Hegseth’s testosterone mandate carries risks, raises questions

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth kicked a hornet’s nest with his move this week to test troops’ testosterone levels. 

Hegseth argues the effort, to become part of the military’s periodic health assessment for troops over 30, will ensure the optimal performance and long-term health of warfighters.

But medical experts say Hegseth’s rationale for the directive isn’t backed by science, warning of overdiagnosis and warning of side effects like heart problems and infertility. 

Coming amid the broader embrace of the hormone among White House officials, the move plays into Hegseth’s focus on appearances and masculinity, which one Democrat said this week borders on “homoeroticism.”

Derek Griffith, the director of the program for research on men’s health at the University of Pennsylvania, told The Hill that as only 2 percent of the male population suffers from low testosterone, it doesn’t “suggest that this is a major problem” in the military — a group of relatively younger, fitter men and women. 

Griffith said that for those who have low testosterone, testosterone replacement therapy, or TRT, could help improve their health. That’s exactly what the Pentagon is offering should troops find they have low levels of the hormone. 

But Griffith was skeptical that the Defense Department was putting the correct amount of energy into the issue versus addressing the primary drivers of poor health outcomes in men, including heart disease, cancer, hypertension, diabetes, depression and alcohol abuse.

“I don’t fully understand,” he said of the new screening guidelines. “I don’t know what they’re seeing or what data they’re using to say ‘this is where we need to really focus and put our energy.’”

And when it comes to the age to start screening for low testosterone, he said 30 is “not probably where I would start.”

“It’s not what’s usually a major issue for healthy men,” Griffith said. “I imagine for most active-duty military, they’re pretty much at a healthy weight. So I would be curious what percentage they’re expecting to identify who........

© The Hill