I don't think science can answer the question definitively. Is it really science to say that at 17 years and 364 days a procedure is ill-advised, but the next day it becomes acceptable?

I think she's trying to get to the right answer for the most people possible. She isn't abandoning the science. She is simply acknowledging its limitations on decisions that affect real people's lives.

These are decisions that need to be made by the people most intimately involved, especially the parents and hopefully they can count on getting the best science-based data to help in their guiding their decision process. It seems WPATH is doing their best to provide them with that evidence and data. And we must remember that it will always be complicated. But I hope we can all agree that GAC is appropriate for some people, and, therefore, outright bans on GAC for people under 18 are wrong.

I have a nephew who would've been severely harmed from such a ban. We need to consider people like him in these decisions.