A Trump administration-ordered review of the science behind gender-transition treatments for children has now cleared a major hurdle: independent scientific peer review, the New York Post reported Wednesday.
The final version of the report, which concludes there is little solid evidence to justify puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors, was released Wednesday after being vetted by outside experts.
Lead author Dr. Leor Sapir, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, told the Post that the report was examined by 10 individual experts and research groups.
None, he said, identified major flaws in its central finding that U.S. doctors should pause routine use of gender-transition interventions for minors until more is known about long-term outcomes.
Reviewers included Dr. Richard Santen, a University of Virginia professor emeritus and former president of the Endocrine Society — one of the main professional groups that has promoted "gender-affirming" approaches. Santen described the Health and Human Services (HHS) review as "scientifically sound," Sapir told the Post.
The report stems from Executive Order 14187, signed by President Donald Trump shortly after taking office.
The order accused parts of the medical establishment of "maiming" vulnerable teens with experimental gender treatments that "must end" and directed HHS to assess the evidence underpinning current standards of care for minors who identify as transgender.
That assessment found that many of the studies cited to justify puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries in young people were of "very low quality."
The authors said there is limited reliable information on long-term psychological outcomes, quality of life, and rates of regret or detransition among patients who undergo these interventions as minors.
Based on that evidence review, the report recommends sharply limiting the use of puberty blockers and other gender-transition treatments for children and teenagers in the United States.
It notes that the United Kingdom has already moved to ban routine use of puberty blockers for minors outside of research settings. Instead, the authors urge a focus on psychotherapy and careful psychological support while more rigorous data are gathered.
Transgender advocacy groups fiercely attacked the report when it was first released in May, accusing it of bias and objecting that the authors' names were initially withheld.
Sapir pushed back, stressing that the nine authors worked independently from HHS and that most are politically liberal and registered Democrats, describing the project as "bipartisan" in spirit.
The author team includes scholars and clinicians such as MIT professor Dr. Alex Byrne; Evgenia Abbruzzese of the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine; Duke University medical ethicist Dr. Farr Curlin; Colorado State University philosopher Dr. Moti Gorin; psychiatrist Dr. Kristopher Kaliebe; endocrinologist Dr. Michael Laidlaw; Baylor College of Medicine psychiatrist Dr. Kathleen McDeavitt; and health policy researcher Dr. Yuan Zhang, according to the report.
In addition to Santen, seven other experts across pediatrics, psychiatry, ethics, and nursing participated in the peer review process.
Sapir said their critiques did not challenge the report's core conclusion: that the evidence base for gender-transition interventions in minors is weak.
Critics "can condemn the report all they want," Sapir said, but so far, he argues, no one has identified a clear factual error.
"I encourage everyone to avoid forming opinions based on what others say. Read the peer reviews and our responses in the Supplement and make up your own mind," Sapir said in a post to X.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.