reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Lawrence Krauss introduces The War on Science and 20 interviews with authors, including Alex Byrne and Moti Gorin, about free inquiry and scientific integrity. Byrne and Gorin discuss their article 'Deafening Sounds: Bioethics and Gender Affirming Healthcare,' tracing how pediatric gender medicine has become dogmatic. They describe the Dutch protocol for puberty blockers and its influence, the US move toward broader social transitions, and the claim that gender affirming care reduces suicide risk, noting that reviews find weak or methodologically poor evidence and that several studies lack appropriate controls. They emphasize that many major medical groups endorse the affirmative model, yet there is little high-quality evidence linking interventions to improved outcomes, and in some European systems the services have been scaled back or reassessed. The conversation highlights the scarcity of open philosophical debate on sex and gender in bioethics, contrasted with abortion ethics, and points to intimidation and no-platforming as factors stifling dissent. Kathleen Stock and Holly Lafford Smith are cited as cases where activists pressured universities and publishers, leading to career damage. The authors argue that suppressed dissent makes a healthy academy elusive, and propose reforms: journals should encourage engagement with opposing views; autobiographical material should be minimized in publications; public philosophy should challenge readers and reach the broader public. The closing theme: thoughtful, evidence-based discussion must guide science and medicine, even when controversial.

On Origins Podcast, Lauren Schwarz and Arthur Rousseau discuss their chapter in The War on Science, focusing on gender-affirming care (GAC) and medical standards. They argue that the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) wields influence, with U.S. medical bodies deferring to it, while the UK’s Cass report and countries have begun to curtail such care. They describe WPATH’s standards of care (SOC 8) as presenting itself as evidence-based, lifesaving care, yet note published reviews finding the strength of the evidence often low or indirect, and that guidelines are not always consistent with the underlying literature. They recount that Johns Hopkins underwent political pressure to withdraw systematic reviews and that WPATH later imposed an approval mechanism over future publications. The speakers condemn the reliance on “lived experience” over rigorous evidence, and highlight concerns about age restrictions being removed and consent for minors to hormonal or surgical interventions. They cite a lack of long-term outcome data, no conclusive evidence that gender-affirming care reduces suicide, and cases illustrating the risks of messaging to afraid families. They call for better education, transparency, and a return to science-based medicine, while referencing the Tennessee minors’ care case and urging global alignment.