House probes NIH after doctor concealed study that disputes puberty blocker benefits

Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Nov 14, 2024 / 07:00 am

A subcommittee in the House of Representatives launched an inquiry into the National Institutes of Health (NIH) after a grant recipient admitted that she concealed findings in a tax-funded study because it failed to show any mental health benefits for children who are prescribed transgender puberty-blocking drugs.

“In light of the NIH grantee’s unwillingness to release the research project’s findings, we ask that you provide documents and information to assist the committee’s oversight of this matter,” Rep. Lisa McClain, the chair of the Oversight and Accountability’s Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services, wrote in a letter to NIH Director Monica Bertagnolli.

Johanna Olson-Kennedy, the leading researcher on the study, told the New York Times three weeks ago that she withheld the study’s results because the findings could bolster criticism of puberty blockers being used on children. The drugs are designed to facilitate a gender transition of a minor by delaying his or her normal development during puberty.

Olson-Kennedy, who works as the medical director of the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, told the Times that she did “not want our work to be weaponized” by critics and lawmakers who want to prohibit doctors from prescribing these drugs to children.

The NIH allocated nearly $10 million of taxpayer money for several projects, which included the research led by Olson-Kennedy to give puberty blockers to 95 children who suffered from gender dysphoria and analyze whether the drugs improved their mental health. The average age for a child enrolled in the study was less than 11 and a half years old and the researchers could not find any mental health benefits.

“We are alarmed that the project’s principal investigator, Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, is withholding publication of the project’s research findings, which cast doubt on the efficacy of the ‘gender affirming’ model, because she believes the findings could be ‘weaponized’ by critics of transgender medical interventions for children,” McClain wrote in the letter.

McClain also accuses Olson-Kennedy of mischaracterizing the study to the Times by telling the reporter that the mental health of the children was “in really good shape” when the study began, even though the researchers previously reported high rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts.

“Deliberately mischaracterizing and withholding the results of the … study has serious implications for the health and safety of children who are subjected to ‘gender affirming’ medical procedures, many of which are irreversible and hold lifelong implications despite lacking adequate scientific support for their efficacy or safety,” the letter adds.

“NIH is responsible for overseeing its extramural research projects to ensure supported researchers practice transparency, exemplify scientific integrity, and are proper stewards of taxpayer funds,” McClain wrote.

The subcommittee requested that the NIH provide all research grant applications and summary statements regarding the broader project about transgender youth, including progress reports, unpublished data, and certain communication documents.

Neither the NIH nor Olson-Kennedy responded to CNA’s request for comment by the time of publication.

Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, a senior ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, told CNA that the House’s inquiry into the grants “seems eminently sensible, given NIH policy that specifies that the results and accomplishments of the activities that it funds should be made available to the research community and to the public at large.”

“This public duty constitutes a basic ethical obligation for researchers who are recipients of public funds (more than $9 million in this case) made available through traditional NIH grants,” Pacholczyk added.

Jane Anderson, the vice president of the American College of Pediatricians, which opposes the use of transgender drugs and surgeries on children, told CNA that “it is crucial that all scientific information be released so families and youth can make truly informed decisions, especially when the research is taxpayer funded.”

“The integrity of medicine, not to mention the safety of our patients, is at risk when we ignore scientific facts for political reasons,” Anderson said.

This is not the first time health care professionals have suppressed information related to the effectiveness of gender transitions of children. 

In 2021, the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) eliminated proposed age-based guidelines that encouraged doctors to wait until children reach a certain age before giving them hormone-altering medications or providing them with transgender surgical procedures. Rather, the organization forwent any age-based suggestions after facing external pressure from the Biden-Harris administration.

Some studies have raised major concerns about puberty blockers, such as a Mayo Clinic study published earlier this year, which found that boys might suffer irreversible harm from the drugs, such as fertility problems and atrophied testes.

Earlier this year, the United Kingdom halted the use of puberty blockers for children after an independent review failed to find comprehensive evidence to support the routine prescription of transgender drugs to minors with gender dysphoria.

President-elect Donald Trump has called the use of transgender drugs and surgeries on minors a form of “child abuse.” He has vowed to instruct the Department of Justice to investigate “Big Pharma and the big hospital networks” to look into whether they are covering up evidence about the harms of gender transitions.