Your best resources for debunking Cass disinformation

We hope the dust will now settle on misinformation that’s been shared about the Cass Review since its publication on April 10. However some of that misinformation has already spread from social media to mainstream outlets. We’ve compiled a short but sound list which should give you everything you need when faced with these claims in scripts or from contributors, or in any Cass or gender story follow up. Remember one claim about cherrypicked studies was made by a contributor talking about their ‘lived experience’ on the BBC - these allegations can pop up any time and you need to be ready.

The Cass Review in full, published April 10 2024. It’s nearly 400 pages so it’s inevitable that many journalists covering it won’t have read it and will be dependent on secondary sources. Here are two summaries from UK broadsheets - both published before claims were made seeking to undermine the quality of the Review.

The Guardian

The Daily Telegraph

Dr Cass herself has now spoken out to quash the claims, 20 April 2024.

• The Times interview with Dr Hilary Cass

The British Medical Journal: editorial by the Editor in Chief Kamran Abbasi

• The Cass review: an opoprtunity to unite behind evidence-informed care in gender medicine

Final clarifications on the Cass Review published April 26

BBC More or Less (12 minute listen)

• Investigating claims that the Cass Review into gender identity services for under-18s in England’s NHS ignored the vast majority of evidence

Benjamin Ryan: Health and science reporter who has written for the New York Times, NBC News, The Guardian, the New York Sun, the Washington Post and the Atlantic

• The Cass Review Fact Check by Ben Ryan

Andy Lewis: Quackbuster critical thinking and science website

• Cass Fact Check Part One

• Cass Fact Check Part Two

Some of the debunks are almost as complex and weighty as the report itself. However all the misinformation has been addressed, and it may be that these resources can be sent to health/gender/identity correspondents or to commissioning editors and presenters, if you feel that the Cass Review is in danger of being misrepresented.