Feds now targeting heroic doc who exposes horrendous child "trans-gender" surgeries in Tx. "childrens hospital"

Apollonian

Guest Columnist

BOMBSHELL – Whistleblower EXPOSES Texas Hospital Horrors! Feds TARGET Hero Doctor!​

January 12, 2024 6:20 pm by CWR

Link: https://citizenwatchreport.com/bomb...xas-hospital-horrors-feds-target-hero-doctor/

[see vid at site link, above]

In this video, Patriot Nurse discusses a shocking revelation that the mainstream media is suppressing — a whistleblower exposes horrifying child surgeries at Texas Children’s Hospital, and the Feds target the hero doctor who dared to speak out. The details are disturbing and reveal a concerning nexus between the medical industrial complex and the federal government. Watch the entire video to understand the gravity of this situation and why it’s an existential threat to freedom and individual sovereignty.

See also CNN Reporters Shocked by the Horrors Witnessed in Gaza Hospital
 

The Anti-Democratic Movement Targeted Ralph Nader First. We Should Have Paid More Attention​

The recent ballot access challenges, political investigations, and canceled primaries are just an extension of a phenomenon we should have seen coming twenty years ago​

MATT TAIBBI
JAN 26, 2024

Link: https://www.racket.news/p/the-anti-democratic-movement-targeted/



In the summer of 2004 Theresa Amato, campaign manager of presidential candidate Ralph Nader, took out a notebook in preparation for an important phone conference.
Her candidate, Nader, had already been subject to an extraordinary — and extraordinarily underreported — campaign of litigious harassment at the hands of the Democratic Party. John Kerry told Nader he had 2,000 lawyers at his disposal and would do “everything within the law” to win. In Arizona, Nader opponents filed a 650-page challenge to his attempt to get on the ballot, forgetting social justice concerns long enough to complain that one of Nader’s petition-circulators was a felon. They demanded ten samples of Nader’s own signature, hired a forensic examiner to call others into question, and challenged residents of a homeless shelter. The Democratic state chairman, Jim Pederson, said outright, “Our first objective is to keep [Nader] off the ballot,” because “we think it distorts the entire election.”
Now, Amato’s candidate was set to talk with Democratic National Committee chairman (and future Virginia governor) Terry McAuliffe. A high-energy, Clintonesque schmoozer in public, McAuliffe in private was curt and to the point: he didn’t mind Nader running in noncompetitive places, but had an “issue” with 19 states where “a vote for you is a vote for [George] Bush.” He shifted with impressive nonchalance to offer a bribe.
“If you stay out of my 19 states,” he said, “I will help with resources in 31 states.” McAuliffe then made a show of pretending to ask an assistant about other ballot challenges against Nader, saying he “supported them” but wasn’t funding them, a statement ultimately contradicted in court testimony by Maine’s State Democratic Party chair. This was just one of countless instances in which Democrats hurled billable hours at anyone deemed a “threat” to votes they considered theirs.
In 2004, a third party needed to collect 634,727 valid signatures in about six and a half months to get on the ballot. If you’ve ever wondered why so few third-party candidates run, it’s because this is an extraordinarily difficult logistical task, and expensive, requiring services of companies that even then charged between $1.00 and $1.50 per signature. (Ross Perot reportedly spent $18 million to get on the ballot in 1992.) The process gets more cumbersome when you’re forced to account for “spoilage,” i.e. how many signatures you’ll lose in the face of challenges from a determined opponent, in Nader’s case from Democrats and affiliated groups.
Nader lost signatures that were allegedly signed in the wrong county (an irony given recent events, as we’ll see), due to “unwritten rules” that a collector’s signature must be legible even if his or her name is printed underneath it, because signatories no longer lived at the addresses where they were registered, because signatures were printed instead of signed, because additional information like the date was included next to signatures, and so on, and so on, and so on.
“We had more than two dozen lawsuits complaints filed against us in a massive effort to disenfranchise the people who wanted to see him on the ballot,” Amato says now.
Amato later wrote a book, Grand Illusion, documenting the Democrats’ plan to keep Nader’s meager resources “tied up mentally, emotionally, and financially in courtroom after courtroom,” violating rules themselves while using the press to smear Nader as the cheat. “I wrote a whole book precisely because I didn’t want the history to be lost, of what the Nader campaigns went through,” she says now.
A subtext of Grand Illusion is how Democrats showed great creativity when seeking ways to keep Nader off the ballot, but almost none when it came to examining possible reasons it might be underperforming. Kerry in 2004 was fatally flawed because he had no position on this central issue of the campaign, the Iraq war. He tried simultaneously to be against it (“Invading Iraq has created a crisis of historic proportions”) and for it (pledging to “hunt down and kill the terrorists”), while running all year from the fact that he voted for Bush’s war resolution.
This complex non-position not only created a clear rationale for a third-party run in a year when support for the war dropped as low as 45%, it was a major factor in Hillary Clinton’s 2016 general election loss, when Donald Trump won 57% of military households vs Clinton’s 39%. Had the party shown a fraction of the backbone on the Iraq issue during the crucial October 2002 vote that it showed in bollocking Nader all through the 2004 cycle, it’s possible Trump never would have been president.
Twenty years and multiple political upheavals later, the Democrats are taking the sabotage game it played in 2004 up a notch or ten. It’s taken the position that all of Joe Biden’s potential challengers within the party and without are, in effect, new Naders, whose presences are “distorting” the real election. The major difference between 2004 and now is that thanks to major changes in both the Democratic and Republican parties, current Democrats have the money and institutional capacity to attempt a legal campaign to “Naderize” even the likely GOP nominee, Trump, essentially seeking to ballot-block their way to victory.
Democrats first disenfranchised internal party challengers like Marianne Williamson, Dean Phillips, and (initially) Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. through tactics like declaring the New Hampshire primary “non-compliant” and “meaningless” and canceling the Florida primary. Then, when Dr. Cornel West, Kennedy, and a new party called “No Labels” decided to seek third-party ballot access, money from LinkedIn billionaire Reid Hoffman, former “Right-wing hit man” turned Clintonian organizational assassin David Brock, and a group fronted by former presidential candidate Dick Gephardt was quickly deployed, leading to a meeting of Biden advocacy groups in which one of the participants warned potential third party entrants, “If you have one fingernail clipping of a skeleton in your closet, we will find it… We are going to come at you with every gun we can possibly find.”
Lieberman on January 16th sent a separate letter to his former Senate colleague Biden, saying, “I respectfully ask you to help put an end to this shameful attempt to silence voters and prevent choice and competition in the upcoming election.” Obviously, this fell on deaf ears. Two days later word came out that American Bridge hired former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Marc Elias to help “thwart” third-party bids.
In essence, Democrats first prevented politicians or interest groups from attempting to influence their platform by running in primaries, then used scorched-earth tactics to head off potential third-party runs, leaving only the Republicans an alternative —except of course they’re using Death Star tactics to try to disqualify that party’s candidate, too.
Amato’s Grand Illusion described the evolving hypocrisy, cynicism, and ruthlessness of the Democratic Party a dozen years before Trump. It’s a story to which we should have paid more attention, because the Sun Tzu tactics unveiled against Ralph Nader are now clearly the strategic model for the whole party. Had the Republicans not suffered a major intramural collapse in 2016, Grand Illusion today might read like a cautionary tale about the anti-democratic tendencies baked into the two-party system. The Republicans, after all, have their own history of ballot-pruning tactics, for example working behind the scenes to suppress the candidacy of Libertarian Gary Johnson in 2012.
But since Trump steamrolled the GOP clown car in 2016, establishment politics has increasingly consolidated under the umbrella of the one party that (just barely) succeeded in fighting off its populist challenger, the Democrats. The return to the Democratic tent of once-hated neocons like Bill Kristol (who was reportedly in attendance at the anti-No Labels meeting described by Semafor) has helped revamp the blue-party institutional space into something like a permanent Washington-against-the-world war council, fueled by an aristocratic contempt whose intensity is almost beyond comprehension.
These people reordered the geography of the world, blithely moved whole manufacturing sectors from one continent to another, started moronic wars that pointlessly killed millions and created millions more refugees, bailed out corrupt banks while whole regions went into foreclosure, and failed to accomplish much but a growing sense of foreboding and decline despite decades of promises to the contrary. Still, they feel sincere rage at the idea that they should have to earn votes.
The special anger Nader inspired came from his refusal to just “send a message,” saying things like “Isn’t that what candidates try to do to one another—take votes?” when Democrats suggested he stop “taking” votes from Al Gore or John Kerry, and run in “safe” states only. Again, never mind that they could have altered their own fortunes easily by prioritizing voters over donors just a little more. In their minds, this was not Nader’s call to make. In the minds of early 2000s Democrats, voters never elected Republicans. Ralph Nader did.
Headlines like “Ralph Nader Was Indispensable To The Republican Party” (HuffingtonPost) and “Ralph Nader Still Refuses to Admit He Elected Bush” (the indispensable Jon Chait of New York, who recently insisted Joe Biden’s 2020 election inspired the “greatest outpouring of joy since V-J day”) still trickle out, as reminders that such grudges are never forgotten. The hyper-combative, winning-is-everything mindset of the new “lawfare” era was probably born in that 2000 loss, a “direct outcome of the 2000 Nader campaign,” as Amato puts it. This is true even though, as Amato notes, there were eight minor candidates on the 2000 Florida ballot, and all eight got more than the infamous “margin of difference” of 537 votes.
In the age of Nader, the rage was directed at anyone who suggested the Democrats should have to face competition from more than one direction. The updated idea in the Trump era is that they should not have to face competition at all.
Back in 2016, when I disliked Trump enough to write Insane Clown President, I was still naive enough to puzzled by the stream of headlines describing his win as afailure of democracy.” It was anything but. The presidency had long been stage-managed to absurdity, with candidates needing the backing of one of the two parties, the press, and corporate donors to gain the White House. The whole idea of this oligarchical ADT system was to guarantee the president arrived in the Oval Office a political debtor, while keeping anyone with aspirations to independence out. This was the clear lesson of the Nader episode.
Trump broke through all these barriers as an unapproved “fringe” candidate, making his win an extraordinary blow for democracy, or so I thought, even though I couldn’t stand him. If he could win, anyone could, and this was good news for those of us who thought the system’s corrupt features might never be fixed.
Looking back, it’s clear Trump’s unsanctioned run and win were the violations of “norms” Washington insiders were most furious about. Now, when politicians talk about protecting “democracy,” what they really mean is restoring those old barriers of entry. The problem is, voters are wise to the game now, forcing insiders to resort to ever-cruder mechanisms of control, like the ten million criminal indictments and the recent ballot disqualification attempts.
If those efforts fail, even more extreme action is surely coming, and “protecting democracy” is the pitch they’ll use to sell it. All of this is will be justifed based on the idea that the Trump threat is so grave that taking so much as one vote from Democrats is criminal irresponsibility, not really morally different from marching for Hitler.
Everything is permitted in the fight against Hitler, which is why the aforementioned Hoffman is the quintessential modern Democratic backer: loaded, thin-skinned, and eager to color outside lines. Vox in 2020 profiled him:
Myopically focused on collecting the 270 electoral votes needed to defeat Trump… to win those votes, critics feel, Hoffman is willing to play dirty. Hoffman’s defenders see this agitation as worth it — and if Democrats win, it could validate a more provocative form of political combat.
Of course no one goes into politics to lose, but if you don’t believe in letting voters decide, and winning becomes about something other than making the best argument or boasting the best record, you got lost somewhere along the line. We cheat when we think we deserve to win, no matter what, and our leaders have spent decades now talking themselves into this frame of mind. The entitlement disease was there all along. We should have seen the chaos of this year coming.
 

Transgender ‘Treatments’ for Children One of the ‘Greatest Ethical Scandals in Medical History’, French Report States​

Link: https://www.breitbart.com/europe/20...ndals-in-medical-history-finds-french-report/


1,121
PARIS, FRANCE - JUNE 24, 2017: A rainbow flag, commonly known as the gay pride flag or LGB
Yuriko Nakao/Getty Images
KURT ZINDULKA24 Mar 20241,121

The practice of sexually ‘transitioning’ children will be remembered as one of the “greatest ethical scandals in the history of medicine,” a report commissioned by French senators stated.
A landmark report produced at the behest of the centre-right Les Républicains in the French Senate found that the medical industry embarked upon the practice of giving children life-altering transgender treatments with little evidence of its effectiveness while ignoring the side effects.
The report found that while parents were often pressured by doctors to put their children on puberty-blocking drugs to prevent suicide, there is little proof that this course of action has any better outcomes for the child.
The head of the plastic surgery department at the Georges-Pompidou hospital in Paris, Laurent Lantieri told the report that there was “no evidence” that sex changes for children improved their quality of life because “there are obviously no randomized trials”.
Meanwhile, there was a prevalence of depression and other mental illnesses among children seeking to change their gender. The report found that 70 per cent of those seeking gender reassignment had “anxiety-depressive disorders” and 30 per cent had previously suffered some form of trauma, typically sexual abuse. Most disturbingly, 30 per cent of children seeking to change their gender were found to have been autistic, although they were often undiagnosed.
The evidence of the safety of prescribing puberty blockers to children was also “based on very fragile bases”, the report noted, pointing out that the justification for their administration in France was based on the so-called “Dutch Protocol” developed in the Netherlands two decades ago.
The protocol claimed that the effects of puberty-blocking drugs given to children as young as 12 years old were reversible. Yet, the French report said that this was not trustworthy, given that it was only based on the observation of 54 patients and was funded, in part, by Ferring Pharmaceuticals, a firm which produces puberty-blocking drugs.
Conversely, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom have all begun to restrict the use of puberty blockers given their side effects and often life-long impacts, which the report said indicated that the world is at a “turning point” on transgenderism.

The report argued that much of the rise in gender transitioning has been a byproduct of it becoming “fashionable” on social media and elsewhere, noting that hospital stays for transgender purposes increased three-fold from 2011 to 2020 in France, from 536 to 1,615. While just four surgeons in France were performing vaginoplasties in 2022, there are now at least 30.
Senator Jacqueline Eustache-Brinio, who led the study, went on to warn that there is “wokism in all of this,” telling Valleurs Actuelles on Friday: “When we realize that certain health professionals or researchers no longer talk about men and women, that they have completely appropriated the woke dialectic by talking about sex assigned at birth, it’s scary. I say to myself, we have to stop with these delusions.”
Concluding the report, the Les Républicains senator wrote: “Ultimately, there is every reason to believe that youth gender transition will be considered one of the greatest ethical scandals in the history of medicine. An ethical scandal approved by the medical profession, schools, universities, media and policies.”
Following the publication of the report and its submission to the French senate this week, the Les Républicains said that they plan on introducing legislation to restrict transgender treatments to children, banning anyone under the age of 18 from having sex change surgeries or from being prescribed cross-sex hormones, particularly puberty-blocking drugs, arguing that children do not have the capability to consent to life-altering decisions.
“I have nothing against minorities,” Senator Eustache-Brinio said, “Everyone has the right to live as they want, but they must not impose their points of view, their desires and their wishes on a majority or the vast majority of people. Trans people have always existed in all societies, what we want is the protection of minors and helping parents to resist social pressure. It is not supporting a child towards a transgender identity that will make them feel better.”

Follow Kurt Zindulka on X: or e-mail to: kzindulka@breitbart.com

 

Leaked Files From Transgender Association 'Shocking' And 'Horrific' Admission, Critics Say​

BY TYLER DURDEN
TUESDAY, APR 02, 2024 - 10:40 PM
Authored by Brad Jones via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/l...-shocking-and-horrific-admission-critics-say/

A leaked video and documents exposing the inner workings of the organization responsible for setting the so-called “standards of care” for gender transition treatments and surgeries on children is a “shocking” and “horrific” admission, critics say.
In a file photo, a detransitioner looks at a letter from her former doctor who authorized a double mastectomy for transitioning into a male, at her home on Nov. 1, 2022. The woman now regrets the procedure. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)

The leaked files from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health—better known as WPATH—reveal “widespread medical malpractice on children and vulnerable adults,” according to a 241-page report disclosing emails, documents, and an 82-minute video.
Environmental Progress, a nonprofit organization led by founder and president Michael Shellenberger that obtained the files, released them to the public in an exposé on March 4.
The WPATH Files show that what is called ‘gender medicine’ is neither science nor medicine,” Mr. Shellenberger said in a statement. “The experiments are not randomized, double-blind, or controlled. It’s not medicine since the first rule is to do no harm. And that requires informed consent.”
The files are “a shocking admission” by WPATH doctors and other medical practitioners privately acknowledging they’re not getting proper informed consent from parents and children before proceeding with gender transition treatments and surgeries, prominent civil rights attorney Harmeet Dhillon told The Epoch Times.
Ms. Dhillon, the founder and CEO of the Center for American Liberty, which is representing several women who’ve allegedly suffered harm and irreversible damage as a result of WPATH’s recommendations of transgender surgery for gender dysphoric children and young adults, called the exposé “an important act of journalism.”
These leaked files show that behind closed doors, WPATH members are admitting to the fact that they’re not getting informed consent for hormonal and surgical interventions from young patients, which is the very premise of our litigation for young women who’ve been mutilated by these doctors when they were children,” she said.
The Center for American Liberty has taken on three pro-bono cases representing detransitioners Chole Cole, Layla Jane, and Luka Hein, who are suing Kaiser Permanente and doctors who performed double mastectomies on these young women.

The Report​

WPATH advocates for children to have access to puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries to alter their body according to their gender identity, according to the report. This suggests that children should be able to understand the full ramifications of these drugs and procedures, and that their parents can provide informed consent.
“But while WPATH publicly supports minors and their families consenting to these hormonal and surgical treatments based on a nebulous inner sense of self, privately, some members admit that consent is not possible,” states the report. “Behind closed doors, WPATH-affiliated healthcare professionals confess that their practices are based on improvisation, that children cannot comprehend them, and that the consent process is not ethical.”
Michael Shellenberger, founder and president of nonprofit organization Environmental Progress, in a file photo. (The Epoch Times)
In video footage of an internal WPATH panel, Dianne Berg, a child psychologist, said experts wouldn’t expect children and youth to fully understand the effects of transgender procedures, because it is “out of their developmental range to understand the extent to which some of these medical interventions are impacting them,” according to the report.
What really disturbs me is when the parents can’t tell me what they need to know about a medical intervention that apparently they signed off for,” said Ms. Berg. She suggested encouraging patients to ask questions and offering a “real informed consent process” rather than what was happening, which is “not what we need to be doing ethically.”
Jamison Green, an activist and former WPATH president, told the panel that sometimes patients avoid learning important information about procedures out of fear, saying, “People also are afraid many times about surgery, and so they can read other people’s descriptions about surgery, and they’ll miss details, or they’ll miss the most important piece of information for them simply because they’re afraid to read it.”
Dr. Daniel Metzger, a Canadian endocrinologist, said gender doctors are “often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven’t even had biology in high school yet,” adding that even adults have limited knowledge of many of these medical interventions.
WPATH guidance states that doctors must inform patients about “the potential loss of fertility and available options to preserve fertility.”
But Dr. Metzger told the panel that “it’s always a good theory that you talk about fertility preservation with a 14-year-old, but I know I’m talking to a blank wall. ... Most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of a brain space to really talk about [fertility preservation] in a serious way.”
Less than week after Environmental Progress released the WPATH Files publicly, Britain’s National Health Service stopped the use of puberty blockers on children. NHS England said, “We have concluded that there is not enough evidence to support the safety or clinical effectiveness of [puberty suppressing hormones] to make the treatment routinely available at this time.”
Meanwhile, other European countries, such as Sweden, Finland, Norway, and France are also growing increasingly skeptical of what supporters call the “gender-affirmation model.”

‘They’re Doing It Anyway’​

Informed consent is a well-known pre-requisite for ethical medical treatments and procedures, and yet “the so-called transgender medical community” in the U.S. continues to prescribe this “gender-affirming care” for children, Ms. Dhillon said.
They’re doing it anyway,” she said. “The WPATH medical practitioners are fully aware that the gender-affirming care they’re pushing is based on shaky and inadequate medical research, but they continue to push it, ignoring the growing body of scientific evidence that is distancing mainstream medicine from these procedures.”
The leaked video also reveals that what WPATH is stating publicly is the opposite of what its members they’re saying privately, Ms. Dhillon said.
“They know what they’re doing is wrong and that’s what they say to each other behind closed doors. They’re not getting proper informed consent. It’s not working,” she said. “We’re enabling, through WPATH’s quack medicine ideology, 9-year-olds to decide that they’re able to change their gender.”
Gender-affirming” doctors and politicians in California, for example, continue to push puberty blockers as a safe, effective and reversible treatments and the only way to prevent suicide among gender dysphoric youth, but the facts say otherwise, Ms. Dhillon said.
The Center for American Liberty litigation has shed the light on the fact that puberty blockers are “absolutely permanently damaging,” she said.
Harmeet Dhillon, founder and CEO of the Center for American Liberty, which is representing several women who’ve allegedly suffered harm and irreversible damage from transgender procedures. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)
“Every day detransitioners come out and announce that they’ve been told by their doctors [they] can’t have children,” she said. “All of our clients who have this so-called ‘treatment’ have permanently altered voices. They can’t reverse that even though they stopped taking the hormones.”
A California law even enables 12-year-old children “to run away from home and seek refuge in LGBTQ homes to emancipate themselves” to pursue medical interventions such as the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormone replacement therapy, and surgery without parental consent, she said.
This is all being justified and underwritten by these pseudo-medical standards even when doctors privately and openly admit they don’t know all the long-term effects of “their radical procedures” or how to deal with them, she said.
The exposé reveals a WPATH member confirming fertility and sexual pleasure could be destroyed for young patients receiving gender-affirming care, Ms. Dhillon said.
In any other field of medicine, doctors cutting off body parts “and then saying they don’t really know what the long-term effects of that are” would be considered “completely outrageous,” but in “this sexual experimentation field,” the same standards of care don’t seem to apply, she said.
Every doctor who knowingly lied to patients should sued for medical malpractice and exposed to put an end to these practices, she said.

WPATH Statement​

WPATH President Dr. Marci Bowers, issued the following statement on March 5:
WPATH is and has always been a science- and evidence-based organization whose recommendations are widely endorsed by major medical organizations around the world. We are the professionals who best know the medical needs of trans and gender diverse individuals—and stand opposed to individuals who misrepresent and de-legitimize the diverse identities and complex needs of this population through scare tactics. The world is not flat. Gender, like genitalia, is represented by diversity. The small percentage of the population that is trans or gender diverse deserves healthcare and will never be a threat to the global gender binary.”
Blaine Vella, executive director for WPATH stated in a memo to association members on March 5:
“This is and will continue to be our response to any media outreach. If any of you receive inquiries from the media, we request that you do not respond, send the request to us ... and our media partners will respond with the statement above.”
WPATH did not respond to an Epoch Times request for comment about the allegations.
A year ago, WPATH and its U.S affiliate USPATH, doubled down on gender-affirming care for minors, saying they “vehemently oppose” legislation outlawing access to gender-affirming health care to “transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people.”

‘A Giant Experiment’​

Erin Friday, an attorney and co-leader of Our Duty, an international group that opposes gender ideology, especially for children and young adults, told the Epoch Times the WPATH Files are an admission that gender transition procedures are “a giant experiment.”
Ms. Friday referred to the case of a 16-year-old girl from the report who developed large tumors on her liver after taking testosterone and other medications, and an oncologist and surgeon both indicated the hormones were the likely reason for the cancer, according to the report. Many other known or potential complications and other related medical conditions were also discussed in the document, along with evidence of a lack of research.
[T]here have never been any properly controlled trials in the wider field of gender medicine, which also consistently lacks long-term data,” states the report.
“Gender-affirming” doctors don’t question a patient’s comorbidities, especially in matters of mental health, even though WPATH’s recommendations state that the goal of “gender-affirming care” is to partner with transgender and gender diverse people “to holistically address their social, mental and medical health needs and well-being while respectfully affirming their gender identity,” said Ms. Friday.
They push aside any patient mental health issue, regardless of whether its severe schizophrenia or a dissociative disorder,” she said. “They know that these people ... have severe mental health issues and they transition them anyway.”
Erin Friday, western U.S. co-leader of Our Duty, speaks at a seminar in San Francisco on Sept. 24, 2023. (Lear Zhou/The Epoch Times)

Ms. Friday, whose daughter formerly identified as transgender but has since accepted her female form, anticipates the WPATH Files will lead to congressional hearings.
The WPATH Files reveal much more than an organization that has overstepped its bounds, she said.

They have admitted to medical malpractice. They have admitted to lying,” she claimed.
Hospital boards and medical societies, Ms. Friday said, would be “well-advised” to use the leaked WPATH Files as “an off-ramp,” to move away from such harmful practices.
Dr. Shannae Anderson, a licensed psychologist in California and Virginia who fled California nearly two years ago after her license was threatened, told The Epoch Times the WPATH Files have exposed the “horrific” agenda behind gender-affirming treatments.
In most states, the WPATH “standards of care” are the only treatment allowed, which means puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, social transitioning, and ultimately top and bottom surgeries, Dr. Anderson said.
“It is illegal in most states to actually offer another treatment avenue, which is crazy,” she said.
Another “absolutely horrifying” aspect of the leaked files is WPATH’s admission “they’re conducting these radical life-altering procedures on individuals with severe mental health disorders,” she stressed.
Dr. Anderson, now the director of psychology and co-director of ethics and advocacy for the American Association of Christian Counselors, which bills itself as the world’s largest faith-based mental health organization, said gender-affirming care policies have hamstrung therapists from being able to talk freely with patients about gender dysphoria and trampled free speech.
But, like other critics, she expects the WPATH Files exposé will lead to congressional hearings and more litigation to restore free speech so therapists can do their jobs.

Psychotherapy is speech. That’s what we do. We talk,” she said. “And so when there is this ban against talking and exploring someone’s gender dysphoria, we’re not even allowed to ask questions about it or explore it.”
WPATH doctors admitting they know children cannot give informed consent is “a huge deal,” she said.
Dr. Anderson, a native of Thousand Oaks, Calif., confronted the board at a Conejo Valley Unified School District meeting in June, 2022, alleging that 8-year-olds were being exposed at school to sexual issues including abstract concepts like transgender ideology, which she said was beyond their level of comprehension.
“That is actually one of the reasons why I had my license threatened in California. I spoke before a school board about how teaching children about transgender ideology is inappropriate and dangerous because they can’t begin to comprehend all that goes into a transgender identity and transformation,” she said. “And, what the WPATH files expose is that I was right, essentially, that when they undergo these gender treatments, they cannot give informed consent.”
WPATH members acknowledged not only that children can’t grasp the scope of what’s going to happen to them with these treatments, but neither can parents, and that they’re not disclosing all the risks and dangers associated with them “because they don’t know what they are,” she said.
There isn’t enough research to determine the long-term effects of such treatments and procedures, and the research that does exist shows that a “watch and wait” treatment is best, because the vast majority of gender dysphoric minors outgrow the condition and accept their natural bodies, she said.
Jordan Peterson, Canadian clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, in a file photo. (The Epoch Times)

Worst Medical Scandal in History?​

In a recent interview with Dr. Jordan Peterson, a well-known Canadian psychologist and author, Mr. Shellenberger said he was unfamiliar with WPATH at first.
“I thought maybe people were exaggerating what was happening,” he said.
Then, “a source or sources” gave him about 170 pages of the internal files from the discussion boards of WPATH, along with the video of WPATH leaders and members talking about some of the problems they were encountering.
“These files put to rest any doubts anybody should have that what is happening is one of the greatest medical mistreatment scandals in human history,” he said. “It might be the worst. It’s certainly up there with lobotomies. It’s up there with the Tuskegee experiments.”
Mr. Peterson responded, “It’s way worse than both of those.”
The WPATH Files show “without a shadow of a doubt” that the people who are are performing these “mistreatments” are not getting informed consent, Mr. Shellenberger said.
“And then they just sort of throw up their hands and they say, we don’t really know how to solve this problem. At no point in the video, does anybody say, ‘Hey, maybe we shouldn’t be doing this,’” he said. “There’s a basic horror to it, but then at the intellectual level, you can’t help but be slightly fascinated by these people. What is wrong with them that they’re so in the grip of an ideology that they’re doing these mistreatments and never questioning ... that perhaps they shouldn’t be doing them at all.”
Mr. Peterson referenced Dr. Ken Zucker, a psychologist whose studies showed 88 percent of 2- to 12-year-olds in two separate studies of boys and girls clinically referred as experiencing gender dysphoria—who were not socially transitioned—later reported as adolescents and young adults they no longer suffered from the condition and were comfortable with their natal genders.
Leave them the hell alone till they’re 18,” Mr. Peterson said. “The man who established that was Ken Zucker. He ran the best journal that dealt with childhood gender dysphoria for years up in Toronto. That was his recommendation for treatment, and the bloody radicals ran him out of business 10 years ago.”
Now doctors are doing the opposite and are recommending the “most extreme” treatments and surgical intervention possible and telling people “that if they don’t listen, their children are going to die, that they’re going to commit suicide, which is a complete bloody lie. There was never a bit of evidence for that, not even bad evidence. It was just a lie,” he said.
Then, they offer “this absolutely cataclysmic treatment with unimaginably dire consequences to people who don’t even understand and can’t understand what they’re agreeing to” and tell them “that’s how they’ll find their true self,” he said. “So that’s where we’re at. It’s so sickening.”

MORE MEDICAL STORIES ON ZEROHEDGE​


CDC Releases Hidden Trove Of COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Reports​



"Insane": US Physicians Received Billions From Pharmaceutical And Medical Device Industry, New Research Finds​



The Increasing Prevalence Of Autism​


 
Back
Top