris administration official changed a medical group’s recommendations for treating transgender children.

This only became known when Marshall, during a legal battle over Alabama’s ban on experimental treatment for children with gender dysphoria, gained access to emails from Admiral Richard Levine. Levine, a transgender person who holds the highest position at the Department of Health and Human Services, now wants to be called Rachel.

World Professional Association for Transgender Health or WPATHin 2022, Levine emailed a proposal for new guidelines recommending that children age 14 or older receive cross-sex hormones, age 15 have a mastectomy, age 16 have facial surgery, and age 17 have a hysterectomy .

Levine opposed these minimum ages.

Marshall writes in her briefing: “According to WPATH participant Levine “was very concerned that disclosing age (primarily for surgery) would impact young transgender people’s access to health care…she and the Biden administration were concerned that including age on the document would have an impact to make the situation worse. Levine’s solution was simple: “She asked us to remove them.”

WPATH initially opposed Levine’s request, which came after consulting with health care providers about the guidelines. Then the American Academy of Pediatrics, or AAP, got involved. Under pressure from the Biden-Harris administration and the American Academy of Pediatrics, WPATH relented, eliminating almost all age recommendations.

“(B)The United States and the AAP sought changes to clinical guidelines recommending irreversible gender reassignment procedures for children, and WPATH agreed, for purely political reasons,” Marshall writes.

“Dr. (Eli) Coleman clearly stated in his testimony that WPATH has removed minimum age requirements.”without presenting anything new science which the committee was not previously aware of,” Marshall adds, referring to the University of Minnesota sexologist who chaired the committee responsible for the WPATH guidelines. (Underline mine.)

So much for the left’s “follow the science” mantra.

At a bare minimum, we owe it to children and their parents to provide them with the latest scientific data on experimental treatments for gender dysphoria.

It’s a shame that the left puts politics before science and the rights of parents and children to make informed decisionsS.