Bryan Kohberger defense team’s alternate suspects list sealed

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s controversial plan to test service members’ testosterone levels may end up having an ironic side effect on male soldiers, two medical experts said in a new report.

Dr. Adrian Dobs, a professor of medicine and oncology at John Hopkins University School of Medicine explained the issue to The Intercept Friday.

“We’re sort of creating a dependency on testosterone,” Dobs said. “Men who take testosterone will have a reduction in their sperm counts.”

Last week, Hegseth announced a new policy that would see all U.S. service members over the age of 30 be tested annually for testosterone levels, boasting about his efforts to transform the Defense Department into the “High-T Department of War.”

The policy is already facing legal challenges, with a federal judge on Wednesday ordering the Trump administration to explain how the new testing policy squares with its existing ban on hormone treatment for transgender service members.

Per the policy, testosterone screening will be mandatory for all service members over 30, though service members under 30 may voluntarily get screened as well.

The concern among medical experts, such as Dr. Alvin Matsumoto, a professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Medicine, is that mandatory screening may produce unreliable results given that a person’s testosterone levels can vary widely depending on a number of factors, including the time of day and recent meals.

“That creates a risk under a program that will routinely screen otherwise healthy troops and make testosterone therapy available to those subsequently diagnosed with a deficiency,” The Intercept’s report reads.

Furthermore, the policy would almost certainly result in some service members being given testosterone replacement therapy when not medically necessary.

“Here we have men who are in their prime of reproduction, and we’re causing a drop in their sperm counts when there really may not be sufficient benefit,” Dobs said.

CNN analyst Andrew McCabe on Tuesday pointed out that the Department of Justice never responded to President Donald Trump's IRS lawsuit — and how that could impact Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's nomination.

The former deputy director of the FBI told CNN anchor Kasie Hunt that, as Blanche's nomination remains in limbo ahead of Thursday's vote, further questions about Trump's former personal attorney have come to light.

"Let's remember, there essentially was never really a true lawsuit here," McCabe said. "The president sued the IRS for $10 billion. The Department of Justice never even answered the complaint. So, there were never two opposing parties. The Justice Department never stood up and defended the United States in the way that it did in every other suit brought by the same leak from the same person."

This was unusual, McCabe explained.

"And because of that oddity, that's a very suspicious decision on the part of people like Todd Blanche and others," he said. "The lack of a true controversy meant that the entire thing was about to get dismissed. Before that could happen, they entered into these agreements. One of them, of course, created the weaponization fund, and the second one essentially granted complete immunity forever to Donald Trump, his family members and businesses."

McCabe described the situation further.

"It was basically a giveaway from the Department of Justice to the president," McCabe said. "How this thing stands or was ever conceived — I have no idea. I've been around many, many settlements of criminal matters, some of which involved IRS criminal matters, and have never seen any language like this. I think it's absolutely unprecedented and an incredibly bad idea."

The IRS settlement became a sticking point for some Republican senators during Blanche's confirmation hearing. On Tuesday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said there is no deal on Blanche's confirmation because of the settlement and the so-called anti-weaponization fund, Politico reported.