Journal of Controversial Ideas

(ISSN: 2694-5991) Open Access Journal
Rss Feed:
Controversial Ideas 2025, 5(2), 3; doi: 10.63466/jci05020003

Censorship of Essential Debate in Gender Medicine Research

1 Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine, Twin Falls, ID 83301, USA;
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
(this article belongs to the Special Issue Special Issue Censorship in the Sciences)
Received: 8 Mar 2025 / Accepted: 18 Sep 2025 / Published: 27 Oct 2025
Download PDF (246kb)

Abstract

The integrity of the gender medicine research literature has been compromised, not only by censorship of correct articles, but also by censorship of critiques of articles with unsupported (for instance exaggerated), misleading or erroneous statements. Many such statements concern the evidence base, which can be evaluated rigorously using a key component of evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews of the evidence. These reviews currently find there is limited to very little confidence that estimates of benefit from (and sometimes harm from) medical gender intervention, that is, puberty blockers, hormones and/or surgeries, are likely to match true outcomes. Several medical societies and articles in medical journals have been claiming otherwise, misrepresenting the evidence base as a whole and/or relying upon unsupported or non-representative individual study findings or conclusions. For example, high likelihood of benefit and low risk of adverse outcomes from medical gender interventions are often claimed, while less invasive alternative treatment options are either omitted or mischaracterized. Other unsupported, erroneous or misleading statements occur when studies minimize or omit mention of significant limitations, or report findings or conclusions not supported by their own data; these are then sometimes quoted by others as well. In addition, correctly reported studies are sometimes misrepresented. Critiques which attempt to rectify such statements are frequently rejected. Some examples are presented here. Such rejections have stifled scientific debate, interfering with the continual scrutiny and cross checks needed to maintain accuracy in the research literature. Currently, erroneous and unsupported statements circulate and repeat between journals and medical society guidelines and statements, misinforming researchers, clinicians, patients and the general public.
Keywords: gender dysphoria; censorship; debate in medicine; gender-affirming; transgender; exploratory therapy
OPEN ACCESS
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).
CITE
Cohn, J. Censorship of Essential Debate in Gender Medicine Research. Controversial_Ideas 2025, 5, 3.
Cohn J. Censorship of Essential Debate in Gender Medicine Research. Journal of Controversial Ideas. 2025; 5(2):3.
Cohn, J. 2025. "Censorship of Essential Debate in Gender Medicine Research." Controversial_Ideas 5, no. 2: 3.
Not implemented
SHARE