Doctor Withholds Study Showing Puberty Blockers Didn't Improve Mental Health of Trans Youth

[Social Media]

 

Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, a prominent advocate for transgender rights and gender-affirming care, recently admitted to withholding the publication of a $10 million, taxpayer-funded study on the effects of puberty blockers on American children. Despite the widespread use of these treatments, the study found no evidence that they improve the mental health of trans-identifying youth. Olson-Kennedy explained that she was concerned the findings could be "weaponized" by critics and used in court to argue against the use of puberty blockers.

 

In an interview with *The New York Times*, Olson-Kennedy acknowledged that while the research was significant, she feared the results could fuel legal challenges to transgender care for minors. "I do not want our work to be weaponized," she said. "It has to be exactly on point, clear and concise. And that takes time." Olson-Kennedy, who frequently testifies in legal battles over state bans on gender-affirming care, admitted that the study’s lack of mental health improvements might one day be used to argue that puberty blockers should not be prescribed. 

 

The National Institutes of Health-funded study, which began in 2015, involved 95 children with an average age of 11. These children were given puberty blockers to delay the physical changes that occur during adolescence, such as breast development or voice deepening. After two years of follow-up, the study concluded that the treatments had no significant impact on the participants' mental health. Olson-Kennedy suggested this could be because the children were already in good mental health when the study began, but earlier data contradicted this, showing that about 25% of the participants were suffering from depression or suicidal thoughts before receiving treatment.

 

The study’s findings also challenge a widely cited 2011 Dutch study, which found that children treated with puberty blockers experienced improved mental health and fewer emotional issues. That research has been a cornerstone in the argument for providing such treatments to trans-identifying youth. However, Olson-Kennedy’s more recent study did not replicate those results, leading to questions about the effectiveness of puberty blockers for mental health support.

 

Critics, including Amy Tishelman, a fellow researcher on the project, have voiced concerns about the decision to withhold the findings. Tishelman acknowledged the fear of the results being misused but emphasized the importance of making the research public. "No change isn’t necessarily a negative finding," she said, suggesting that the lack of improvement could still offer valuable insights into the preventative aspects of puberty blockers. "We just don’t know without more investigation."

 

Erica Anderson, a clinical psychologist and expert on transgender youth, expressed shock at the decision to keep the data hidden. She argued that withholding such vital information is contrary to the scientific process. "You do research, and then you disclose what the results are," Anderson told *The Post*. "You don’t change them, you don’t distort them, and you don’t reveal or not reveal them based on the reactions of others."

 

Olson-Kennedy’s reluctance to release the study results comes amid growing debate in the U.S. over the use of puberty blockers and other medical treatments for transgender youth. A recent Washington Post-KFF survey found that 68% of U.S. adults are against providing puberty blockers to children aged 10 to 14, and 58% oppose hormone treatments for those aged 15 to 17. In April, England’s National Health Service (NHS) discontinued the use of puberty blockers for children after a four-year review by independent researcher Dr. Hilary Cass. The report concluded that "for most young people, a medical pathway will not be the best way to manage their gender-related distress."

 

Similarly, Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala, a Finnish expert on pediatric gender medicine, stated in 2023 that "four out of five" children questioning their gender eventually reconcile with their biological sex without medical intervention. 

Despite mounting questions over the efficacy of puberty blockers, Olson-Kennedy has yet to respond to *The Post*’s request for further comment. However, her admission of deliberately withholding the study has ignited a debate over the balance between scientific integrity and advocacy in the field of transgender care for minors.

 

Based on a report from NYP 2024-10-25

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

She should be struck off, IMO.

[Purdey]

Looks like someone would lose money if the research was made public.

[Classic Ray]

As a scientist, why doesn’t she accept the results of peer-reviewed research, in spite of her personal agenda?

 

Just lost any credibility as to her authority to pronounce on this subject.

[Thingamabob]

Olson-Kennedy should face serious charges of endangerment, and be struck off without delay.

[Red Phoenix]

Yesterday the New York Times ran this headline:
"U.S. Study on Puberty Blockers Goes Unpublished Because of Politics, Doctor Says"

Here are the politics the headline is talking about:

"The leader of the long-running study said that the drugs did not improve mental health in children with gender distress and that the finding might be weaponized by opponents of the care." (Emphasis added.)

You are reading that correctly: we can't tell you rubes the truth, because then you might try to stop what we're doing.

Author J.K. Rowling was a bit spicier: 
"We must not publish a study that says we're harming children because people who say we're harming children will use the study as evidence that we're harming children, which might make it difficult for us to continue harming children."

 

= = =

[owl sees all]

Well said J.K.

 

The US is leading the way down the path of absurdity.

 

Hey white-coats!! leave those kids alone.

Edited October 25 by owl sees all
Took out a 'd' and replaced it with a 's'.

[john donson]

puberty blockers, also know as medication sexual predators have to take when released...

[thesetat2013]

1 hour ago, owl sees all said:

Well said J.K.

 

The US is leading the way down the path of absurdity.

 

Hey white-coats!! leave those kids alone.

This article must really rub Harris and hurt her chances to win an election. She supports allowing children to demand sex changes and her VP is making laws to allow the state to take the child away from the parents if they do not adhere to a childs sex change request. Then the state will pay to have it done for the child. This world and the US are getting TRANS crazy. 

[Scott Tracy]

2 hours ago, thesetat2013 said:

This article must really rub Harris and hurt her chances to win an election. She supports allowing children to demand sex changes and her VP is making laws to allow the state to take the child away from the parents if they do not adhere to a childs sex change request. Then the state will pay to have it done for the child. This world and the US are getting TRANS crazy. 

Does she? Is he? Will it? Mind you what state? The state or federal state?

[nauseus]

Kids are seemingly confused by the so-called "education" of today, no doubt.

 

I think that this whole concept is disgusting.

[thesetat2013]

2 hours ago, Scott Tracy said:

Does she? Is he? Will it? Mind you what state? The state or federal state?

In April 2023, Walz, who has been the state's governor since 2019, signed a Minnesota law aimed at protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community to access and receive gender-affirming health care—which can include a range of medical procedures and care such as surgery and puberty blockers—without intervention of out-of-state laws.

The law says court orders "for the removal of a child issued in another state solely because the child's parent or guardian assisted the child in receiving gender-affirming care in this state must not be enforced in this state," with many referring to this as a "Trans Refuge" law. It prohibits the extradition of out-of-state individuals for receiving legal case in Minnesota.

[CallumWK]

Where are those covid - climate change - LGTBQXYZ etc apologist now, who always ask us if we believe in science.

It is quite obvious now that science is a business like all others. They either don't publish studies that are not to their likening, or just process them in a way that they will provide the desired results.

Edited October 25 by CallumWK

[jayboy]

I'm just surprised the New York Times, an excellent newspaper in many ways but captured by right on young journalists, published the article at all.

[roquefort]

2 hours ago, jayboy said:

I'm just surprised the New York Times, an excellent newspaper in many ways but captured by right on young journalists, published the article at all.

It's the New York Post, not the Times. I think you mean the NYT has been captured by left wing journalists, but the sentence is a bit confusing.

[jayboy]

36 minutes ago, roquefort said:

It's the New York Post, not the Times. I think you mean the NYT has been captured by left wing journalists, but the sentence is a bit confusing.

 

No, it's the New York Times not the tabloid New York Post as the link to the article makes clear.I am sorry you found the sentence confusing and my use of the expression "right on" is a bit dated and probably betrays my vintage.To be clear, there is no problem with a newspaper being left of centre.The problems at the NYT are not created by left wing journalists per se but by the spread - particularly by the young - and almost obsessive adherence to identity politics, essentially based around categories rooted in religious, ethnic, linguistic, national, gender, and sexuality in contrast to class-based movements.Even modest opposition to these ideas is regarded as unacceptable, which is why I found the publication of this article in the NYT slightly surprising.

[roquefort]

35 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

No, it's the New York Times not the tabloid New York Post as the link to the article makes clear.I am sorry you found the sentence confusing and my use of the expression "right on" is a bit dated and probably betrays my vintage.To be clear, there is no problem with a newspaper being left of centre.The problems at the NYT are not created by left wing journalists per se but by the spread - particularly by the young - and almost obsessive adherence to identity politics, essentially based around categories rooted in religious, ethnic, linguistic, national, gender, and sexuality in contrast to class-based movements.Even modest opposition to these ideas is regarded as unacceptable, which is why I found the publication of this article in the NYT slightly surprising.

My apologies, you're correct on the source of the article. I agree with your comments on the NYT - they equally apply to CNN, the BBC and most mainstream media outlets in the West. However, those ideas based on identity politics are almost exclusively propagated by those on the left of the political spectrum, pulling in many in the political centre who feel they have to comply or be ostracised by their peers. Witness the absurd spectacle of politicians and sportsmen 'taking the knee' in deference to the corrupt scam known as Black Lives Matter (reported on today in another thread).