ReportWire

Tag: Pundits

  • Video at G7 shows Biden talking to skydivers, not wandering off

    Video at G7 shows Biden talking to skydivers, not wandering off

    [ad_1]

    President Joe Biden’s age has long been the subject of conservative attacks, even more so now that at age 81, he’s seeking a second term.

    According to claims using edited or out-of-context videos, Biden once left in the middle of a news interview (False), “turned around and shook hands with thin air” (False), and sat in an imaginary chair at a D-Day event (he didn’t). 

    A new video emerged at the Group of Seven Summit in Italy that people claimed showed Biden “wandering off” during a June 13 skydiving demonstration.

    Conservative media outlets and others on social media seized on a shortened video clip from the event that appeared to show Biden slowly walking away from the other world leaders before being pulled back by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni for a group photo.

    “WHAT IS BIDEN DOING?” RNC Research, an X account managed by former President Donald Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee, asked in a June 13 post sharing the video.

    The RNC video had nearly 3 million views as of June 14 and soon began to spread across social media with conservative media outlets and influencers citing RNC’s video and adding claims that Biden had wandered off. 

    A Daily Mail TikTok video’s caption said Biden “strangely wandered away” and had to be “guided” back to the group.

    The “Jesse Watters Primetime” Instagram account shared the video and wrote, “Biden wandered off into an Italian field at the G7 summit.”

    The New York Post took it a step further, altering the video’s frame to make it more narrow, cutting out a skydiver seen in the RNC video.

    “President Biden appeared to wander off at the G7 summit in Italy, with officials needing to pull him back to focus,” the New York post wrote in an X post, linking to an article that credited RNC Research’s video. The claim also made the Post’s print edition front page, with a headline calling Biden the “Meander in Chief.”

    But a longer video of the event, shared on YouTube by the G7 Italy account, tells a different story. At various points in the G7 video, you can see parachutists off to the right of the frame, to Biden’s left.

    In the video below, parachutists to Biden’s left can be seen on the grass as another lands with a G7 Summit flag, shortly before Biden turns to speak with them.

    Cable news network MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” broadcast showed video from a different angle, where you can clearly see several parachutists behind Biden’ to his left. He turns and speaks to them and gives a thumbs up sign, before Meloni came over to get his attention for the group photo.

    The New York Post’s X post was tagged with a community note that said, “The video has been cropped.” We reached out to the New York Post and its editor, Keith Poole, for comment, but didn’t immediately hear back.

    RNC spokesperson Anna Kelly didn’t speak to the intent of the video the group shared on X, but emailed links to posts, including an Italian news outlet’s coverage of Biden’s visit that described his voice as “weak.” Another link Kelly shared is a Trump War Room post that featured the misleading cover of the New York Post. 

    British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told the British publication The Telegraph that Biden had turned to greet the parachutists and hadn’t wandered off.

    “He went to go and talk to the pilot, one of the parachute jumpers. He went to go and shake all their hands,” an archived version of The Telegraph story said. The article has since been updated to remove Sunak’s quotes.

    Andrew Bates, White House senior deputy press secretary, confirmed that Biden was giving a thumbs up to skydivers and thanking veterans. He pointed out conservatives such as Adam Kinzinger, a former Republican member of Congress from Illinois, and the conservative outlet The Washington Examiner called out the misleading claims.

    Our ruling

    Social media posts, including from The New York Post, The Daily Mail and “Jesse Watters Primetime,” claimed that video showed Biden wandering away from other world leaders at the G7 Summit in Italy at an event in which skydivers landed carrying flags of each country in attendance. 

    But longer video and video from other angles clearly shows Biden was speaking to skydivers on the ground before the Italian prime minister tapped him for a group photo. The New York Post edited a video from RNC Research to cut one skydiver out of the frame. The claim is False.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Do Jesse Watters’ LGBTQ+ and DEI funding claims add up?

    Do Jesse Watters’ LGBTQ+ and DEI funding claims add up?

    [ad_1]

    The U.S. Senate passed a $1.2 trillion dollar spending package, narrowly avoiding a partial government shutdown. Before the bill was signed into law in the wee hours of March 23, one pundit criticized some of its details.

    “What’s in the new monster bill Congress is rushing to pass?” Fox News host Jesse Watters posted March 21 on X, where it had 2.3 million views as of March 28. He wrote that the bill included:

    • $850,000 for a “gay senior home.”

    • $15 million to pay for Egyptians’ college tuition.

    • $400,000 for a “gay activist group to teach elementary kids about being trans.”

    • $500,000 for a “DEI zoo.”

    • $400,000 for “a group to give clothes to teens to help them hide their gender.” 

    His X post also included a clip of him discussing the earmarks on his show, “Jesse Watters Primetime,” the same night. He posted a similar claim on TikTok, where it amassed more than 500,000 views and 55,000 likes. 

    We contacted Fox News, and a spokesperson shared a list of the funding items Watters was referring to. 

    Joshua Sewell, research and policy director at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan budget watchdog group, said the majority of federal spending is not distributed through earmarking. Sewell said the earmarks Watters noted “don’t appear to be unique or out of character” or “excessively large” when compared with other projects receiving earmarks. 

    Except for the Egyptian college funding, all of the items Watters cited are from the budget’s Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education portion, which  Sewell said, has approximately 1,000 earmarks. 

    Given the large number of earmarks, “I’m sure everybody could find something they don’t think is a best use of funds,” Sewell said.

    E.J. Fagan, assistant professor of political science at the University of Illinois Chicago, agreed that earmarks “are a teeny-tiny piece of the federal budget.” 

    Fagan also said his “impression from the backlash to these very small set of earmarks is that it is just cherry-picking.” His research on the FY 2022 budget found that 0.6% of all federal earmarks mentioned LGBTQ+ as a target population. 

    Here, we examine each of Watters’ claims. 

    $850,000 for a “gay senior home”

    This needs more context. 

    The $850,000 earmark is for the Boston-based nonprofit LGBTQ Senior Housing Inc. to provide affordable housing for people 62 and older. It will help fund “The Pryde,” a 74-unit housing complex in Boston’s Hyde Park neighborhood that is slated to open this spring. But that complex  is not exclusive to gay people; it is open to anyone who meets the income and age requirements.

    The organization’s mission is to “facilitate access to welcoming, safe and affordable housing for low-income LGBTQ+ seniors,” by developing that housing and establishing onsite services and programming “that addresses the needs of LGBTQ seniors.” 

    The $850,000 will be used for programming and the complex’s community center, which also will be open to older people from the neighborhood who don’t live in the complex.

    The organization says the project is needed because of the challenges faced by LGBTQ+ seniors, some of whom may not have offspring to serve as caregivers or who may face discrimination or isolation. 

    Applicants for the housing complex were not asked about their sexual orientation. 

    “It would be against the law to limit this affordable housing to just members of the LGBTQ+ community,” said the organization’s executive director, Gretchen Van Ness. 

    The money will come from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ funds for community living.

    Van Ness told PolitiFact that she applied for the funding through the office of Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., last year, because The Pryde is in Pressley’s district

    $15 million to pay for Egyptians’ college tuition

    This is missing context.

    Fifteen million dollars is allocated to USAID, the federal agency that manages foreign aid, “for scholarships for Egyptian students with high financial need to attend not-for-profit institutions of higher education in Egypt,” that are accredited by agencies recognized by the United States Department of Education or meet equivalent standards, the budget description says.

    Similar Egyptian higher education funding has been provided to USAID over the past four decades, a USAID spokesperson told PolitiFact. The scholarships allow Egyptians to study at universities “in fields critical to Egypt’s sustained economic growth and development.” 

    Spending bills passed during Donald Trump’s presidency provided $10 million per year for the higher education scholarship program from 2017 through 2019 and increased it to $15 million in 2020

    “The State Department and USAID have a long history of funding numerous programs to support the spread of democracy and western values throughout the world,” Taxpayers for Common Sense’s Sewell said. “This is not a surprise.”

    $400,000 for a “gay activist group to teach elementary kids about being trans”

    This is misleading.

    Watters is referring to “Garden State Equality,” a New Jersey LGBTQ+ advocacy group and a state affiliate of the Equality Federation, a national network of LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations. 

    The budget describes the $400,000 earmark as funding “for trauma-informed strategies to support LGBTQ+ youth.” 

    Garden State Equality Executive Director Christian Fuscarino told PolitiFact the funding will support programs to educate communities about adverse childhood experiences, or ACEs, traumatic events early in life such as violence, abuse or neglect that can affect long-term health. Research has shown that LGBTQ+ people report higher rates of adverse childhood experiences.

    Fuscarino said some of the federal funding will be used for a summer camp for high school-aged kids that teaches about the importance of diversity, equity and inclusion, and imparts some trauma-informed strategies. That can include sharing techniques such as breathing exercises to cope with trauma’s impacts, Fuscarino said. The money comes from the Department of Education’s funds for “innovation and improvement.”

    The organization also conducts professional development training with kindergarten through 12th grade educators on LGBTQ+ terminology and anti-bullying initiatives. It has developed LGBTQ+ lessons and curriculum resources

    Since 2019, New Jersey law has required schools to teach LGBTQ+ history in middle and high schools, and adopt instructional materials that portray society’s diversity including the “political, economic, and social contributions” of LGBTQ+ people.

    A breakdown of how this funding will be spent is not yet finalized, Fuscarino told PolitiFact. Although the money is earmarked, the organization may not access the money until it submits a proposed budget and receives Department of Education approval.

    Fuscarino said Watters’ characterization of the organization’s work as “teaching” elementary kids about “being trans” is inaccurate.

    “We may go to a kindergarten class by being invited and read a story that is about an LGBTQ character,” said Fuscarino, “but that’s not the core of what we’re doing.”

    $500,000 for a “DEI zoo”

    Watters’ framing is misleading. (“DEI” is an acronym for diversity, equity and inclusion.) 

    The $500,000 earmark is for the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, the nonprofit that manages the acclaimed San Diego Zoo. 

    The money is for the nonprofit’s Nature Biodiversity Corps program that “brings together inner-city high school students from diverse cultural, ethnic, and lived-experience perspectives,” according to the website. The students “design, implement, maintain, and monitor native wildlife gardens on their school campuses,” alongside experts and Wildlife Alliance mentors, the website says.

    The funding comes from the Department of Education’s funds for “innovation and improvement.” 

    In the clip from his show that Watters shared on X, Watters described the biodiversity program as “an anti-racist nature appreciation program where high school kids from diverse backgrounds can observe wildlife.” But the program is more than a trip to the zoo.

    Students spend 10 to 20 hours monthly working on wildlife gardens at their own schools and participating in nature-based learning experiences at wildlife conservation sites.

    The website says that since 2022, 200 high school students have participated, creating 14 gardens. 

    Race and ethnicity are not considerations for participation in the program, zoo spokesperson Jake Gonzales said. 

    The earmark funding will go toward staff salaries, transportation and supplies — including native plants for the gardens — and toward reaching more students at more schools, Gonzales said. The zoo has received federal earmarks in previous years, but for other conservation projects.

    $400,000 for “a group to give clothes to teens to help them hide their gender” 

    This claim is inaccurate.

    The funding is for Briarpatch Youth Services, a Madison, Wisconsin, nonprofit that runs a youth homeless shelter and works with at-risk youth.

    The earmark was requested by Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., and would come from the Department of Health and Human Services’ funds for substance abuse and mental health services. 

    Briarpatch’s website lists several programs including employment services, support for those navigating the criminal justice system and street outreach and counseling for homeless youth.

    The nonprofit’s “Teens Like Us” program has a support group for “queer and questioning youth” beginning at age 13. In 2023, the Teens Like Us program included what organizers called the “Briar-Attire Gender Affirming Clothing Program.” The program provided gender-affirming clothing such as chest binders and tucking underwear to those who could not afford or access them. The Teens Like Us website no longer lists the clothing program.

    Baldwin’s office told PolitiFact the $400,000 earmark can be used only for mental health services and counseling for kids experiencing homelessness, and will not be used for the Teens Like Us program. Briarpatch Executive Director Jill Pfeiffer confirmed that to PolitiFact.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Fox host Brian Kilmeade wrong about ByteDance ownership

    Fox host Brian Kilmeade wrong about ByteDance ownership

    [ad_1]

    “Fox & Friends” co-host Brian Kilmeade and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., argued on live television about who owns TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance Ltd. Their heated exchange came a day after the U.S. House passed a bipartisan bill that could lead to the popular app being banned in the U.S.

    The bill would require ByteDance, a China-based company, to sell TikTok, which has 170 million U.S. users, to a non-Chinese owner within six months or face a U.S. ban. The Senate would also need to approve the bill for it to move forward, though its fate there is uncertain. President Joe Biden has said he would sign the legislation if it reaches his desk

    During the March 14 exchange with Paul, Kilmeade said, “Who owns that company? ByteDance? ByteDance is owned by China.”

    “No, it’s not,” Paul replied. “See that’s a lie. … You’re defaming the company.”

    Paul said three times during the interview that 60% of ByteDance is owned by international investors, 20% is owned by its Chinese co-founders and 20% is owned by employees, including 7,000 Americans.

    “It’s a complicated ownership, but it’s not owned by the government,” Paul said.

    Kilmeade then asked who owns the TikTok app’s algorithm.”TikTok owns their own algorithm and it’s not in China,” Paul responded.

    “Who owns TikTok?” Kilmeade countered. “ByteDance. And who owns ByteDance? The Chinese government.”

    “No they don’t. See, you just told a lie, Brian,” Paul responded.

    Watch the exchange between Kilmeade and Paul above. (YouTube)

    According to TikTok, Paul is correct. An expert on China told PolitiFact that it’s hard to independently verify. 

    Kilmeade did not respond to a request for comment sent to a Fox News spokesperson.

    PolitiFact has a partnership with TikTok to counter inauthentic, misleading or false content. 

    Information about TikTok’s ownership comes from the company itself

    A TikTok spokesperson, in an email to PolitiFact, confirmed Paul’s numbers about its ownership structure. TikTok also uses the same figures that Paul cited on its webpages about its ownership.

    The Associated Press reported that ByteDance is based in Beijing, but registered in the Cayman Islands. TikTok has global headquarters in Los Angeles and Singapore and offices around the world, including in New York City, but TikTok says ByteDance does not have a single global headquarters.

    Kenton Thibaut, a senior resident China fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, said that because ByteDance is a privately owned company, what is known about its ownership structure comes from the company itself.

    “Its ownership is not possible to verify,” Thibaut said. “It has, however, had to provide disclosures in the past.”

    She said ByteDance has provided disclosures to Washington, D.C., courts; to funders; and in Chinese government documents. Tibaut said those disclosures show that 60% of TikTok is owned by global investors, as TikTok told PolitiFact and Paul told Kilmeade.

    The TikTok spokesperson also told PolitiFact that ByteDance’s five-person board of directors includes three Americans: Arthur Dantchik, co-founder of trading company Susquehanna International Group; William Ford, CEO of investing company General Atlantic; and Philippe Laffont, founder of hedge fund company Coatue Management.

    In a March 11 letter, TikTok Vice President of Public Policy Michael Beckerman wrote to Reps. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., in response to a letter from the lawmakers, who said the Chinese government controlled ByteDance. Both Gallagher and Krishnamoorthi serve on the House Select Committee on Strategic Competition between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party.

    “TikTok is not owned or controlled by the Chinese government,” Beckerman wrote. “The ultimate parent company of TikTok Inc. is ByteDance Ltd., a privately-owned holding company established in the Cayman Islands. ByteDance Ltd. is majority owned by investors around the world, and the rest of the shares are owned by the founding team and employees around the world.”

    According to The Wall Street Journal, ByteDance agreed in 2021 to allow the Chinese government to take a 1% ownership stake known as a  “golden share” at one of its China-based subsidiaries, Beijing Douyin Information Service Co., which runs Douyin, an app available in China that’s similar to TikTok. (TikTok is not available in mainland China.) China is increasingly taking “golden shares” at China-based companies, giving the government board seats, voting power and a say in business decisions, the Journal reported.

    Thibaut also said that the government-owned China Internet Investment Fund has a 1% share in Douyin, and China’s Central Cyberspace Affairs Commission has a board member on Douyin. That has raised suspicions ByteDance would allow China to have influence over the company’s operations, but we don’t know a lot about how or if the Chinese Communist Party uses its share to control company decisions, Thibaut said.

    TikTok called the Chinese government’s 1% share in Douyin a “common arrangement” under Chinese law. It has no bearing on ByteDance’s global operations, including TikTok, it said.

    Could China influence TikTok if it doesn’t have ownership?

    Some legislators and U.S. officials have raised concerns that Chinese national security laws could require ByteDance to turn over TikTok data about American users to the Chinese government.

    President Joe Biden in December 2022 signed a law barring federal employees from using TikTok on government-owned devices, with limited exceptions. States, local governments and universities have instituted similar TikTok bans on devices they own.

    There have been previous issues, such as when ByteDance employees accessed data of Forbes journalists in 2022 and used it to track their movements. There was no evidence that China’s government compelled ByteDance employees to access the data to discover who was leaking information to the press about ByteDance’s links to China, Forbes reported. 

    In March 11 testimony before a Senate committee, FBI Director Christopher Wray said TikTok’s  “parent company is for all intents and purposes beholden to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party).”

    Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., asked if because ByteDance owns TikTok’s algorithm, regardless of where TikTok’s user data is stored, the Chinese government could ask ByteDance for the U.S. user data used to make the algorithm work, to which Wray said, “That’s my understanding.”

    Exchange between Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and FBI Director Christopher Wray about TikTok. (CBS News, YouTube)

    Thibaut said “we cannot know” whether the Chinese government could force ByteDance to provide it with U.S. TikTok user data.

    In a February report about TikTok, Thibaut and two colleagues wrote that “if ByteDance or TikTok executives were to refuse an order directing them to allow Chinese intelligence agencies to use TikTok for ‘national intelligence efforts,’ these executives would likely face punishment.”

    TikTok denies that China could force ByteDance to turn over U.S. user data. Beckerman’s letter addressed some of those concerns, saying that since January 2023, new U.S. TikTok data has been stored in the Oracle Cloud in the U.S. and controlled by TikTok’s U.S. subsidiary,  U.S. Data Security. Only the Data Security team employees can access U.S. user data, it said. There are limited exceptions for legal and compliance reasons, which does not include adhering to China’s national security law, it said.

    The company’s U.S. data-storing plan is known as Project Texas and began in 2022 as a way to assure U.S. users their data was secure.

    In March 2023 testimony before a House committee, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew, who is a native of Singapore, told legislators, “ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country” and that under the Project Texas structure, there is no way for China’s government to compel access to U.S. users’ data.

    Our ruling

    Kilmeade said that the Chinese government “owns” TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance Ltd.

    Information on ByteDance, a privately owned company, comes from TikTok and is difficult to independently verify. TikTok said 60% of ByteDance is owned by global investors, including U.S.-based investors, 20% by its Chinese co-founders and 20% by its employees, including thousands in the U.S. The company’s vice president has attested to that structure in a letter to Congress.

    An expert also told us that TikTok has included the same global investor ownership percentage in disclosures to Washington, D.C., courts; funders; and in Chinese government documents. 

    China holds a 1% ownership stake in one of ByteDance’s China-based subsidiaries, Beijing Douyin Information Service Co., which runs an app in China similar to TikTok.

    Although many U.S. officials are concerned that China could exert influence over ByteDance, and thus over TikTok, available evidence does not support the claim that ByteDance is owned by the Chinese government. Kilmeade also offered no evidence to support his statement.

    In the absence of evidence supporting the claim, we rate it False.

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PolitiFact – Fact-checking 3 claims in Tucker Carlson’s show on trans health care

    PolitiFact – Fact-checking 3 claims in Tucker Carlson’s show on trans health care

    [ad_1]

    Since his firing from Fox News, former primetime host Tucker Carlson has taken his show on the digital road — to X, where he has interviewed public figures such as former President Donald Trump and independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr

    On Oct. 4, Carlson released an episode titled “Trans, Inc” that focused on gender-affirming health care provided to transgender people.

    “Genital mutilation is not just a fad. It’s a full-blown industry,” read the caption on Carlson’s X post sharing the episode. The 48-minute video criticized aspects of transgender health care, such as hormones, surgery and social affirmation. It describes “transgenderism” as “unnatural” and “demented,” comparing it with “human sacrifice.” Carlson could not be reached for comment. 

    In the video, Carlson interviewed Chris Mortiz, whom Carlson introduced as a “policy guy” who has “taken a close forensic look at where the money is coming from.” From his limited online presence, we found that Moritz has worked as a lawyer, investment banker and consultant. Mortiz did not respond to our requests for comment. 

    The video included some claims we have fact-checked before. But here are three new assertions involving hormone treatments, gender-affirming surgeries and the trans health care market. 

    Moritz: “With respect to the transgender pharmaceuticals, there are no long-term studies, peer-reviewed, that show the efficacy or not of taking these very powerful pharmaceuticals.”

    Moritz’s description of a total lack of research is inaccurate. The Endocrine Society’s Clinical Practice Guidelines state, “Prior to 1975, few peer-reviewed articles were published concerning endocrine treatment of transgender persons. Since then, more than two thousand articles about various aspects of transgender care have appeared.”

    PolitiFact found several published and peer-reviewed studies examining the long-term effects and efficacy of cross-sex hormone treatment on bone health, cardiovascular risk, mortality, psychosocial functioning and more. There is enough research that we found systematic reviews — analyses of large numbers of individual research studies —  on specific aspects of treatment like bone health.

    Although adolescent treatment for gender dysphoria started only in the late 1990s, transgender adults have received hormonal treatment and sex reassignment surgery since the early 1970s

    Additionally, people who aren’t transgender, including men with low testosterone and women in menopause, sometimes rely on hormone therapy. 

    “Hormone therapy for transgender males and females confers many of the same risks associated with sex hormone replacement therapy in nontransgender persons,” the Endocrine Society’s Clinical Practice Guidelines say. 

    The guideline outlines safe dosages and provides guidance for how physicians should monitor for potential adverse effects.

    Carlson: “I haven’t heard anybody mention female genital mutilation in the United States in quite some time now. Is that because we now officially engage in it?” 

    Female genital mutilation is a nonconsensual procedure that can include the partial or total removal of the clitoris, labia minora or the narrowing of the vaginal opening. The World Health Organization said it is mostly forced on girls younger than 15. More than 200 million women have been affected in 30 countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

    The procedure aims to reduce or eliminate sexual function and pleasure. It is widely considered a human rights violation.

    Dr. Marci Bowers, a gynecological surgeon who does gender-affirming genital surgeries and restorative surgeries for female genital mutilation survivors, told PolitiFact that gender-affirming surgeries do not amount to genital mutilation — the two are entirely different.

    “Transgender surgery is done with full consent of the individual,” Bowers said.

    Female genital mutilation is usually forced on girls younger than 15 in nonmedical and unsterile conditions. Gender-affirming surgeries, however, are performed in hospitals by trained professionals, and are rarely performed on people younger than 18, said Bowers, president of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. When gender-affirming surgery is performed on minors, it is “only under the most severe conditions of gender dysphoria,” she said.

    Bowers also noted the difference in how the two procedures affect women’s sexual functionality — such as the ability to have sensation or orgasm. Gender-affirming surgeries “are generally quite elegant surgeries that leave the individual fully functional versus (female genital mutilation), which robs a woman of functionality,” she said.

    Mariya Taher, co-founder of Sahiyo, an organization working in Asia to end female genital mutilation, agreed with Bowers. Taher told PolitiFact her organization “strongly” believes that gender-affirming health care does not equate to genital mutilation.

    “We are saddened to see the two issues are being conflated” and that female genital mutilation “is being used as a guise to target and harm trans youth and gender-diverse individuals” Taher said.

    Additionally, representatives from the End FGM network in both the U.S. and Europe told PolitiFact that female genital mutilation and gender-affirming surgeries are not the same.

    Moritz: “The combined value sales of sex reassignment surgeries and pharmaceutical products in 2018 was $2.94 billion. By 2022, that figure had rose to $4.18 billion.” 

    We are unsure how Moritz arrived at those numbers; he offered no evidence backing them up and did not answer our inquiries. 

    We found a few publicly available market research reports, which are often commissioned by investors deciding whether to invest in a given industry. But it is difficult to assess the reliability of these reports without knowing the methodology behind them, and estimates can vary widely, said experts.

    Carlson made a broader assertion that profits are driving transgender health care: “Transgenderism, it didn’t happen by accident,” he said. “Some people are profiting from it.”  

    None of the 2022 reports we found for the U.S. market added up to $4.18 billion, but some got close. Grand View Research, for example, values the U.S. sex reassignment hormone therapy market at $1.6 billion and the U.S. sex reassignment surgical market at $2.1 billion in 2022. 

    These values can be calculated using a combination of insurance data, federal and state data, and information directly from medical providers, explained Stephen Parente, professor of finance at the University of Minnesota Carlson School of Management. But for procedures not reimbursed by insurance, getting accurate estimates might prove more challenging. Coverage of health care services for transgender people can differ by state and health plan, according to HealthCare.gov.

    “Most types of health care, including gender affirming care, involve multiple types of providers of goods and services — e.g., drugs, visits, procedures, hospital stays, etc.” said Melinda Buntin, health economist and professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “For this reason, it is hard to assess how much is spent on specific categories of care in sum.”

    The market size can vary depending on what is included in a given estimate, said Supriya Munshaw, associate professor at Johns Hopkins Carey School of Business. Is it just surgery or is the hospital stay included? What about complications? How do they determine what mastectomies are gender-affirming and which are done for breast cancer?

    “How are you actually calculating the number?” said Munshaw. “It might differ in different research reports.”

    The U.S. health care market is large to begin with, totaling $4.3 trillion in 2021, according to federal data on national health expenditures. A market of billions is a “sizable market” from an investment perspective, Munshaw said, but “it doesn’t mean that if something is profitable that the healthcare industry is pushing it.”

    PolitiFact Researcher Caryn Baird contributed to this report.

    CORRECTION, Nov. 15, 2023: Melinda Buntin is health economist and professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Her name was misspelled in an earlier version of this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link