Advocates of gender-affirming care say it’s evidence-based.
But now, newly released internal files from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) prove that the practice of transgender medicine is neither scientific nor medical.
American Medical Association, The Endocrine Society, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and thousands of doctors worldwide rely on WPATH. It is considered the leading global authority on gender medicine.
And yet WPATH’s internal files, which include written discussions and a video, reveal that its members know they are creating victims and not getting “informed consent.”
Victims include a 10-year-old girl, a 13-year-old developmentally delayed adolescent, and individuals suffering from schizophrenia and other serious mental illnesses.
The injuries described in the WPATH Files include sterilization, loss of sexual function, liver tumors, and death.
WPATH members indicate repeatedly that they know that many children and their parents don’t understand the effects that puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries will have on their bodies. And yet, they continue to perform and advocate for gender medicine.
The WPATH Files prove that gender medicine is comprised of unregulated and pseudoscientific experiments on children, adolescents, and vulnerable adults. It will go down as one of the worst medical scandals in history.
Why I Am Publishing WPATH Files And How I Got Them
The written WPATH Files come from WPATH’s member discussion forum, which runs on software provided by DocMatter.
Ninety seconds of the 82-minute video was made public last year. We are making the full video available for the first time.
One or more people gave me the WPATH Files, and my colleagues and I attempted to summarize them as a series of articles. We quickly realized the topic was too sensitive, complex, and large to be dealt with as a work of journalism, and we moved the project to the research institute I founded seven years ago, Environmental Progress (EP).
The Files are authentic. We redacted most names and left only those individuals who are leading gender medicine practitioners to whom we sent “right-of-reply” emails. We know WPATH members discussed our emails internally. No WPATH leader or member has denied that the Files are anything other than what they appear to be.
EP is publishing a 70-page report to provide context for the 170 pages of WPATH Files. Mia Hughes is the author of the report. It and accompanying summary materials can be downloaded at the link below. That link also provides a link to the full WPATH video.
What follows are simply a few highlights. People with a serious interest in the topic should read the report and all the files:
“We're explaining things to people who haven't even had biology in high school…”
“I think the thing you have to remember about kids is that we're often explaining these sorts of things to people who haven't even had biology in high school yet,” says Dan Metzger, an endocrinologist.
“The 14-year-olds, you just... It's like talking [about] diabetic complications with a 14-year-old. They don't care. They're not going to die. They're going to live forever, right? So I think when we're doing informed consent, that's still a big lacuna.”
“14 year old trans female who started transition since she was 4… wants to have Gender Affirming Surgery”
“I’ve recently received questions from an [‘Assigned Female At Birth’] pre-menarche 10 y/o patient about whether blockers will ‘stunt’ his growth…”
“It is very difficult to ask that they wait until age 16...”
A “16 y/o patient…found to have two liver masses… the likely offending agents were the hormones…”
The problem is that drugs can cause tumors, even, apparently, in people as young as 16 years old.
“To what degree… providers discuss actual rates of surgical complications… (e.g., pain…additional surgeries, necrotic tissue, infection, hematomas…”
Many young patients experiencing gender distress do not appear to understand that they may suffer serious consequences from long-term hormone use and genital surgery.
“I feel the best time for surgery in the U.S. is the summer before their last year of high school.”
Despite the widespread and growing expression of concern within the WPATH Files over the negative side effects of gender medicine, WPATH members urge that irreversible surgeries take place when adolescents are just 16 or 17 years old.
“Most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of brain space to really talk about it seriously.”
One WPATH member says, “It's out of their developmental range sometimes to understand the extent to which some of these medical interventions are impacting them.”
“We try to talk about it, but most of the kids are nowhere in any kind of a brain space to really, really, really talk about it seriously.”
Many Parents Don’t Understand What Will Happen To Their Children
“I try to kind of do whatever I can to help them understand best they, best I can,” says a therapist. “But what really disturbs me is when the parents can't tell me what they need to know about a medical intervention that apparently they signed off for."
“In a developmentally delayed 13yo… what is the ethical approach?”
The situation of obtaining informed consent is complicated further when the adolescents are also developmentally delayed and, in the case below, “may not reach the emotional and cognitive developmental bar set” by WPATH’s already very low standards of care.
“Oh, the dog isn’t doing it for you?”
Many gender medicine victims are filled with regret that they were sterilized. Nobody knows this more than the doctors who mistreated them. At times, their response to such regret appears callous.
“I follow a lot of kids into their mid twenties, I'm always like, ‘Oh, the dog isn't doing it for you, right?’ They're like, ‘No, I just found this wonderful partner and now we want kids. So you know, it doesn't surprise me.”
“I’m unaware of an individual claiming ability to orgasm when they were blocked at Tanner 2.”
Many gender medicine patients lose sexual function, including experiencing orgasm. As such, they are not only deprived of sexual pleasure, they are significantly undermining their ability to form long-lasting romantic relationships.
It’s clear from the Files that even many people within gender medicine do not understand this.
On January 14, 2022, the surgeon and President of WPATH, Marci Bowers, explained this reality in a low-key way.
Seven days later, a WPATH member asked Bowers to clarify.
“After 8-10 years of [testosterone, they] developed hepatocarcinomas… died a couple of months after.”
For some gender medicine patients, there are fates worse than both sterility and loss of sexual function.
Part II: Mental Illness
“A Patient Who Became Dangerous”
On an unknown date, a San Francisco-based surgeon named Thomas Satterwhite posted an urgent new message to WPATH’s internal message board.
“I had a patient who became dangerous/threatening to our care team post-op,” he wrote, “which ultimately ended in a restraining order.”
Satterwhite explained that “This patient had undiagnosed mood disorders that did not surface until post-op, after which, she travelled around the country to find other surgeons to provide care.”
It’s a chilling story, and one that raises many questions about the ethics and legality of gender-affirming medicine.
At the top of that list is how did Satterwhite and his colleagues miss the fact that the person they operated upon had a serious psychiatric condition?
But Satterwhite was focused on a more prosaic question: What was the best “medicolegal” way that he could warn other doctors and health care providers that his former patient was “potentially dangerous”?
There is no evidence in the WPATH Files, nor elsewhere, that the experience shook Satterwhite enough to question whether gender-affirming care is, in reality, committed to the maxim, “First, do no harm.”
Our Awful History Of Mistreating Mental Illness
Nations have struggled to care properly for people with mental illness and psychiatric disorders for centuries.
After every past scandal, we pledge to do better next time, relying more on science than ideology.
Readers of the WPATH Files may walk away with the sense that we have learned nothing.
Repeatedly throughout the WPATH Files, we see gender medicine practitioners waive away evidence that mental illnesses and psychiatric disorders have been misdiagnosed as gender dysphoria.
The WPATH Files are a picture of people single-mindedly committed to the hammer of gender medicine and thus seeing every patient who comes to them as a nail.
“Disordered eating,” “purposeful malnutrition,” and a “high prevalence of eating disorders”
A therapist raises concerns in a message about the age of a patient.
“I have an incoming 13yo (soon to be 14 yo)... I was under the impression that is more the exception to start for kids under 16, not the norm…”
But the person has another piece of troubling information.
“A possible complication,” the therapist warns, is that it “sounds like there is some purposeful malnutrition and restrictive eating for ‘a more non-binary appearance.’”
The chief medical officer of a health center in Texas chimed in that the therapist had best hurry the 13-year-old teenager along the gender-affirming path because “waiting appears to increase the rate of suicide,” which is one of several pseudoscientific myths repeated within the WPATH Files.
“Something is off… I am wondering if they might have schizoaffective disorder or schizophrenia”
“...I was surprised to find that several of my clients met criteria for dissociative disorders...”
“Someone can have schizophrenia and be ready for surgery…”
“...I have noted a high incidence of dissociative disorders...”
“I have operated on three DID [Dissociative Identity Disorder] patients... All three did okay out to the six month mark....”
“In the last 15 years, I had to regrettably decline writing only one letter, mainly b/c the person evaluated was in active psychosis and hallucinated during the assessment session...”
“They had alters who were both male and female gender and it was imperative to get all alters who would be effected by [Hormone Replacement Therapy] to be aware and consent to the changes."
Part III: Ethics
“I’m not aware of any other medical procedure that requires the approval of a therapist.”
Frequently, WPATH members push back against “gatekeeping,” including the requirement for sound mental health before undergoing a lifelong regime of drugs and surgery.
“If an individual patient feels that they made a mistake… be careful with that not letting that change the way others receive care.”
At times, WPATH members speak of the growing number of “detransitioners” who regret gender medicine.
Some gender medicine practitioners express less concern for the detransitioners than for the threat they may pose to gender medicine.
“Patients need to own and take active responsibility for medical decisions, especially those that have potentially permanent effects."
There is evidence within the WPATH Files of WPATH members, as well as its president, Marci Bowers, blaming their victims.
“Those conversations can be ongoing even after the intervention has occurred.”
Readers of the WPATH Files may be struck, as we were, by how flexible WPATH members were in rationalizing their mistreatments.
Faced with rising amounts of regret and detransition, WPATH members describe what’s happening as a “gender journey” not a single “transition.”
And faced with their own failure to achieve informed consent, WPATH members re-frame it as a “process,” and an “on-going conversation.”
“...informed consent [is a]... process... not one conversation at one point in time ... those conversations don't have to stop once the Medicaid and intervention has been started. Those conversations can be ongoing even after the intervention has occurred.”
“What has been currently happening is, frankly, not what we need to be doing, ethically.”
As we saw above, many WPATH members waive away the evidence of medical mistreatment.
But others appear genuinely concerned by the lack of informed consent.
A therapist describes talking to parents after they meet with a medical doctor.
“I would go in, and say, ‘Okay, so tell me what you learned.’ They would be like, ‘We have no idea what they were talking about.’
“Part of it is that they feel less deferential to the kind of doctor I am than the kind of doctor the medical doctor is.
"And because they really are seeking the care, they're just going to say they know when they really aren't picking up on what's happening.
“And so I think the more we can normalize that it is okay to not get this right away, that it is okay to have questions, is, you know, the more we're going to actually do a real informed consent process than what I think has been currently happening and that I think is, frankly, not what we need to be doing ethically.”
You can tell that her comment had an impact from the long and awkward pause that followed.
The @NYTimes today notes that in one Epstein email there is "peculiar combination" of "pizza" and "grape soda."
In truth, on at least five occasions, Epstein’s urologist, Harry Fisch, uses the words “pizza” and “grape soda” in strange ways.
In making this observation, I am not endorsing any theory about what the words mean.
However, I think the author @DraperRobert should have noted that there are at least five and more likely at least six mentions of pizza and grape soda, and that in one case, the words appear to be about sex, since they come after discussion of erectile dysfunction pills.
Here the cases:
1. “After you use them, wash your hands and let’s go get pizza and grape soda.”
Their text messaging exchange begins with Epstein emailing Fisch to request Stendra, a fast-acting, second generation erectile dysfunction drug that was designed for "greater spontaneity."
The "them" Fisch is referring to are clearly the pills.
Then, in separate messages, Fisch writes:
2. “What time do you want to get pizza and grape soda tomorrow?”
3. “Pizza and grape soda… Nough said”
4. “Pizza and grape soda tomorrow for lunch?”
5. “First we get a slide of pizza with grape soda… Then the pop tart” to which Epstein replies, “Wow.”
6. And someone whose name is redacted, but is almost certainly Fisch, as he is sending an attached document from “Veru-Equity” which is Fisch’s company, appears to make clear that he is using a coded phrase when he writes, in an email to Epstein,” Let’s go for pizza and grape soda again. No one else can understand.”
I encourage people to read the messages themselves. In no case did I get the feeling that they were actually talking about pizza and grape soda.
Of course, it is easy to see things that aren't there, and so there is some non-zero possibility they are really into pizza and grape soda.
But if it's all a terrible misunderstanding then, given that the story is now in the New York Times, Fisch should be glad to clear up what they were talking about.
I emailed Fisch at several of his email addresses on Wednesday and did not heard back. The Times says it did too.
I believe it is reasonable that authorities should ask to interview Fisch to understand what it was that they were discussing.
I encourage people to read the emails in their full context and share your thoughts. They are easy to search for and find here:
Not all references to food in the Epstein Files are code words, but some definitely are, including references to "shrimp," as I explain here. We need an independent investigation and real reform as our Intelligence Community is operating outside of civilian control.
The recently released Jeffrey Epstein files neither reveal a conspiracy to traffic underage girls to powerful men, nor a relationship to the Intelligence Community (IC), nor a client list, according to some in the media and online. None of the hundreds of CDs, videos, and photographs showed men with young women, notes the Associated Press. And the FBI “found scant evidence the well-connected financier led a sex trafficking ring serving powerful men,” notes AP.
But the Epstein Files do, in fact, provide even more evidence than we already had that Epstein trafficked underage girls to powerful men and that he had ties with both the IC and the Justice Department. The Files reveal that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick misled the public about his relationship with Epstein, which continued years after he had claimed, and included at least one business deal. And they reveal that a powerful UK diplomat, Peter Mandelson, the former ambassador to the United States, illegally shared confidential state financial secrets with Epstein, and appeared in his underwear in at least one photo. The new evidence forced Mandelson to resign, leave the House of Lords, and nearly brought down the Keir Starmer government.
To be sure, there is false and misleading information in the Epstein Files. There may not be any CIA files on Epstein. There appears to be no client list. At least one of the alleged Epstein victims lied. And there is no evidence for some sensational claims. Moreover, there are FBI reports of testimony from clearly unreliable people, attesting, for example, to witnessing mass murder and cannibalism. Some online are view nearly every food reference as a code word for pedophilia or worse, imagining evidence and seeing connections that simply aren’t there.
While there was an investigation, the files make clear that the FBI had a list of co-conspirators with Epstein, who are in the Epstein Files, engaging in behaviors to recruit women to engage in what is effectively prostitution, whom the FBI never investigated.
An FBI employee on July 7, 2019, emailed a colleague to ask, “When you get a chance can you give me an update on the status of the 10 CO conspirators?” The email named “Brunel” and “Maxwell,” references to Jean-Luc Brunel, a French recruiter of fashion models who was under investigation for raping minors, and convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell.
Another FBI document lists all 10 co-conspirators, and they include the foudner of Victoria's Secret, and Epstein’s assistant, Lesley Groff.
We know that Epstein had installed hidden cameras, a surveillance room, and produced hundreds of videos spying on people on CDs and tape.
The CIA so valued Epstein’s attorney, Kathy Ruemmler, the White House counsel for President Barack Obama, that its Director gave her the agency’s highest award. The Director of the CIA under Biden, William Burns, met with, or was scheduled to meet with, Epstein at least three times when he was a State Department official. And, in the 1990s, Wexner and Epstein helped relocate a CIA front organization, Southern Air Transport, from Miami to Columbus, Ohio, where Wexner lived.
Epstein considered using a former “CIA plane to transport prisoners to Guantanamo Bay…called a Torture Plane,” according to Epstein’s pilot, Larry Visoski, in an email.
Ruemmler at one point emails Epstein to say, “Yes, I am really here,” to which Epstein responds, “it looks like a cia drop,” tradecraft jargon for an intelligence exchange.
Epstein, through his lawyer, tried to get information out of the CIA about himself, and the CIA responded, saying it looked and found nothing. But by denying an “open or otherwise acknowledged” affiliation, the CIA legally protected itself from having to confirm or deny covert, unacknowledged, or informal relationships, such as being a confidential informant, a foreign intelligence asset, or a non-official contractor.
These new revelations come at a time when even mainstream news media are reporting on more evidence that Epstein may not have killed himself in August 2019. Noted CBS, “investigators reviewing surveillance footage from the night of Jeffrey Epstein’s death observed an orange-colored shape moving up a staircase” toward his cell. An FBI memorandum describes the fuzzy image as “possibly an inmate.” And CBS reported that “Prison employees interviewed by CBS News said escorting an inmate at that hour would have been highly unusual.”
So what does it all mean? Who was Epstein and what was he doing?
To answer those questions, we need to take a closer look at the code words.
When Nicole Junkermann, an Epstein lover, says “Wow!” after he indicates he might be willing to have a baby with her, Epstein replies, “Is that a code word” to which she replied “No i am surprised.” In one exchange, a woman, whose name is redacted, but is almost certainly Nadia Marcinko (a.k.a., Naďa Marcinková), Epstein’s Slovak-born pilot, asks him to fly with her. He says, “Is that a code word?” And she replies, “I really meant fly… would your answer differ if it were a code word?”
While most of the Epstein Files emails that use the word “shrimp” appear to refer to the seafood, some appear not to. Someone whose name is redacted emails Epstein to say, “Call Talia, she will give you massage. And she looks better then ‘shrimp’ anyway. And good with Massages.” The person is using shrimp in the context of “massage” which in many emails appears to refer to massage with sex...
Calling anti-ICE riots an "insurrection" or "insurgency... poses dangers," says @nytimes. It "legitimizes the use of violence," says a CSIS expert.
Funny, then, how The Times labeled January 6 an "insurrection" and the same CSIS expert called J6 a "terrorist incident."
The Times uses the word "insurgency" rather than "insurrection" for its headline, even though not a single one of the people the article criticizes uses that word. Three use the word "insurrection" and one uses the word "revolution."
Perhaps that's because the Times knows that it led the charge to label January 6 as an "insurrection," and that it is now engaging in flagrant hypocrisy.
Even more disturbing is that the article quotes Seth G. Jones @SethGJones saying, “When you start using the language of warfare and treating someone that has an opposing view as a terrorist or as an insurgent, that legitimizes the use of violence against them."
Well, that's precisely what Jones and his coauthors did in a 2022 @CSIS report, "Pushed to Extremes: Domestic Terrorism amid Polarization and Protest," which labeled January 6 as "the most prominent instance" of a domestic "terrorist incident."
It was already clear that Alex Pretti was interfering in a law enforcement operation. Now, new @BBC video shows Pretti kicking out the taillight of an ICE SUV and wrestling with ICE agents. His gun is sticking out of his waistband. He screams & spits. He is deranged & dangerous.
In this clip, you can clearly see Pretti refusing to go to ground — just as he refused to do so when he was shot.
Congrats to @thenewsmovement and @BBCNews for their big scoop.
The news media irresponsibly downplayed or didn't properly report on how Pretti was deliberately interfering in a law enforcement operation on the day he was killed.
At a minimum he recklessly waved through traffic on the street and physically confronted ICE, as the image below clearly shows.
I shouldn't have to say this but some people need to hear it: I'm not defending the shooting. It was obviously a mistake. There should be a full investigation and people should be held accountable.
But it is also the case that Democrats, influencers, and the media are getting leftists killed by encouraging them to interfere with law enforcement operations and telling them that they are fighting Nazis.
Pretti showed exceedingly bad judgement in openly wearing a gun as he attacked an ICE vehicle. He showed similarly bad judgement interfering in the ICE operation on Saturday.
Pretti in the new video appears to be in the grip of that very familiar form of derangement.
Here is a link to the full @thenewsmovement video.
I saw some people have been trying to put Community Notes on this video. If you watch it, you will see that it is definitely Pretti, there is no evidence of AI manipulation, and the provenance of the video is known.
Most of the debate since yesterday has focused, understandably, on whether the ICE agent acted in what he perceived to be self-defense. Whatever the case, it’s clear that, by encouraging people to interfere in law enforcement operations, the Left is getting people killed.
A Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in Minnesota shot a second person dead yesterday. Most of the debate since then has focused, understandably, on whether the ICE agent acted in what he perceived to be self-defense.
Whatever the case, it’s clear that, by encouraging people to interfere in law enforcement operations, the Left is getting people killed. Videos show both victims, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, impeding law enforcement operations, which progressive nonprofits, Democrats, and liberal influencers have been encouraging for months.
Good drove her vehicle perpendicular to block traffic while her partner taunted ICE officers. Pretti intervened at least twice, first by waving traffic through on the street and again as an ICE officer sought to subdue another person interfering in the operation, triggering the agent to use pepper spray against him.
In saying this, I am not defending the decisions and behaviors of the ICE officers or anyone else. The killings are a tragedy. And there is a worthwhile debate underway over ICE tactics, separate from the specific behaviors of Good and Pretti.
We don’t know what was in the minds of Good and Pretti specifically, but Democrats, progressives, and anti-ICE activists have for years called ICE and the Trump administration fascist and compared them to the Nazis. On January 19, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz called ICE “Donald Trump’s modern-day Gestapo.” Last year, in California, Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation to block ICE from hiding its identities. The Los Angeles mayor called them a “reign of terror.” And a few days ago, the Lieutenant Governor of Minnesota urged citizens to “put your body on the line” to block ICE protests.
Walz and other Democrats have blocked state and local law enforcement from working with ICE, which has contributed to increasingly risky behavior by anti-ICE activists like Good and Pretti, and thus growing danger to everyone involved. There were no Minneapolis police visible in the videos of the Good and Pretti deaths.
And many of America’s largest progressive cities and states are all openly defiant of federal law, declaring themselves “sanctuaries” that protect illegal migrants from the federal government.
California, New York, Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and others are “sanctuary states”. At the same time, New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, Oakland, San Diego, Sacramento, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Denver, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Madison, Milwaukee, Boston, Cambridge, Somerville, Philadelphia, Washington, Baltimore, Newark, Jersey City, Austin, Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, Chapel Hill, Durham, Asheville, Tucson, Phoenix, Las Vegas, and Reno, are “sanctuary cities.”
The underlying problem is that for decades, schools, Hollywood, and the media have made clear that we should risk and even sacrifice our own lives to stop fascism and Nazism. And yet neither ICE raids nor Trump are fascist, and it is offensive to compare them to the Nazis.
The Nazis rounded up Jewish citizens and shipped them to death camps. ICE, by contrast, is detaining foreigners who the government believes committed criminal offenses beyond coming to the US illegally. No nation in the world has allowed more people to enter illegally. Nor has any treated them with greater due process than the US is doing.
The American people elected Trump president, like it or not, and the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause in Article VI establishes that federal law prevails over conflicting state or local laws. It ensures the Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties are the “supreme Law of the Land,” binding state courts and governments. The ICE raids may be bad politics, but there is no question that they are constitutional.
While some Democrats and progressives know their language is hyperbolic, half of the individuals surveyed told pollsters last year that Trump is a fascist. Such radical beliefs appear to have partly motivated two assassination attempts against Trump and the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
While the radical Left has for decades called its political opponents fascists, these views were until recently marginal views, even within the Democratic Party. Moreover, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Bernie Sanders, and Hillary Clinton all spoke out against illegal migration until 2016. So what changed? Why did so many Americans come to view a democratically elected president and law enforcement operations as equivalent to fascism? What radicalized the Left?
Part of the answer is bad information. Many progressives believe ICE is simply sweeping up hard-working and law-abiding immigrants, and do not know that 64 percent of immigrants detained since Trump took office in January 2025 had criminal convictions or pending charges, in addition to having broken the law by entering and working in the country without a visa.
For some, labeling Trump as a fascist was simply a political tactic and not something they believed. But many others believe it, as the polling data shows.
Many people, both liberals and conservatives, believe progressives like Good and Pretti are acting out of empathy and sympathy for migrants. But if they are, it is purely ideologically driven, not from any real-world understanding of migrant communities. Few of the white progressives protesting ICE have ever spoken more than a few words to much less gotten to know illegal immigrants, even those who work for them as cleaners, cooks, and gardeners, much less come to understand their lives...
So “60 Minutes” straight up lied. Plus, they could have gone to a White House press briefing or asked Trump after a cabinet meeting or on Air Force One. They chose not to. Totally unethical & irresponsible behavior. @bariweiss was right to hold the piece.