Keeping Politics Out of Medicine

A Doctor's Fight for Medical Integrity

Dr. Stanley Goldfarb’s book Doing Great Harm? is not a typical critique of modern social trends. Instead, it offers a rare and personal account from someone who has spent decades within the medical establishment, witnessing its transformation and deciding to take action. The narrative begins with his own experience of being canceled by the University of Pennsylvania’s medical school and the online medical encyclopedia UpToDate. This came about after he questioned whether lowering standards in the name of diversity could actually harm patients. What followed was unexpected—rather than retreating, Goldfarb founded Do No Harm, a national network of physicians, nurses, and patients committed to resisting what he calls the “ideological capture” of medicine.

Goldfarb’s central argument is clear and compelling. He claims that the core ethical principle of medicine, “do no harm,” has been replaced by a political one: “do social justice.” Admissions committees now prioritize “lived experience” over academic qualifications. Professors encourage students to view objectivity as a form of bias. The American Medical Association even suggests that doctors should consider “equity” in treatment decisions, sometimes at the expense of equal care. What was once a science focused on individual patients has transformed into an experiment in social engineering.

Goldfarb presents these points like a clinician analyzing lab results. He emphasizes that every hour spent on ideological training is an hour lost to mastering essential medical knowledge such as anatomy, pharmacology, or diagnostics. When political conformity replaces scientific rigor, the consequences are real and affect patients directly. What makes his book persuasive, even to skeptics, is that Goldfarb never sounds like a partisan. He acknowledges the existence of racism and inequity in healthcare but argues that replacing one set of biases with another isn’t progress—it’s malpractice. His tone is weary rather than angry, and it carries the moral authority of a doctor who has seen the dangers of compromising truth.

The Campaign Against Pediatric Gender Medicine

The second half of the book expands into Do No Harm’s campaign against pediatric gender medicine, where Goldfarb’s clarity turns into moral urgency. He describes how children presenting with anxiety, depression, autism, or trauma are often directed toward irreversible interventions under the guise of “affirmation.” His group has helped draft and pass laws in 25 states to ban puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries for minors, while also creating long-term liability provisions so that detransitioners can hold institutions and doctors accountable for harm done.

Regardless of one’s political views, these sections raise serious concerns about the current state of pediatric care. However, Goldfarb draws a clear line when it comes to adulthood, arguing that once a person turns 18, the state should step back. This stance, however, reveals a significant inconsistency. He insists that informed consent requires stable judgment and a full understanding of risk. Yet, the mental health challenges he documents in adolescents—depression, self-harm, anxiety, autistic traits, and personality disorders—often persist into adulthood. The ability to give meaningful consent to life-altering procedures depends on more than just age; it requires stability, comprehension, and freedom from coercion, which are often lacking even among adults seeking transition.

The Broader Implications for Medicine

Goldfarb’s deeper warning goes beyond DEI or gender policy. It addresses what happens when medicine loses its humility. The authority of the medical profession was built on the belief that truth exists outside ideology and that a doctor’s primary duty is to seek it on behalf of the patient. When schools prioritize “representation” over readiness, qualified individuals are displaced by those less prepared. When administrators focus on “equitable outcomes,” they may quietly abandon equal treatment. When doctors are trained to see patients as avatars of identity, medicine ceases to be personal and becomes political theater.

A Fight for the Soul of Medicine

Doing Great Harm? is the work of a man who realized that complaining alone wasn’t enough. The book is more persuasive because it avoids self-pity and bombast. By the time readers reach the end, even the most skeptical will concede that Goldfarb is fighting for something greater than a culture war—he is fighting for the soul of medicine. He does so in the way doctors used to: with evidence, ethics, and the courage to tell uncomfortable truths.

You don’t have to agree with Goldfarb’s perspective to recognize that something is breaking within the medical profession. The question that once guided medicine—“What’s wrong, and how do we fix it?”—has shifted to “Whose fault is it, and what does justice require?” The first approach heals; the second divides.