The U.S. government dumped nearly $10 million into a study on puberty blockers that at least one researcher involved hoped would show they help children seeking a gender transition – only to find that they are not the solution they claim to be. Now, the doctor who led the study is refusing to release the results on the grounds that they could be used to support a ban on sex changes for children.

The doctor in question, Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, is also a trans rights advocate, and she told the New York Times that she worried the study would be “weaponized” by critics of transgender interventions for children. She said she feared it could be used in court to argue against using puberty blockers for transitioning. Apparently, these political concerns outweigh any regard she has for the best interests of American children.

One of her fellow researchers on the study said that deciding to withhold the results goes against the basic tenets of research standards and keeps the public in the dark when it comes to “really important” science.

The study received very generous funding from the government – $9.7 million, to be exact. The study, which spanned nine years, involved 95 children whose average age was 11 and who started receiving puberty blocking medication in 2015. These drugs delay the onset of the bodily changes that occur during puberty, such as deepening voices in boys and developing breasts in girls.

After following up with the children who received these drugs for a period of two years, the researchers found that these treatments did nothing to improve their mental health.

The desire to withhold these results is not surprising when you consider Olson-Kennedy’s political beliefs. Considered a leading advocate for giving children so-called gender affirming care, she often provides expert testimony for legal challenges to bans on these procedures, which more than 20 states currently have in place to protect the safety of young people.

When the New York Times asked her why she was unwilling to publicize the results of the study, she replied: “I do not want our work to be weaponized. It has to be exactly on point, clear and concise. And that takes time.”

Doctor accused of not respecting scientific method

Clinical and research psychologist Amy Tishelman of Boston College, who served as one of the original researchers in the controversial study, said: “I understand the fear about it being weaponized, but it’s really important to get the science out there.”

Another clinical psychologist, Erica Anderson, told the New York Post that she was “shocked” and “disturbed” by the decision not to share this important information.

“Dr. Olson-Kennedy has the largest grant that’s ever been awarded in the US on the subject and is sitting on data that would be helpful to know,” she stated.

She went on to call out Olson-Kennedy for not respecting scientific method, stating: “It’s not her prerogative to decide based on the results that she will or won’t publish them. It’s contrary to the scientific method. You do research, and then you disclose what the results are. You don’t change them, you don’t distort them, and you don’t reveal or not reveal them based on the reactions of others. You report as scientists what you’ve learned.”

Olson-Kennedy also contradicted herself by telling the Times that the study didn’t show mental health improvements because the participants had “good mental health on average” before the study. However, she had previously stated that 25% of them had different mental illness symptoms prior to the treatments and were considered “depressed or suicidal.”

The UK’s National Health Service has already banned the use of puberty blockers in children after a four-year review found that it was not a good solution.

Sources for this article include:

Outkick.com

NYPost.com