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 more critical politicians and journalists (myself included) were not welcome, and various pressure groups were even involved in the organization. There were activists on the doorstep who said 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. The real scientist would rather be wrong about the truth than right about the false. The pseudo-scientists at some point say: This is all I need to know. It is 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 the Gender Clinic at AUMC, they can also block unwanted research. There is probably no gender clinic in the world that has as much data as the Knowledge and Care Center for Gender Dysphoria (KZcG) at AUMC, the birthplace of transgender medicine. But except for a small circle of our researchers, no one has access to it. When it comes to trans people who feel remorse, the clinic still relies on a study that is now X years old and on a different patient group. As was emphasized repeatedly at that closed conference last week, many research opportunities are not being exploited by this world-renowned 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.