![](https://i0.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/scotaldntrans.jpg?fit=789%2C460&ssl=1)
The Corner
WHO Admits Evidence Supporting ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ in Children Is ‘Limited and Variable’
![](https://i0.wp.com/www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/scotaldntrans.jpg?fit=789%2C460&ssl=1)
“The science” is moving away from considering “gender-affirming care” as the “settled” and best way to treat children and adolescents experiencing gender confusion. In fact, even the World Health Organization (WHO) just admitted this truth.
Here’s the background. WHO was preparing to push gender-affirming care as the standard of care for treating dysphoric children. But after getting intense pushback, it backed down — and made a cogent, and in my view crucial, admission that should materially impact this debate going forward.
From a just-released WHO FAQ Sheet on the “development of a guideline on the health of trans and gender diverse people:”
The scope [of the guidance] will cover adults only and not address the needs of children and adolescents, because on review, the evidence base for children and adolescents is limited and variable regarding the longer-term outcomes of gender affirming care for children and adolescents. [Emphasis added]
This is huge. California has declared itself a sanctuary state to ensure that gender-dysphoric children have open access to puberty-blocking treatments and surgeries — even against parental wishes. So have other blue states. Maine has a similarly radical bill pending in the legislature. The Biden administration continues to pretend that gender-affirmation is the only way to go in treating children and has even attempted to stifle medical conscience on the issue. Ideological medical groups still peddle the false notion that gender-affirming care is “medically necessary” and life-saving treatment.
That’s all a false and ideological narrative. If woke WHO — under political pressure, to be sure — admits that the evidence for applying the approach in children is “limited and variable,” it is probably even less than that.
Perhaps, at last, the worm has finally turned.