Time to up the pressure! We need to flood his office with emails and phone calls demanding action!

You can do so here:

Time to up the pressure! We need to flood his office with emails and phone calls demanding action!

You can do so here:

Are you going to do an article about 20 republican AGs suing the AMA to try to pressure them to stop supporting puberty blockers after they agreed with the ASPS on surgery?

Thank you so much for this! Way more people need to be aware of this especially since it hasn’t been widely reported!

*February 17

A little bit of good news news I just found while researching the AMA’s position is as recently as January 17 they sent a letter opposing the new anti trans CMS rules, which is a good sign for the AMA at least…

www.ama-assn.org/health-care-...

Again I really hope you’re right and they’re not wavering. But since this NYT article is unfortunately going to be cited in anti trans testimonies and court cases, I still think they should clarify their position so it can’t be weaponized

Thanks. I really hope you’re right, but that was also before the FTC letter so I’m still extremely worried about where they stand after the letter. I really hope you can contact them and get clarification on where they stand now

Can you please get clarification on what the American Psychological Association thinks about gender affirming care since the NYT claims they are retreating? I’m kinda panicking about that rn!

I really hope you’re right! But I just wish we could get a message from the Psychological Association itself clarifying that since the NYT article is referring to the Psychological Association, not the Psychiatric Association…

This is from 2024 though. Since the FTC letter is from 2025, they could still be wavering on their support for gender affirming care now which is what I’m worried about! I really hope Erin can clear this up!

Claim: The American Society of Plastic Surgeons broke from scientific consensus on transgender healthcare, proving the consensus was always hollow. Fact: The ASPS position statement was not a clinical guideline. It was issued by the ASPS board in a secretive process that bypassed the organization's own expert task force, relied on the Trump administration's widely criticized HHS report, and set an age minimum matching Trump's executive order exactly. Seven members of the task force the board circumvented wrote an open letter stating they do not even know who authored the statement. But something confounding has happened in the last few weeks: Cracks have appeared in the supposed wall of consensus. After expressing concerns about the evidence base in 2024, on Feb. 3, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons became the first major American medical group to publicly question youth gender medicine since its widespread adoption. The organization published a nine-page "position statement" advising its members against any gender-related surgeries before age 19 and noting that "there are currently no validated methods" for determining whether youth gender dysphoria will resolve without medical treatment. (The document also acknowledged a similar level of uncertainty surrounding blockers and hormones, though that's less directly relevant to the practice of plastic surgeons.) Singal claims that "cracks in the wall" have appeared in the consensus around gender-affirming care, citing the American Society of Plastic Surgeons' recent position statement-a document published and immediately paraded by anti-trans activists across the country. Singal does not tell his readers how incredibly controversial and manipulated the document actually is, nor does he explain why this position statement is not a clinical practice guideline and can never be one. It cannot be held up as a case of scientific consensus breaking around transgender care, because it completely bypassed the scientific …

According to an open letter by members of the scientific review panel at the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the organization convened a gender surgery task force comprised of experts in adolescent psychiatry, medicine, and research methodology in May 2025. The task force met monthly for nine months, working toward evidence-informed conclusions. But the ASPS board-led by president Bob Basu, a significant donor to both the Trump campaign and Ted Cruz, was apparently unsatisfied with the pace and direction of the experts' work. Instead of waiting for the task force's conclusions, the ASPS/PSF board secretly developed and published its own unauthored position statement, one that went through no consensus-finding process, no scientific review, and bypassed the scientific committee working on the question entirely. Most damningly, the process appears to have been directed by the Trump administration, which has made its disdain towards transgender people entirely clear in a slew of anti-trans executive orders, some going as far as to call transgender people "dishonorable" and "false". The statement's age 19 cutoff matches Trump's January 2025 executive order exactly. It relies heavily on and references the Trump administration's HHS report on gender dysphoria, which I have previously fact-checked and found filled with pseudoscience, discredited theories, and authors connected to anti-trans hate groups. And most importantly, the process appears to have been directly initiated by Trump's HHS department. The letter states that the ASPS statement was "initiated by a federal agency seeking clarifications of medical society positions on this topic." When the board released its nine-page statement on Feb. 3, it blindsided the very experts the organization had assembled to study the question. Seven task force members signed an open letter stating they were "unaware of the statement's authors and what methodology was used." And who celebrated? Within hours, HHS leadership is…

4. Claim: The American Society of Plastic Surgeons broke from scientific consensus on transgender healthcare, proving the consensus was always hollow.

Fact: The ASPS statement was done at the behest of Trump admin officials by a president who was a major donor, bypassing the expert working group.

Fact Check: Jesse Singal Lies About Trans Care At The New York Times The New York Times spreads misinformation about transgender people yet again.

1. The New York Times, unsurprisingly, has released yet another hit piece on transgender people.

This time, it comes from Jesse Singal.

I fact check it in my latest piece.

End your NYT subscription, and put it towards people doing good work on the issue.

Subscribe to support our journalism.

I love your article, but I’m afraid the December letter you link to was from the American Psychiatric Association NOT the American Psychological Association.

These appear to be distinct groups despite sharing the same acronym.

Can you please get clarification from the Psychological Association?

@erininthemorning.com you should also contact Katherine McGuire to get clarification on this statement which is probably going to be cited in court filings opposing gender affirming care now…

Please factcheck this article! It contains a bunch of misinformation that can’t go unchecked!

Please do something about hospitals ending care for trans people!

@jokestress.bsky.social You should probably profile this guy too…

@jokestress.bsky.social you should profile everyone involved in this article on your website!

Seconded! That is really important insider info that people need to know!

Please do an article on ASPS abandoning gender affirming care likely as a result of pressure from the Trump administration!

@erininthemorning.com @transvestigations.bsky.social

@erininthemorning.com @transvestigations.bsky.social please help spread the word on this!

I’m really worried that the WPATH president elect is going to become a hot ticket item that all detrans plaintiffs going forward will ask to testify in their favor…

#DeTransLaw Personal Thoughts:

Varian v. Einhorn Verdict: $2 Million

Liability: 70% Psychologist ($1.4 Million), 30% Surgeon ($600K)

Anti-Trans zealots are completely misinterpreting and exagerating what this verdict means for both GAC and other Detrans Lawsuits, so here are some of my thoughts:

You’re right of course, but how can we trust future juries to recognize this?

Maybe I’m just still pessimistic from the ruling, but I’ve lost faith in juries to notice and consider what should be so obvious…

Then why the f*ck did they rule against him????

How is it different? Does it not use the same theories?

Did you hear Luka Hein’s lawsuit has a summary judgment on February 4. Do you think it’s likely to survive given the Varian ruling?

@erininthemorning.com @transvestigations.bsky.social amazing news, if true!