Looking for "Implicit Bias Training for Michigan Healthcare Professionals"? CLICK HERE

Do No Harm
Donate

Main Menu

    • About Us
    • The Team
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • What Others Say
    • Voices of Do No Harm
    • Newsroom
    • Issue Awareness
    • Federal Policy
    • State Policy
    • Litigation
    • Research
    • Resources
    • Centers
    • Submit a Tip
    • Become a Member
    • Careers
    • Make a Donation
    • Share Your Concern
    • Attend an Event
    • Listen to Our Podcast
  • Donate
  • Media Inquiries
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
Search

Commentary

Dustup at Washington State University Underscores the Politicization of Continuing Medical Education

  • By Naomi Risch
  • November 10, 2025
  • Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education, Washington State University Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine

Share:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
  • Buffer

Continuing Medical Education (CME) is a requirement for maintaining a medical license and is meant to promote professional growth and improve patient care. In practice, a recent dust-up at a Washington medical school reveals that it has become yet another vehicle for injecting and enforcing far-left ideological orthodoxies into American medicine.

Washington State University’s medical school took the commendable step of providing access to CME courses developed by the Society for Evidence Based Gender Medicine, a nonprofit that aspires to bring reason, rigor, and healthy skepticism into debates about so-called “gender affirming care” for minors. 

Unfortunately that decision drew the attention and ire of transgender activists as well as the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME), the organization tasked with determining which entities can provide continuing medical education. Recently, the ACCME initiated an investigation into WSU’s vetting of SEGM courses and ordered them to pull those courses even before the investigation concludes. 

While skeptics of pediatric sex changes are scrutinized by the ACCME, those who toe the line for transgender activists appear to enjoy full autonomy. 

A module provided by the American Medical Association claims that “Access to gender-affirming care is associated with increased quality of life and decreased rates of self-harm…in transgender adults and youth” and that “For some, gender-affirming surgery may be the only effective treatment.” The module fails to note that the evidence used to support these claims is weak and has a high risk of bias, the precise problems that health authorities in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Finland acknowledged in their u-turn on pediatric sex changes.

Meanwhile, the AMA doesn’t feature a single module dedicated to understanding the significant risks of “gender-affirming care.” At best, some courses mention risks in passing. There is just one lone module on detransitioning, compared to 22 modules that mention “gender-affirming care,” which flies in the face of “giving a fair and balanced view of diagnostic and therapeutic options.”

Standard 1 in ACCME’s accreditation requirements is “Ensure Content is Valid,” and mandates that “recommendations for patient care…must be based on current science, evidence, and clinical reasoning, while giving a fair and balanced view of diagnostic and therapeutic options.” Meanwhile, the Standards for Integrity and Independence in Accredited Continuing Education are supposed to “present learners with only accurate, balanced, scientifically justified recommendations.” In practice, it’s clear that ACCME “standards” are wielded as political cudgels and not mechanisms for rigorous, apolitical gatekeeping. 

The problem doesn’t appear to be unique to transgender issues. In a module on the American Medical Association’s website entitled ‘Five Ways Health Care Can Be Better for Fat People,’ sociologist Kristen A. Hardy, who does not hold a medical degree, writes, “Medical or surgical treatments that intentionally attempt to manipulate body weight should not be offered and should be recognized as manifestations of a biased (and racist) cultural mindset…”

There is no attempt in this article to find balance, alternative viewpoints, or scientific justification. Instead, it privileges “cultural mindset” over actual science. This shouldn’t come as a surprise; ACCME’s Strategic Goals for 2022 – 2026 call for “incorporating the issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion into all aspects of accredited education.” Regrettably, this has only exacerbated political agendas permeating medical education. 

While CME holds promise for advancing medical care, we must demand that the ACCME uphold their standards of “only accurate, balanced, scientifically justified recommendations,” lest we waste doctors’ valuable time, contribute to their indoctrination or—much worse—risk harming patients.

Promoted Links

Group of doctors

Become a Member

Help us protect patients, physicians, and healthcare itself from radical, divisive ideology.

JOIN US

Single doctors

Share Your Concern

Have you seen divisive ideology or discrimination at your healthcare employer, medical school, or medical provider? Let us know – anonymously.

Share Anonymously

Stay Informed

Get up to speed with the threats facing healthcare – and how we’re protecting patients and physicians.

Folder

"*" indicates required fields

Do No Harm
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
Search
  • Contact
  • Search
  • Our Story

    • About Us
    • The Team
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • What Others Say
    • Voices of Do No Harm
  • Our Work

    • Newsroom
    • Issue Awareness
      • Identity Politics (DEI)
      • Gender Ideology
    • Federal Policy
    • State Policy
    • Litigation
    • Research
    • Resources
    • Centers
  • Get Involved

    • Submit a Tip
    • Become a Member
    • Careers
    • Make a Donation
    • Share Your Concern
    • Attend an Event
    • Listen to Our Podcast

© Do No Harm 2025 | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer