Displaying posts published in

June 2023

Dem Expert Witness Couldn’t Cite Evidence of Benefits of Trans Procedures for Children By Matt Margolis

benefits-of-trans-procedures-for-children-n1703599

On Wednesday, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) grilled a so-called “expert” witness on the issue of transgender procedures for women, during which she failed to cite even a single study showing that cross-sex hormones, puberty blockers, or surgeries have any positive impact.

Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the Yale School of Medicine, testified in a hearing in opposition to a provision that would block federal funding for hospitals that provide transgender services for minors.

“This is taxpayer money, and when 70% of taxpayers opposed these barbaric treatments on minors, then taxpayers should not fund it,” Crenshaw told her.

During the exchange, McNamara accused Crenshaw of cherrypicking data to support his position against transgender procedures for children.

“It is very unscientific and flawed to pick a single study or a single statistic and to discuss it in isolation,” she said.

“Totally agree,” Crenshaw said.

“All the medical experts are able to talk about all the evidence as a whole,” she added.

“Totally agree. So it’s good to look at systematic reviews right?” Crenshaw asked. “That’s the gold standard of evidence when you’re trying to understand whether something works or whether it doesn’t. So the British Journal of Medicine looked at 61 systematic reviews with the conclusion that, quote, ‘there is great uncertainty about the effects of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries in young people.’ Journal of Endocrine Society came up with the same conclusion. Even the American Academy of Pediatrics — all cite the lack of evidence.”

“So here’s the thing,” Crenshaw continued. “If you’re doing a therapy, and it’s you know, temporary, whatever, fine, maybe let’s try let’s see if it works. But when you’re talking about permanent physiological changes, do you not agree just from an ethical standpoint that you might want extremely strong evidence of the benefits and there is no systematic review, that that states that there is strong evidence of benefits?”

Activists Attacking Art Climate hysteria strikes again. James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/activists-attacking-art-44b29637?mod=opinion_lead_pos11

We’re still waiting for an example of a great civilization built by progressive leftists. Now there’s still another reason to doubt whether the contemporary mania to attack society’s traditions has any value at all. How can one take seriously warnings that climate change threatens civilization from people whose vandalism targets civilization itself?

“Ruining the most beautiful art in the world is probably not going to win people over to your cause,” observes RealClearPolitics President Tom Bevan on Twitter as he links to an Associated Press story about the latest attack by global warmists on a cultural treasure.

AP reports:

Two women were detained in Stockholm after they threw “some kind of paint” at a painting by French artist Claude Monet and then glued themselves to the frame, Sweden’s National Museum said Wednesday.
The painting, “The Artist’s Garden at Giverny,” was on display as part of an exhibition at the museum. Spokesperson Hanna Tottmar said artwork was encased in glass and “is now being examined by the museum’s conservators to see if any damage has occurred.”
The exhibit, titled “The Garden,” was closed but expected to reopen to visitors on Thursday. ”We naturally distance ourselves from actions where art or cultural heritage risks being damaged … regardless of the purpose,” Per Hedström, the museum’s acting director, said.

Yes, let’s all distance ourselves from this destructive zealotry, which has sadly become popular on the radical left. “Why Are Climate Activists Throwing Food at Million-Dollar Paintings?,” asked a headline last year in Smithsonian magazine. Margaret Osborne reported:

Wearing neon orange vests, two climate activists splattered mashed potatoes on the protective glass that covers Monet’s Grainstacks at the Museum Barberini in Potsdam, Germany. They then glued their hands to the wall below the painting and began to speak.

But who would want to listen when the speakers have just self-identified as unreasonable and untethered to any standard of decent behavior?

Newsom vs. DeSantis: Bring It On The U.S. needs a debate between the California and Florida Governors.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ron-desantis-gavin-newsom-debate-sean-hannity-florida-california-donald-trump-joe-biden-a746e8f7?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

The two shouty debates between Donald Trump and Joe Biden in 2020 were not exactly the stuff of Lincoln and Douglas, and if next year brings a rerun, many TV viewers would probably flip the channel in favor of something else, anything else, “Fast & Furious 17” or women’s air hockey finals. Yet serious public arguments can matter.

So kudos to Fox News’s Sean Hannity, who floated a series of “great debates” in an interview this week with Gavin Newsom. “Love it,” the California Governor said.

Mr. Hannity: “You would do a two-hour debate with Ron DeSantis?”

Mr. Newsom: “I’d make it three.”

The Florida Governor responded at a news conference Thursday, without addressing Mr. Newsom’s hurled gauntlet. “What I would tell him is, you know what, stop pussyfooting around,” Mr. DeSantis said. “Are you going to throw your hat in the ring and challenge Joe [Biden]? Are you going to get in and do it? Or are you just going to sit on the sidelines and chirp?”

Charter Schools: New Evidence of Student Success A nationwide Stanford study shows huge learning gains over union schools.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/stanford-credo-charter-schools-study-student-performance-traditional-schools-education-math-reading-1d416fe5?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

School choice is gaining momentum nationwide, and charter schools are a large part of the movement. A new study shows that these independently run public schools are blowing away their traditional school competition in student performance.

Stanford’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (Credo) report is the third in a series (2009, 2013, 2023) tracking charter-school outcomes over 15 years. The study is one of the largest ever conducted, covering over two million charter students in 29 states, New York City and Washington, D.C., and a control group in traditional public schools.

Credo’s judgment is unequivocal: Most charter schools “produce superior student gains despite enrolling a more challenging student population.” In reading and math, “charter schools provide their students with stronger learning when compared to the traditional public schools.” The nationwide gains for charter students were six days in math and 16 days in reading.

The comparisons in some states are more remarkable. In New York, charter students were 75 days ahead in reading and 73 days in math compared with traditional public-school peers. In Illinois they were 40 days ahead in reading and 48 in math. In Washington state, 26 days ahead in reading and 39 in math. Those differences can add up to an extra year of learning across an entire elementary education.