The FTC is Investigating WPATH and AAP for Claims About Gender Dysphoria Treatments

The Federal Trade Commission is investigating the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to determine if they violated sections of the FTC Act related to unfair or deceptive practices. The FTC is evaluating whether these organizations have made false, unsubstantiated, or deceptive claims related to treatments for pediatric gender dysphoria. Both groups have responded to FTC Civil Investigative Demand letters with a petition to squash the CID.

Both organizations claim that they fall outside of the FTC’s jurisdiction as 501 (c) (3) nonprofit organizations. The FTC may regulate “corporations,” which WPATH correctly defines in its petition as an entity “organized to carry on business for [its] own profit or that of [its] members.” WPATH claims it does not exist to increase profits for its members, as all revenue generated by the organization is reinvested in the nonprofit to fulfill its mission. It also states that the board is made up of volunteers from a wide range of disciplines.

WPATH offers memberships for $250 a year, and one of the benefits is that each member can be listed on the “find a provider” tool. The members are healthcare professionals who provide pediatric gender-affirming care and have the opportunity to profit if more people seek these treatments.

WPATH argues that the board of directors and committee members are volunteers. However, all of these individuals are directly involved in providing care for transgender individuals or researching and writing books about the topic. The listed representative for the US on the WPATH board is Joanna Olson-Kennedy, who faced a lawsuit for allegedly failing to provide informed consent. The lawsuit was dismissed for falling outside the statute of limitations. The first medical malpractice case to go to trial ended with a $2 million verdict in favor of the detransitioner plaintiff earlier this month. Jefferey Jaxen reported for The HighWire that many states are extending the statute of limitations for these cases.

In addition to the volunteer argument, WPATH states that its members come from a wide variety of disciplines, including medicine, social work, education, and law. Professionals across all of these disciplines can increase their profits and opportunities by continuing to support pediatric gender-affirming care.

The AAP made similar arguments in its petition to quash the CID. The HighWire has reported several times about the AAP’s members and partnerships with pharmaceutical companies as conflicts of interest in its support for an alternative vaccine schedule to the CDC’s. That alternate schedule has been adopted by several states in favor of the updated CDC schedule that was changed based on international scientific consensus.

Both the AAP and WPATH have described puberty blockers as reversible treatments, a claim that has been rebuked by the Cass Review in the UK and the HHS report that was released last year. The Cass Review references multiple studies that found “bone density is compromised during puberty suppression” and notes that there are no high-quality studies with an appropriate study design that evaluated the outcomes of adolescents using puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria or gender incongruence.

Lupron is a commonly used puberty blocker manufactured by AbbVie that is not approved by the FDA to treat adolescents with gender dysphoria. In addition to being used off-label for pediatric gender dysphoria, Lupron is also given to sex offenders off-label to suppress sexual urges. The Cass Review said there is not enough evidence on the effects of puberty blockers on fertility. The review notes that cross-sex hormones “may well lead to a loss of fertility.” These are some of the alleged long-term health impacts associated with “gender affirming care” treatments that have been dismissed or downplayed by AAP and WPATH.

In 2024, The Guardian reported about the “WPATH files,” which included several leaked recordings that contradict some of the organization’s claims. “Despite its grand title, WPATH is neither solely a professional body – a significant proportion of its membership are activists – nor does it represent the “world” view on how to care for this group of people,” said Hannah Barnes in her article for The Guardian.

“There is no global agreement on best practice.”

A Canadian endocrinologist said it is like talking to a “blank wall” when discussing fertility preservation with a 14-year-old. This statement suggests that adolescents are not capable of understanding the potential long-term effects of the treatments they are being given. Critics say that this means adolescents are not capable of consenting to these treatments if they are unable to fully understand the long-term impacts.

Dr. Marci Bowers, the previous president of WPATH, said she is “unaware of an individual claiming ability to orgasm when they were blocked at Tanner 2,” which is the beginning of puberty. Bowers is admitting that sexual dysfunction is an expected side effect of this treatment that is given to children before they have the ability to understand what is at stake. Informed consent requires the ability to understand. Parental consent is typically required for most medical interventions.

 Fox Varian is the plaintiff in the first detransitioner court case that went to trial. In Varian’s case, the mother did not wish to move forward with the treatments. However, she felt pressured by the psychologist who suggested she would self-harm or commit suicide if she wasn’t given the treatment. The lawyers also argued that the psychologist put the idea of transition into the daughter’s head.

 Olson-Kennedy, who is a representative of WPATH, told ABC News in 2011 that they “often ask parents, ‘Would you rather have a dead son than a live daughter?’” She referenced a suicide rate that is “astronomical compared to any other group,” which has been proven false and acknowledged in the US v Skrmetti Supreme Court case that challenged the Tennessee state ban on GAC treatments for minors.

In the case, Justice Samuel Alito referenced the Cass Review that said there is no evidence that GAC treatments reduce suicide. Chase Strangio, the lead attorney for the ACLU and private plaintiffs, acknowledged Alito’s statement. Strangio said there is no evidence that the treatment reduces “complete suicide” because that is rare. Strangio argued that the treatments reduce “depression, anxiety, and suicidality, which are indicators of potential suicide.”