Carlat 播客回顾性别肯定医疗的流亡起源：从约翰斯·霍普金斯关闭诊所到 DSM-5

It's 1979, and Johns Hopkins has just shut down the first gender surgery clinic in the US. But investigations into the biological roots of gender identity are about to reopen those doors — and reshape how medicine thinks about sex, gender, and who gets to decide.

Duration: 11 minutes, 52 seconds

Transcript:

KELLIE NEWSOME: It's 1979. Johns Hopkins has banned gender-affirming surgery, and similar clinics are closing their doors. But investigations into the biological origins of gender identity are about to change all that.

CHRIS AIKEN:

Welcome to the Carlat Psychiatry Podcast, keeping psychiatry honest since 2003. I’m Chris Aiken, the editor in chief of the Carlat Report. 

KELLIE NEWSOME:

And I’m Kellie Newsome, a psychiatric NP and a dedicated reader of every issue. We'll start with a preview of the CME quiz. You can earn CME through the link in the show notes, and stay tuned to the end to find the answer to this question:

1. For which condition did lavender oil (Silexan) show efficacy in a recent, large randomized controlled trial?

A. Major Depressive Disorder

B. Post-traumatic Stress Disorder

C. Primary insomnia

D. Premenstrual dysphoric disorder

DSM-5 defines gender dysphoria as marked incongruence between the gender a person was assigned at birth and the gender they experience on the inside. That sounds straightforward, but there are two consequential ideas in there. The DSM is saying that we aren't born male or female — we are assigned those genders. And sometimes the assignment is wrong. The idea traces back to intersex conditions, where people are born with ambiguous genitalia. In the past, physicians assigned a gender at birth and performed surgery within the first few days to reshape the genitals accordingly. This was standard practice in the 1950s, and it wasn't rooted in ideology — it was rooted in a theory. The prevailing view at the time was that gender is determined by the environment. Babies were born gender-neutral and would comfortably develop into whatever gender they were assigned. In most cases, that assignment was female, because constructing a vagina is easier and less risky than constructing a functional penis. This started to change in the 1990’s, as evidence accumulated that gender identity takes shape before birth — influenced by genetics and androgen exposure in the womb. People who had been assigned an arbitrary gender at birth began requesting reassignment surgery in large numbers, complaining of widespread stigmatization, body-image problems, and impaired sexual functioning. So we've shifted from a 1950s model in which gender is entirely malleable to a more nuanced view that recognizes the role of biology and hormones in shaping gender identity. But at no point in that trajectory did medicine hold that gender was a fixed binary concept. Nor did the ancient Greeks, Shakespeare, or Judaism, and Islam has long recognized intersex genders as mukhannathun. As for Christianity, Paul discards earthly notions of gender and ethnicity, just as he does for the kosher diet, in his letter to the Galatians: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile… male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” 

CHRIS AIKEN:

 Building on that biological understanding, the standards for intersex care changed officially in 2006, with landmark guidelines urging surgeons to wait before assigning a baby's gender. Unless surgery was necessary for physical functioning, it was deferred, and that’s how practice is today. We allow time for the child’s gender to develop; the family is involved in the decision, guided by a multi-disciplinary team. The belated surgery comes with more physical risks, but it is psychologically safer.  Before 2006, most intersex patients were assigned female, but today most elect the more difficult male surgery. The reason is more biological than cultural. Most of these cases involve Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, where the brain may still respond to the circulating androgens even if the genitalia don’t fully develop.

KELLIE NEWSOME:

 We’ve also seen a shift toward male transitions among people with gender dysphoria — but likely for different reasons. Twenty years ago, most patients transitioned from male to female,  two to three times more common than the reverse. Today, the rates are equal, and among younger patients, it’s shifting the other way, with more girls identifying as boys. Why? No one knows, and we don’t want to add to the speculation.

CHRIS AIKEN:

 DSM-5 removed the word "disorder" from Gender Dysphoria. It was a controversial step. If Gender Dysphoria is not a psychiatric disorder, then what is it doing in the DSM? The DSM committee almost removed the condition entirely, but kept it in – as one member of the committee told me – largely to ensure insurance coverage for transgender care. ICD-11 takes a more consistent approach, placing gender dysphoria under sexual health rather than psychiatry. In 2014, the Affordable Care Act prohibited gender discrimination by health insurers, including discrimination based on gender identity. As coverage expanded, more clinics opened, including a new Center for Transgender Health at Johns Hopkins, four decades after they closed their original clinic

KELLIE NEWSOME: Along the way, we've moved from a model where psychiatrists act as gatekeepers — deciding who is mentally fit to undergo these procedures — to one where informed consent is the deciding factor. But as the recent malpractice lawsuits have shown, that shift carries its own risks. If you work in this area, follow the WPATH guidelines and document them clearly. They were last updated in 2022, and each edition has eased the gatekeeping requirements. Here's a summary of what they require for hormonal or surgical transition:

• A clear diagnosis of gender dysphoria. 
• Capacity to make a fully informed decision and consent to treatment. 
• An assessment of social supports and any comorbid medical or psychiatric conditions — and if other conditions are present, they should be reasonably well-controlled.

The guidelines also require patients to live publicly in their new gender role and take hormones for at least a year before surgery, though for some surgeries, they’ve lowered the requirement to six months. Hormones, however, can be started without a prior trial period of living in the new role. That's a brief summary. If you’re going to do an assessment, google WPATH to get the full set of standards.

CHRIS AIKEN:

 Hormones and surgery carry risks. The changes brought by hormones are partially reversible; surgery is not. Hormonal therapy can cause a potentially permanent loss of fertility. Both estrogen and testosterone carry risks of blood clots and stroke. Testosterone can also cause bone mineral loss, elevated cholesterol, hypertension, and diabetes. The long-term risks of hormonal therapy are unclear, but cancer is a possibility. Careful documentation at every step isn't just good practice — in the current climate, it's essential protection.

KELLIE NEWSOME:

 We’ve tried to steer clear of ideology in this podcast and follow the evidence where it leads us. We’ve focused on current controversies, but in doing that, we’ve left a lot out. Gender-affirming care isn't just about hormones and surgery. It's about accepting people's identity and valuing who they are. Transgender people face misunderstanding, marginalization, and stigma — sometimes violently — and always at a cost to their mental health. Over their lifetimes, 50% experience suicidal ideation, 50% engage in self-harm, and a third make a suicide attempt. For today's research update, we're pulling a classic from 2024. It examines a new use for lavender oil — Silexan, which is sold over the counter in the US as CalmAid. This is a regulated extract approved in Europe for generalized anxiety disorder, with glutamatergic, serotonergic, and neuroprotective properties. This trial tested lavender oil in mild to moderate major depression, comparing it head-to-head against sertraline and placebo in 498 adults. The lead author is Siegfried Kasper, whose industry-funded team has produced most of the lavender research, and the dearth of independent replication is a meaningful limitation. Prior trials established lavender’s benefits in anxious depression; this is the first to test it in pure depression.

CHRIS AIKEN:

 Both active treatments beat placebo. Response and remission rates for sertraline 50 mg and lavender 80 mg were nearly identical. Lavender edged ahead on functional outcomes and tolerability — its main side effect was burping, in about 17% of patients. Annoying, but not dangerous.

KELLIE NEWSOME:

 One note on dosing: this study used 80 mg daily, but most anxiety trials show better results at 80 mg twice daily. The bottom line — Lavender oil has a role in depression; consider it when patients have high levels of anxiety, prefer natural treatments, or do not tolerate antidepressants. Though it is prescription-only in some countries, it's available over the counter in the US as CalmAid. Get more research updates on Dr. Aiken's Daily Psych feed. Search ChrisAikenMD on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Bluesky, and Threads. Struggling to tell borderline from bipolar? We speak with Dr. Mark Zimmerman — who led some of the pivotal studies in this area — in the May issue of the Carlat Report. Get $30 off your first year's subscription with the promo code PODCAST. The Carlat Report has operated free of industry funding since 2003.

The Carlat CME Institute is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Carlat CME Institute maintains responsibility for this program and its content. Carlat CME Institute designates this enduring material educational activity for a maximum of one quarter (.25) AMA PRA Category 1 Credits^TM. Physicians or psychologists should claim credit commensurate only with the extent of their participation in the activity.