New England Journal of Medicine Publishes Article Attacking Cass Review

[UtopiaPlanitia]

Dave Hewitt has written an analysis of the recent article attacking the Cass Review that was published in the NEJM.

Link to NEJM article (academic paywall): https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMp2413747

Link to Hewitt's discussion article: https://www.voidifremoved.co.uk/p/new-england-journal-of-misinformation

Excerpts from Hewitt's article:

"New England Journal of Misinformation

In January 2025, the New England Journal of Medicine published an article titled “The Future of Gender-Affirming Care — A Law and Policy Perspective on the Cass Review”. The article is little more than a blatant attack on the integrity of the Cass Review, and sets out the following main points:

• The Cass Review sets an unattainable bar for evidence and violates international standards
• It was secretive and biased
• Its methodology was flawed

While throwing in a few other potshots for good measure, and ending in some absolute gibberish about gender policing.

While only a “perspective” piece, that it was published in the form it is reflects quite badly on the editorial standards of NEJM. That is, the piece isn’t simply bad or contentious, but factually wrong in such a fundamental way that it renders the whole article incoherent…..

….The Review’s cautious approach to the evidence for paediatric transition offer a stark rebuttal to those arguing in court that this is a robust, safe and evidence-based practice. Unable to produce better evidence, advocates have been left with no alternative than to attempt to undermine the Cass Review. It has to be condemned and discredited, and so we get contributions such as this, published complete with obvious, foundational errors in the NEJM.

There is nothing wrong with the authors having a strong opinion on what they call “gender-affirmative care”. There is nothing wrong with the NEJM publishing that opinion, as part of the cut and thrust of academic disagreement. But that is not what this is - it is a shabby attack on the Cass Review, a recitation of activist talking points in service of a wider political agenda, and one in which the NEJM is an all-too-willing participant. The Cass Review has to be destroyed, for The Greater Good."

It’s just a bit bla bla bla innit?

To me it almost feels like TRAs are trying the citation laundering method again - they used that method as 'proof' that puberty blockers were safe and effective for gender distress https://justdad7180.substack.com/p/reversibility-of-puberty-blockers

Now they seem to be doing the same to try and cast doubt on the Cass Review. It's basically throwing mud and hoping that it sticks or at least clouds the discussion so that normal people will think there's no smoke without fire so this Cass Review must be fishy in some way (scuse the mixed metaphors, it's late 😵).

It’s heartbreaking for me to grasp the scale of capture of academic and otherwise esteemed journals.

I thought it would be my duty interest and privilege to serve in clinical service and research reviews to my retirement and beyond.

Right now, I can’t contemplate it. The whole field like it’s left integrity, fairness, and honesty far behind.

I recognise this thread from my own field and various activities.

x.com/garylfrancione/status/1898760312649641988?

You have my sincere sympathy 💐

I contemplated pursuing a career in academia but developments over the last ten years have made me glad that I chose not to go ahead with it. I wouldn't be able to keep quiet in the face of ideological nonsense and I wouldn't have the resources to fight off any resulting witch hunt.

"The Cass Review sets an unattainable bar for evidence and violates international standards"

International standards written by the trans privileges advocates themselves without a base of evidence...

The 'intellectuals' in the TRA movement are all about ensuring free surgery and hormones on demand, so they envisage any standards as being onerous and unreasonable.

Interesting, with everything else with which they’ve prevailed why wouldn’t they believe their version of evidence free medicine and international standards should prevail.

Jesse Singal piece on it - mostly above the paywall. I think it might actually have tipped him over from exasperated to angry.

Key TL;DR from below the paywall:

"This is an error. An error in what is supposed to be one of the premier medical journals in the world. Unless the “response” in question constitutes a correction of this and many other problems, there’s really nothing to discuss here. So I’m publishing this and staking out a more assertive position than usual: To repeat myself, if Eric Rubin and Debra Malina don’t correct this, there is no reason to trust anything they publish. That’s it."

https://jessesingal.substack.com/p/if-the-new-england-journal-of-medicine

I’m shocked at how multiple serious journals over the years have let their normally strict standards slide for articles discussing Genderism and related medical procedures. It makes no sense for them to weaken their excellent reputations except if you consider they are doing it for ideological reasons. And if they are willing to lie on this issue for ideological reasons then it makes me trust them less on other issues.

The whole point of the scientific method and peer review publishing is to try and get at the facts of any particular issue, to try and account for or weed out human bias. I am so disgusted that in recent years academics and journals have shown themselves to be comfortable with promoting bias and ideology. It reduces trust in the system overall and not only allows Genderist cranks to publish, it opens chinks in the system that allow cranks in other areas of contention (such as flat earthers, or climate change deniers) to criticise important work as potentially being lies too.

Genderism truly destroys and subverts everything it touches because the lie at the heart of the ideology cannot stand up to rationality and reality, which means its adherents have to ignore the truth even if it’s staring them in the face.