This is a bit dry, but I think it's worth highlighting. (I fully admit I haven't read through that much of it myself).
Jack Turban is one of the most prominent pro-childhood-transitioning voices in the US. He's currently involved in at least one of the court battles about banning medical transition for minors.
This piece goes through the evidence he's presenting. As Turban is digging up every potential pro-transition scientific evidence, it's a good review of the current state of the literature - both what we actually know, and how Turban is (mis)representing it.
Abridged version
Full version
Got this via Jesse Singal - his commentary:
The extent to which Jack Turban, one of the leading voices in the youth GD debate, creeps right up to the line of lying even in a document he is filing in court under penalty of perjury suggests something has gone profoundly and dangerously wrong.
I have not vetted every single claim in this Medium post. But the claims I'm most familiar with are accurate, and are very much in line with what I've seen in my own deep dives into Turban's work: a chronic inability to accurately describe both individual studies and broader trends in the research literature. There's often a lack of awareness of basic methodological issues that pop up in the first semester of Stats 101.
He should stop injecting large quantities of misinformation and misunderstanding into a fraught and important subject.
(It's worth noting that Singal himself is not in favour of these bills, believing that the courts should not be intervening in medical treatment. But he's fully aware how bad/non-existent the arguments for the "treatment" are.)