© 2024 Blaze Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Video: Dan Crenshaw floors Democratic witness with simple request for scientific proof that child sex-change mutilations are beneficial: 'Tell me one. Name one study.'
Image composite, source: Energy & Commerce Democrats

Video: Dan Crenshaw floors Democratic witness with simple request for scientific proof that child sex-change mutilations are beneficial: 'Tell me one. Name one study.'

Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) pressed expert witnesses Wednesday about the scientific justification for sex-change mutilations of children and the potential long-term benefits of such irreversible procedures. The Texas congressman did not have to press hard to find that there was little in the way of a tenable rationale beyond that found in pseudo-scientific activist literature.

The Subcommittee on Health convened to take up a number of proposals concerning health care access and research support for rare diseases. The committee also discussed the reauthorization of a program that sends taxpayer money to children's hospitals.

The Children's Hospital Graduate Medical Education Payment Program, contingent on legislation that comes up for reauthorization every five years, doled out roughly $356 million to 59 hospitals nationwide last year.

Crenshaw seeks to ensure that the program does not ultimately direct taxpayer money to children's hospitals that mutilate kids, stating, "This is taxpayer money, and when 70% of taxpayers opposed these barbaric treatments on minors, then taxpayers should not fund it."

He has proposed an amendment to that effect, conditioning reauthorization on the prohibition of funds going toward children's hospitals that, at any point during the preceding fiscal year "furnished gender-affirming care ... to an individual under 18 years of age."

During the hearing, he broached the issue with Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an assistant professor of pediatrics at Yale School of Medicine.

McNamara, opposed to Crenshaw's proposed amendment, claimed in her testimony, "This bill would require children's hospitals to deny kids health care to maintain funding. ... Kids suffer when their legislators remove parents' rights and prevent pediatricians from providing the evidence-based standard of care."

McNamara further indicated, "Gender-affirming care is the only evidence-based treatment for gender dysphoria. ... The scientific evidence shows that GAC is lifesaving care that improves mental health and physical well-being in those experiencing gender dysphoria."
"It is very unscientific and flawed to pick a single study or a single statistic and discuss it in isolation. ... Medical experts are able to talk about all of the evidence as a whole," McNamara told Crenshaw.

Agreeing, Crenshaw said, "It's good to look at systematic reviews, right? That's the gold standard of evidence when you're trying to understand whether something works or doesn't. So the [British Medical Journal] looked at 61 systematic reviews with the conclusion that 'there is great uncertainty about the effects of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries in young people.' The Journal of the Endocrine Society came up with the same conclusion. Even the American Academy of Pediatrics all cite the lack of evidence."

"When you're talking about permanent physiological changes, do you not agree, just from an ethical standpoint, that you might want extremely strong evidence of the benefits? And there is no systematic review that states that there is strong evidence of benefits," said Crenshaw.

Given McNamara's repeated allusion to evidence, Crenshaw looked to McNamara to provide some.

McNamara responded, "The standards of care were developed based on extensive —"

Crenshaw interjected, saying, "You're not telling me any journal. You're not telling any study. Don't say 'standards of care.' Tell me one."

The so-called expert appeared flummoxed, reiterating, "The standards of care."

"'The standards of care.' That’s not a journal. That’s not a study. That’s not an organization. It’s not an institution. You’re just saying words. Name one study," said Crenshaw. "Tell me one. Name one study."

The Washington Examiner reported that Crenshaw later posed similar questions to child and adult psychologist Miriam Grossman, who noted, "Medicine is unfortunately permeated with politics at this point. ... Now, ideally, we wouldn’t be stepping in. Who wants the government stepping in between doctors and parents and children? ... But when there’s something that is so wrong that is going on, then I think we have to."

Crenshaw said in a June 9 statement, "There is no other human rights atrocity in America that is so quickly gaining momentum and validation within the very institutions that should know better."

"One of these institutions is children’s hospitals. In a place where 'do no harm' is the ultimate guiding principle, there is no excuse to ever perform these treatments that permanently alter a child’s physiology," said the Texas congressman. "From now on, we will not allow a dime of this taxpayer-funded program to go toward children’s hospitals that cater to the harmful pseudoscience that is 'gender-affirming care.'"

Here is the full exchange:

Dan Crenshaw Speaks on Blocking Program Funding for Hospitals Providing Gender Transition for Minorsyoutu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Want to leave a tip?

We answer to you. Help keep our content free of advertisers and big tech censorship by leaving a tip today.
Want to join the conversation?
Already a subscriber?
Joseph MacKinnon

Joseph MacKinnon

Joseph MacKinnon is a staff writer for Blaze News. He lives in a small town with his wife and son, moonlighting as an author of science fiction.
@HeadlinesInGIFs →