The International Olympic Committee is set to issue a new blanket rule which would prohibit trans-identified male athletes from competing in the female category. The policy is not set to be formally announced until after the new year, and it is unclear if the guidance will be implemented prior to the start of the 2026 winter Olympics. According to the Post, the revised policy was motivated by findings by the IOC’s sporting committee, which conducted an evidence review of what’s known about the physical advantages possessed by biological male athletes. “It was a very scientific, factual and unemotional presentation which quite clearly laid out the evidence” a source told the Post.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops formally voted to prohibit pediatric medical interventions for dysphoric minors in catholic hospitals. Specifically, the bishops approved revisions to their ethical and religious directives that help guide catholic health care institutions, incorporating documents by the Vatican (Dignitas Infinitas) and U.S. Bishops (Moral Limits to the Technological Manipulation of the Human Body) that address “gender ideology” more broadly. According to the Catholic Health Association, nearly one in seven patients are treated at Catholic hospitals each day.
Last week, the en banc Sixth Circuit ruled that schools cannot compel students to use cross-sex pronouns for trans-identified students, overturning a decision by a federal judge and a panel of the appeals court. The ruling repudiates a school board policy which allowed the school to discipline students for accurately describing the biological sex of their classmates. The policy was challenged on 1st amendment grounds, but it was originally upheld by both a U.S. district judge and a 6th circuit panel. In the latest ruling, however, the court determined that the burden falls on the school district to prove that its policy is constitutionally sound. “Unlike, say, a political diatribe about transgender rights in math class, the mere use of biological pronouns does not entail ‘aggressive, disruptive action.’ Nor does the school district suggest that such speech has ever disrupted any school activity in the past,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Eric Murphy.
NPR reports that the U.S. Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) intends to unveil two proposed rules later this month which would have implications for pediatric medical transition. One rule would prohibit Medicaid and CHIP reimbursement for “affirming care” interventions for patients under 18 and 19, respectively. An additional rule would aim to block the receipt of Medicare and Medicaid funds to entities that continue to render transition procedures to dysphoric minors. Although the latter rule is being framed by critics as an “unprecedented” use of executive power to shape medical care, it’s important to recognize that the Biden administration issued a mirror version of this rule, which forced hospitals to render these very practices at the risk of losing federal funds, however, the rule was vacated by the courts.
The Daily Signal chronicles a growing controversy over a Continuing Medical Education (CME) course designed by the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM), which was suspended at Washington State University after activist pressure forced an investigation by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME). Notably, SEGM’s CME underwent nearly a year of rigorous vetting to ensure it conformed with national evidence standards established by the ACCME. Activist criticism of the CME has little to do with the content itself, and more to do with SEGM’s affiliation. Activist Erin Reed pointed out that SEGM was labeled a “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center, however, critics observe that this designation is wielded as a strategic weapon to silence dissenting critics who have concerns about the weak evidence base for pediatric medical transition. “Allowing ideology or activism to override scientific evidence and professional judgment undermines both patient care and confidence in our medical institutions” a SEGM spokesperson said.
In a significant new paper in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, Colin Wright draws on evolutionary and developmental evidence to explain why there are exactly two sexes. Wright also provides rebuttals to five recurring arguments often used to undermine the sex binary. “Sex is binary (i.e., there are only two sexes) in all anisogamous species and males and females are defined universally by the type of gamete they have the biological function to produce—not by karyotypes, secondary sexual characteristics, or other correlates” Wright argues.
The Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM) released the third issue of its SEGM Digest, which provides useful overviews of influential publications in the field of pediatric gender medicine. This iteration of the digest contains primers of new studies on detransition, the psychological and physical effects of puberty blockers, and how Finland’s gender service came to adopt a more conservative approach to treating gender dysphoria. Furthermore, the digest also includes an overview of a new paper on psychotherapeutic approaches to treating gender dysphoria informed by the UK’s Cass Review, and overviews of key papers on obstacles to research on sex and gender, and the risks that pediatric gender medicine poses to women and girls.
In the American Journal of Medicine, Charles J. Lockwood and Jay Wolfson explain how the pull of social justice activism led to mission drift among professional medical associations. They go on to explain how the replacement of open inquiry with activist dogma chills debate and erodes public trust in medicine’s credibility. The authors also highlight how unquestioning adherence to activist dogma prevents the field of medicine from developing effective solutions to complex medical problems. “The path forward lies not in reaction but restoration. Professional organizations must reclaim their founding purpose—to advance expertise, promote inquiry, and safeguard academic freedom. Their credibility rests on competence and candor, not conformity” the authors conclude.
In the Dallas Morning News, former Texas Medical Association trustee Dr. Lisa Ehrlich explains why my MI report on ideological capture within TMA should be a “wake up call for policy transparency and reform.” For context, last month I wrote a report chronicling how TMA came to adopt controversial positions on “affirming care” that are at odds with the principles of evidence-based medicine. Ehrlich explains the costs of replacing evidence-based medicine and robust debate with fashionable advocacy, particularly the costs to patient’s and their welfare. “We can allow our association to become captive to a narrow ideological bloc, or we can reclaim it as the voice of physicians serving patients across Texas. The choice, and responsibility, are ours” Ehrlich urges TMA members.
Joseph Figliolia
Policy Analyst
News
