Continuing medical education courses are a requirement for doctors to keep their licenses, but recently, one such course faced backlash from transgender activists, resulting in its cancellation by a major national institution.
Washington State University had taken close to a year to review and approve a course detailing the side effects of experimental transgender medical treatments on children, along with Europe’s increasing skepticism toward “gender-affirming care.” However, activists protested, using the Southern Poverty Law Center—a group known for its anti-conservative stance—as a reference.
A spokesperson for the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine (SEGM), the organization behind the course, stated, “It’s deeply concerning that a set of educational courses grounded in peer-reviewed evidence has been suspended after pressure from activists.” They noted that these modules were designed to help medical professionals understand the changing landscape of youth gender medicine in Europe and the importance of long-term outcomes.
They also expressed disappointment, saying they were bewildered by the decision to halt the courses after such an extensive accreditation process. “Allowing ideology to overshadow scientific evidence compromises both patient care and trust in our medical institutions,” the spokesperson added.
Transgender Activist Pressure
WSU’s medical college had approved the SEGM courses covering topics like whether “male” or “female” brains exist separately from the bodies, common misconceptions in youth gender medicine, and changes in practice in Europe.
On October 29, an article by pro-transgender activist Erin Reed caught attention on Substack, which led the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to investigate and request that WSU revoke the course’s accreditation during their inquiry.
According to SEGM, WSU mentioned that they had “never seen anything like this from a national accrediting body.” Dr. William Malone, a co-founder of SEGM and an endocrinologist in Idaho, remarked, “We can’t find anything that indicates the agency has the authority to order a course suspension prior to an investigation.”
The University and ACCME Weigh In
WSU clarified that its college of medicine acted as the accrediting body through its Continuing Medical Education program, stating they didn’t create these courses. Pam Scott, the university’s vice president of system communications, emphasized that accreditation merely indicates compliance with ACCME standards and does not imply university endorsement of SEGM.
She added that the course materials are currently on hold while the university collaborates with ACCME to ensure compliance with their standards. Ellen Sullivan, ACCME’s vice president for communications, mentioned that they do not publicly comment on specific cases that are under review but noted that all accredited courses must adhere to strict evidence-based guidelines.
The Southern Poverty Law Center
The Substack article that seemed to trigger ACCME’s actions referenced the Southern Poverty Law Center in both its title and the opening line. It characterized the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine as an anti-LGBTQ hate group for supposedly spreading anti-scientific views.
This caused critics to argue that the SPLC misuses its “hate group” labels to discredit those who hold opposing views. They pointed out that the SPLC has a history of using its reputation for taking down Klan organizations to target conservatives and Christians, including placing SEGM on its “hate map.”
Furthermore, the SPLC has advocated for transgender education for children while filing lawsuits to prevent restrictions on “gender-affirming care.” They have publicly condemned SEGM’s views as “pseudoscience,” which can potentially delegitimize dissenting medical professionals.
SEGM responded to the SPLC’s report, asserting that it “replaced evidence with labels,” framing scientific dissent as bigotry and relying on a narrowed circle of activist sources for validation.
The SPLC’s reports frequently cite the “Standards of Care” developed by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. However, internal communications from that organization indicate serious concerns regarding “gender-affirming care” for minors, including issues such as children’s inability to provide informed consent and severe side effects, like the risk of developing liver cancer in teens undergoing hormone treatments.
It’s noteworthy that despite being labeled an anti-LGBTQ hate group, SEGM’s president and many contributors identify as part of the LGBTQ community, claiming to focus strictly on promoting evidence-based discussions around youth gender dysphoria without taking political stances.
Major tech companies, which once partnered with the SPLC to identify “hate,” have begun distancing themselves from it, and even the FBI has cut ties, deeming the SPLC a “partisan smear machine.”
SEGM’s representatives hope that ACCME’s evaluation will remain impartial. “Clinicians in the U.S. need access to credible, unbiased information regarding global approaches to youth gender dysphoria,” they stated.
The SPLC did not provide a response to queries regarding this situation.
