Doctors Withhold Puberty Blockers Study Over Concerns It Could Be ‘Weaponized’ 

A researcher funded by the federal government to study the effects of puberty blockers on transgender youth has chosen not to publish the findings, fearing the results could be "weaponized" against gender-transition treatments for minors.

Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy, the medical director at the Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, began her study in 2015 as part of a larger project on transgender health, which received $9.7 million in funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The study focused on 95 adolescents, averaging 11 years old, who were treated with puberty blockers.

After two years, the research found little to no change in the mental health of the adolescents who received the treatment. Despite this, Dr. Olson-Kennedy has not released the study results, expressing concerns over how the data could be misused.

“I do not want our work to be weaponized,” Dr. Olson-Kennedy told The New York Times. “It has to be exactly on point, clear, and concise. And that takes time.”

The delay in publishing the study’s results has sparked a heated debate, with critics accusing the researcher and the NIH of prioritizing activism over science. Camilo Ortiz, a clinical psychology professor at Long Island University, voiced frustration on social media platform X, stating, “This is not science. This is activism and the NIH should not be funding it. A real scientist accepts what the data show and has an allegiance to the truth.”

Dr. Olson-Kennedy expressed concern that if the results were made public, opponents of puberty blockers might argue that the drugs are ineffective, using the study to bolster claims that they shouldn’t be prescribed to transgender youth.

An NIH spokesperson confirmed that it is up to researchers to determine when and how to publish their findings, though they are encouraged to share results of federally funded studies.

The debate over gender-transition care for minors has intensified across the U.S., with 22 states enacting bans on gender-transition drugs and surgeries for minors, and two others banning only surgeries. As the political and medical debate continues, Dr. Olson-Kennedy’s decision to withhold the study has only added to the controversy surrounding gender-affirming care.

This situation highlights ongoing tensions between scientific research and activism, as well as the complexities involved in publicizing findings that can influence both medical practice and political policy.