On 12 June 2023, I emailed the president of the American Medical Association, Dr Jack Resneck, regarding recent California legislation:

“I notice that the AMA has been unusually quiet about 2 California bills that have important ramifications for patients, parents, and physicians:

CA Bill AB957- gender affirming care

CA Bill AB2098 - informed consent

AB2098 is still being contested in the courts, I believe. With AMA's multiple public statements regarding government overreach in health care regarding reproductive rights, it appears unusual that the AMA hasn't weighed in one way or the other on either bill. They have substantial impact on US healthcare.”

To his credit, Dr Resneck, whose one-year tenure as AMA president ended 14 June 2023, responded to my email on 10 July 2023:

“The first bill you referenced, Assembly Bill 957, concerns family court consideration of a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity in child custody determinations. Though we understand that a parent’s support for a child’s gender identity is an important determinant of child wellbeing, we have not taken a position on the legislation. However, we are in touch with the California Medical Association and are monitoring the bill.

We agree with you that the second bill you referenced, Assembly Bill 2098, has important ramifications for physicians. The bill, which was enacted last year, expands the California medical board’s authority to discipline physicians who disseminate misinformation or disinformation about the COVID-19 virus. As you noted, the law has been challenged in court and is currently enjoined pending the outcome of litigation. The AMA’s Litigation Center is monitoring the litigation, as it has not yet reached the appellate level.

The American Medical Association (AMA) is committed to confronting disinformation, and during my time as President, I emphasized the imperative of combatting disinformation because it sows distrust in experts, science, and medical institutions, and hampers our ability to respond effectively in a health crisis.”[i]

As the leader and voice of the AMA, Dr Resneck has immense responsibility and influence. Both he and his predecessor, Dr Gerald Harmon, were incredibly active in supporting mandatory vaccination requirements, opposing anti-abortion legislation, supporting affirmative action, endorsing critical race theory, and protesting the June 2024 SCOTUS ruling that overturned Roe vs Wade. They published numerous press releases and online postings regarding these political issues that they clearly have taken a side on. Resneck, in particular, has been particularly active with the abortion issue. On 24 June 2022, he released a press release called “Ruling an egregious allowance of government intrusion into medicine.” He has been publicly active on the topic ever since. His 26 May 2023 tweet on abortion was but one of many on the topic:

“Actually, I've spoken publicly about the danger of criminalizing reproductive healthcare and states and regulatory bodies coming after abortion providers all year, including Dr. Bernard.  AMA has briefed in multiple federal court cases seeking to protect abortion access, from district courts to circuit courts to the Supreme Court.  I've testified in Congress and written widely about the reckless efforts by states to interfere in abortion care.  I've done countless interviews on national TV and print media.  We've worked with the federal government to mitigate the terrible downstream consequences for women and public health where possible.  We're bringing attention to less known downstream consequences, including physicians having to leave restrictive states, OB residents no longer wanting to train there, labor and delivery units closing, and patients losing access to other related medications.  Our policies are unequivocal and I'm proud of our AMA work in this extremely challenging time.”

The AMA clearly is an active and outspoken influencer of government and public opinion when doing so suits the political appetite of its leadership. Its silence regarding the following two California bills, however, is concerning as it indicates it is likely trying to have it both ways: get the outcome it wants without having to have its opinion captured on public record.

California Bill AB957 – the law has passed the California House and is now being debated in the Senate. It includes language that would add a parent’s denial of their child’s gender expression to the list of offenses deemed child abuse and therefore included in child custody considerations.

“This bill, for purposes of this provision, would include a parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity or gender expression as part of the health, safety, and welfare of the child.”

This Bill is concerning to many for several reasons. First, it removes parental input into a child’s decision to pursue genital mutilation and intense chemical makeovers. Second, it puts providers in the precarious position of being forced to report parents that suppress their six-year old’s desire to change their gender based upon prodding from teachers, friends, or other unacceptable influencers. Remember, physicians that fail to report child abuse face professional and criminal sanctions. The AMA seems to care little for parents’ rights and for the untenable position California physicians may find themselves in if this law passes.

The science is far from settled on transgenderism and the long-term effects of its treatments. The incidence has skyrocketed from approximately .01% to upwards of 5% of minors, most likely due to societal and social media influencing.  Sweden is halting most gender affirmation treatments for minors and instead advocating behavioral health interventions until the patient reaches the age of majority and can make a more informed and educated decision. More countries are following suit.

The AMA seems unconcerned that there is a high likelihood that a staggering number of children wanting to change their gender may not have gender dysphoria and actually are just anxious kids listening and mimicking others. The also seem to be consciously ignoring the lack of data on long term safety and the fact that countries with far more experience in gender affirming care are rethinking their previously aggressive stances.

California Bill AB2098 – this was signed into law in September 2022 but is currently in a legal injunction pending legal challenges. This law forbids physicians from providing informed consent or anything negative or ‘misinformation’ about the covid vaccine. As a law, it provides professional and legal consequences for offending physicians.

“(2) “Disinformation” means misinformation that the licensee deliberately disseminated with malicious intent or an intent to mislead.

(3) “Disseminate” means the conveyance of information from the licensee to a patient under the licensee’s care in the form of treatment or advice.

(4) “Misinformation” means false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care.”

“In the form of treatment or advice” explicitly interjects California’s government into the exam room. Non-medical entities (aka the law) now get to decide what medical ‘misinformation’ is. With censorship from social media, government organizations, and medical organizations during COVID-19, this law should be particularly concerning to all Americans as it now elevates the suppression of dissent from mere ‘misconduct’ on a social media platform to criminal behavior. The AMA seems to agree due to its public silence and from statements made by its most recent president in the email and other venues.

It is interesting that the same organization that doesn’t want the government to interfere with a woman’s choice to have an abortion is silent on the California government’s chilling law to prevent patients from seeking informed consent decisions from their providers on a vaccination that has real potential for harm. As with any treatment, a full informed consent is important for patient safety and for calculus to undertake an intervention or not. Patient rights have advanced over the past century to ensure drug companies and governments don’t endanger patients by denying them information and a choice to get a treatment or not. The infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiments come to mind. The AMA seems to have no issue supporting California’s attempt to return to such dangerous and reckless times of the past.

The AMA’s silence regarding these 2 bills indicates they are willing to pick and choose which government intrusions into medicine are permissible. This is weaponization of medicine to achieve social and political goals, plain and simple. The AMA clearly has clearly sided with the radical social goals of one political party in America. History is rife with examples of totalitarian governments using medicine to enforce its nefarious edicts. Nazi Germany comes to mind with eugenics.