Michael Schellenberger

Rank 46 of 47
|
Score -202
6/26/2025, 1:36:36 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
4d
Historians will at least have the WPATH Files as archival material for understanding the mentality of the deranged medical predators who experimented on children without their informed consent.
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
482d
THE WPATH FILES

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
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
4d
Operating on the bodies of children so they look like the opposite sex is the future, said the media. It wasn’t. It’s increasingly the past. And it won’t come back, not even in CA. Historians will struggle to understand trans medicine alongside bloodletting, lobotomies & Tuskegee

The statement is critical of transgender medicine, suggesting it violates ethical principles like the Hippocratic Oath and informed consent. It implies that medical professionals should have spoken out against these practices. The tone is accusatory and challenges the integrity of medical practices related to transgender care.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement could be seen as harmful to transgender individuals and medical professionals by framing transgender medicine negatively without acknowledging the complexity of the issue. [-2]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It does not respect the dignity of medical professionals or transgender individuals, potentially contributing to stigma and misunderstanding. [-2]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks empathy and understanding towards those involved in transgender medicine, focusing instead on blame. [-2]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in constructive dialogue, instead making broad accusations without inviting discussion or understanding. [-2]