Before You Share…
Transgenic mice? Transgender mice? What is even happening and why it helps to pause before you share!
I was scrolling through my Facebook feed three weeks ago when I came across a post that enraged me. It said that certain individuals were confusing “transgenic” mice with “transgender” mice. The post in question is shown below. I was furious and immediately wanted to share and post about it.
But then I stopped and asked myself—can I verify this? Do I know for certain that:
People are actually saying this, and I’m not just amplifying rumors?
That the confusion is truly between “transgenic” and “transgender”?
After looking into it, I found that they really did mean transgender in this post. But then I got distracted and never got around to posting about it until now.
I am bringing this up now, because last night, during his speech to Congress, President Trump mentioned “transgender mice.” Almost immediately, hundreds of posts popped up saying something along the lines of, “It’s transGENIC mice, not transGENDER.”
But I don’t think that’s true. I believe he really did mean transgender. This, in my opinion, is even worse than mistaking it for transgenic.
So let’s talk about what I found three weeks ago, and why I think this distinction even matters.
What does transgenic mean?
First, what is transgenic? Scientists use transgenic animals for many purposes. The term refers to genetically modifying or engineering an organism to study a biological process, a disease, or something else.
For example, in my PhD research, I used transgenic mice engineered to produce a fluorescent protein in cells that made certain cytokines. This allowed me to study immune responses because I could literally “see” which cells were producing those cytokines. In my postdoctoral work, I used transgenic C. elegans for various experiments.
If you’re wondering what transgender means, those Nerdy Girls have a wonderful post that will help you here.
Misrepresenting Research
When I paused and investigated three weeks ago I came across a “report” from a blog focused on (in their words) “saving money and taxes by cutting wasteful government spending”.
It is this blog report that appears to be the source for the post I saw above. I am not going to link it directly because I don’t want to drive traffic to their site. It is a hot mess with many things misrepresented.
However, below is one screenshot.
The report goes on to single out studies on the following topics found using the NIH reporter website.
Understanding the role of hormone differences (testosterone vs. estrogen) on wound healing. These were done using XX and XY mice.
Understanding how gender-affirming hormone therapy may impact the immune response to HIV vaccines.
Understanding the reproductive consequences of steroid administration.
Understanding the microbiome changes that might arise due to gender affirming hormone therapy in mice.
Understanding if transgender men and women have increased risk of overdose due to hormones.
Now, I would argue these are not about making transgender mice, but are about studying important biological questions. Some of them may use transgenic mice - but that is not what the report is having issues with.
Understanding the impact of hormones on different functions has the potential to help all of us in some way because we all make these hormones to some level. Beyond that though, transgender people exist, they have a right to exist, AND they also deserve to have research done that addresses their unique medical needs (see this lovely post here that discusses a bit about why).
No matter how you frame it, this work is important. However, this blog report is removing context to fit their agenda that NIH research using animals shouldn’t be funded. This is a very common tactic to mislead. Don’t fall for it.
So - transgenic or transgender mice?
Given the origins of this misinformation and how it has circulated in certain communities, it’s likely that President Trump was referring to this blog report and did mean transgender mice.
Of course, it’s impossible to know for sure. But considering the broader efforts to undermine transgender rights in the U.S., it’s easy to see how this type of research could be deliberately misrepresented as part of a larger attack on both science and transgender individuals.
Update 3/6/25: The White House released a statement clarifying they DID mean transgender mice. You can read it here. Each of the six studies like specifically do refer to improving transgender care somewhere in their description on NIH reporter. Now, we can still argue semantics because mice can’t self identify so can’t really be “transgender”, but that is NOT the point. They meant transgender care (gender affirming therapy etc..) and there ARE studies being done on that (and SHOULD be).
Why should we care?
We should care about this for a few reasons;
Using “transgender” in this context to justify defunding science is worse than simply mixing it up with “transgenic.” It’s not just a misunderstanding—it’s a statement without context designed to serve an agenda.
Understanding what’s actually being used against us allows us to respond effectively. If we assume the issue is a mix-up between “transgenic” and “transgender,” we risk wasting time correcting something that isn’t actually the problem. Worse, it could make us seem disingenuous to people who are genuinely confused and trying to understand what this research is and why it matters.
We are all susceptible to rumors. This is why verifying information before sharing is critical. No one is perfect. As a scientist, my first assumption when I saw the post was also that this was about transgenic research!
Update 3/6/25: See the message below I received thanking me for this post on facebook. This is exactly why this is an issue that needed calling out.
Rumors and falsehoods thrive when people react before verifying. We need to be vigilant. We need to call out falsehoods, but also ensure we don’t unintentionally spread any ourselves.
I agree that the mice did not "choose" to get GAHT to alter their physical appearance. So in a sense calling them transgender would be like calling someone who received chemotherapy a cancer patient when there could be other reasons they got the treatment. I suppose we can refer to them as gender affirmed mice?
However, is calling mice transgender offensive? Perhaps to transgender individuals but I'd argue that "transgender healthcare" is equally if not more offensive since, going back to my chemo analogy, one does not need to be transgender to receive GAHT. So I don't think transgender healthcare is a drop in replacement for transgender. Maybe gender affirming care?
On another note, is calling someone "orange" offensive? Perhaps if used in a derogatory manner. So I think that part of the thank you message that you shared in the post should be censored a bit but that's really just me nitpicking.
I think it's supposed to be a joke