“I have no preconceptions and have every intention to lead our evaluation from a position of neutrality,” he said. “As a geriatrician, I do not treat children and young people for gender dysphoria, and so the first phase of my review will be to listen to people with lived experience and a range of healthcare professionals working in this area.”
That is not a position of neutrality. The healthcare professionals working in this area have been shown to be zealots with an agenda. Listening to them as though they were neutral and objective is what got us into this mess in the first place.
People with lived experience are similarly biased, being those who believe they have a gender identity, so are true believers in the ideology of genderism. Many have also undergone irreversible medical treatment to affirm their belief, which is likely to have reinforced their beliefs further, since rejecting them would now force them to face the possibility that they may have been harmed.
The first step should be to define exactly what is meant by the term gender dysphoria and exactly what this physical treatment for a mental condition is trying to achieve. Accepting gender dysphoria as some sort of quasi religious belief of a soul in the wrong body, or a fixed gender in the mind which requires a matching body is far from neutral.