Episode Description
In this episode, we discuss the activist-led campaign to discredit systematic reviews conducted by researchers at McMaster University because they were funded by SEGM (the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine). We examine the researchers’ response, whether the campaign gained traction, and what it reveals about the politicization of evidence.
From there, we step back to look at the broader landscape of systematic reviews on “gender-affirming care”—and whether the American public realizes just how weak the evidence base actually is. This naturally brings us to the University of Utah’s August 2024 review, which claimed that the evidence shows these interventions to be safe and effective. We break down what the Utah review got wrong and why its conclusions stand in sharp contrast to other systematic reviews.
Links:
“No pride in pseudoscience” op-ed
WPATH suppresses publication of Hopkins reviews
Get full access to Informed Dissent at informeddissentpodcast.substack.com/subscribe