The Medical University of South Carolina initially said it wouldn’t be affected by a law banning use of state funds for treatment “furthering the gender transition” of children under 16. Months later, it cut off that care to all trans minors.

One Saturday morning in September 2022, Terrence Steyer, the dean of the College of Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina, placed an urgent call to a student. Just a year prior, the medical student, Thomas Agostini, had won first place at a university-sponsored event for his graduate research on transgender pediatric patients. He also had been featured in a video on MUSC’s website highlighting resources that support the LGBTQ+ community.

Now, Agostini and his once-lauded study had set off a political firestorm. Conservative activists seized on one line in particular in the study’s summary — a parenthetical noting the youngest transgender patient to visit MUSC’s pediatric endocrinology clinic was 4 years old — and inaccurately claimed that children that young were prescribed hormones as part of a gender transition. Elon Musk amplified the false claim, tweeting, “Is it really true that four-year-olds are receiving hormone treatment?” That led federal and state lawmakers to frantically ask top MUSC leaders whether the public hospital was in fact helping young children medically transition. The hospital was not; its pediatric transgender patients did not receive hormone therapy before puberty, nor does it offer surgical options to minors.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -111 months ago

    No, it’s rare for a treatment to go from standard practice to experimental, like they suggest. That means a serious misassesment has been made at some point.

    The researches conclude that the hormone treatment makes irreversible changes to the bone structure but that the positive aspects as a treatment to gender dysphoria have not been sufficiently observed.

    • @Syrc
      link
      3
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The thing is even if it does go experimental, I don’t think it would change much. Even now, they aren’t administering it like candy.

      And about bones, doesn’t the study say this?

      GnRHa treatment delays bone maturation and bone mineral density gain that, however, seem to partially recover during cross-sex hormone therapy when studied at age 22 years.

      If it’s only a “delay”, which doesn’t even need the hormone treatment to stop for it to partially recover, doesn’t that mean it’s reversible?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        011 months ago

        Partially recovered doesn’t sound reveserible, does it? And the severity ranges from case to case, safe to assume.

        Obviously, we only experience puberty once in life. Anything that alters that process will have consequences.