It’s all about the love of money – and man playing God, of course.
In the latest American Medical Association (AMA) Journal of Ethics, authors are not only suggesting uterus transplants to help transgender women (aka men) get pregnant, but they also say taxpayers should help fund the procedures – which cost up to $300,000.
Um, no thank you. In plain language: the discussion is now about doing uterus transplants so biological men can have babies. Be honest; who saw this coming?
Do you think they’re suggesting these cross-sex procedures to save lives or are they affirming people’s delusions to rake in the big bucks? Also, just because we have the modern technology to do something doesn’t mean we should do it.
When man tries replacing God, it will not end well. Let’s make Frankenstein science fiction again.
The American Medical Association featured an “ethical analysis” of uterus transplants for males in its journal this summer and detailed arguments behind such experiments, I mean, procedures. But worse is the idea that we should help pay for them.
Taxpayer dollars. It’s for science. It’s progress. After all, they have “Medical” in their name.
Responding to the news, Dr. Martin Makary, professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine stated:
“Rather than funding objective medical studies on transgender medicine, the AMA has chosen activist positions on this delicate topic; …Why don’t they fund a study on the 10-year regret rate of children who undergo transitioning surgery? What is the suicide rate among those who undergo aggressive hormone or surgical treatment versus long-term talk therapy?”
He also pointed out the irony that the AMA is promoting uterus transplants for men so a baby could possibly be born – while other “treatments” for transgender children and minors are making them permanently infertile.
Whatever happened to ‘Do no harm’? This seems like partisan activism to me.
They also discussed reducing the cost of the dangerous surgery in the AMA June issue, “Patient-Centered Transgender Surgical Care.” But why reduce the cost if the government can make the people pay for it? Another question is will insurance companies cover these procedures?
There is no good moral, ethical, or medical reason why American citizens should be forced to pay for these operations. None. Mental health or otherwise. And yet, the paper says taxpayers should also fund cosmetic surgeries so men can look or feel more like women.
This is not just about affirming; it’s not about supporting them or about ‘live and let live.’
This is more deception and programming of a nation on transgender ideology. The philosophy that justifies mutilating human bodies is a direct assault on the truth that every human being is created in the image of God.
The Bible warns us not to be deceived or taken captive by worldly philosophies (Colossians 2:8).
But we’re talking about the medical profession here. “Science.” They’re supposed to be objective.
There are no long-term studies on the effects of injecting hormones into children. Most cases of sex-change regret where people have spoken out to warn others have been suppressed and censored by the one-party big tech media conglomerate.
The left won’t fund those studies or allow these kinds of tragic stories to be told.
Dr. Makary also said it’s hard to do further research because activists have already run a lot of medical professionals out of town for wanting to be objective. He’s also disgusted like most of us are that minors can walk into a Planned Parenthood and walk out with a bottle of hormones.
I don’t think the abortion giant would support experimental surgery to enable someone to have a baby, but the first uterus transplant was done in Sweden in 2014.
On the record, there have been about 100 uterus transplant surgeries performed worldwide, and the process involves multiple surgeries and follow-up appointments. On average it can take a year and a half to complete.
Just this year, doctors at the University of Alabama, Birmingham (UAB), became one of the first in the U.S. to offer the uterus transplant procedure to hysterectomy patients as well as rare cases in which a woman was born without a womb.
Its Uterus Transplant Program is one of only four in the country that performs the new operation and is the first to do it outside of a clinical trial. One mother had been diagnosed with a rare condition that caused her to be born without a uterus and they did the procedure. In May, a baby boy became the first to be born because of UAB’s program.
Lead surgeon at the “Comprehensive Transplant Institute” at UAB, Dr. Paige Porrett said other providers would also think this is medically possible but warns about potential risks due to hormones and previous “gender-affirming” surgeries.
The procedure is already considered high-risk due to increased risk of complications.
Paige states:
“Doing this in a transgender woman, especially one who still has male sex organs, would be even more difficult due to those anatomical differences. Hormone replacement therapy and gender reassignment surgery could make it more difficult for a trans patient to produce enough eggs for IVF, which is part of the transplant protocol.”
Modern advancements in science, medicine, and technology, however, do not give man license to play God. But the intrigue, money, power, and potential recognition are too tempting.
The debate will continue, and the public must be convinced and programmed a bit more to be on board with this so-called “progress” to help the transgender community. I don’t think the idea of taxpayers helping fund this will ever gain popularity.
But some will find ways to make money from the mental health crisis regardless.
Chris Rufo at City Journal just wrote about the disturbing story of one doctor that has been doing “non-binary” genital surgeries since 2015. Business is booming for Dr. Curtis Crane who employs five doctors and does more than 1,000 procedures a year in San Francisco, CA and Austin, TX clinics. Demand is increasing. Safety and sanity are not.
Rufo rightly says those who suffer from serious emotional or mental health issues should not be subjected to these experiments. Crane justifies them by appealing to “equality” and “acceptance” and rejects the laws of nature and nature’s God.
But there is a glimmer of hope and a bit of positive news. Rufo adds:
“The debate about transgender medicine is shifting. Legislators in 20 states have recently passed bills to restrict transgender medical interventions, such as puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and genital surgeries, for minors. And the tide of public opinion appears to be moving against “gender-affirming care,” a euphemism for child sex-change procedures not supported by the evidence and that often cause devastating consequences. Preventing such procedures for patients under age 18 has to be the baseline.”
Once again, I can sum up this battle in three words: God or man. It’s a worldview war.
