Pediatric endocrinologist explains 'transgender therapy' a danger to kids, based on 'very poor science'

On Friday, the Democratically controlled House passed the so-called "Equality Act", along with eight Republicans in support, which among other things adds sexual orientation and "gender identity" under the protections of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

This addition now goes to the Senate, where it faces a less certain future, but it brought up again a discussion that has been in the news a great deal this year, in a variety of forms.

Fox's Laura Ingraham on Friday spoke with Dr. Paul Hruz, a pediatric endocrinologist, specifically on gender identity and the incautious, largely experimental and, as he called them, "drastic" treatments being given to children, euphemistically referred to as transgender "therapy."

The "therapy" is actually very serious, and in young children can leave lifelong harm.

In the clip below, Ingraham starts with the most obvious and utterly reasonable question. "I have a question after reading a lot about this," she said. "Why is the medical community so afraid of considering the impact of hormone treatment, and surgeries and so forth, for the young?"

"It's fairly important to recognize that what is being put forward with the goal of truly helping these individuals that are suffering is based on very, very poor science," Hruz told Ingraham. "Any effort to draw attention to the poor science and the potential very negative and serious consequences that these hormonal interventions really has not been given the attention that it deserves."

He added that this therapy is uniquely unquestioned, and dangers unexplored, as compared with normal medical science and research.

The social stigma attached to questioning liberal progressive social justice tropes is enormous, and that is as true in scientific inquiry as it is entertainment, business, or any other endeavor in American life. That mob rule is hurting those least capable of speaking for themselves, or understanding what is happening to them. Which is tragically ironic, considering the stated goal of social justice is giving voice to those who don't have one.

Listen below as Dr. Hruz explains that the physical and emotional development of adolescence and puberty are being ignored, or whether the questioning of gender identity in youth is a normal and passing process of development, for which a permanent harmful treatment would be a dramatic overcorrection or irreparable error.

It's very important to note that Dr. Hruz doesn't question the existence of gender dysphoria, or having a gender identity different from one's biological sex. He didn't speak ill of the legislation either. The reason that it's important is because the reaction his statements will get, and that Ingraham will get for simply having covered the topic, will not care about that distinction.

The fact that he is even questioning the undertaking of serious intervention in the development of a child without thorough understanding of the consequences or even the necessity, won't matter, because the politics of social justice are too rigid for even contemplation of caution. You must embrace and celebrate surgically altering children, or you're the backward loon.

In other words, even if you are challenging the science with scientific data, the reaction will be of a social and political nature, not a similarly scientific one.

Gosh, that sounds familiar. Is there some other topic you can think of where leftists are advising humongous, future-altering change and disallowing even inquiring about the validity of their claims? One driven especially by celebrities, busy-bodies, and activists, and not principally by the science?

Hmmmmm. I'm sure that's familiar for some reason.