My objection was to the oversimplicity of your clause We havent gone from wrong science to corrected science we have gone from a poor understanding of gender identity determinants a century ago to an improved one to a more improved one we hope but it will be further refined in the future I am also not so sure we should give the credit to science as much as to patients and advocates social activists psychologists and doctors dealing with individual peoples problems values and preferences It is simpleminded naivete to make it a story of heroes and villains and assert we have it correctly now Do you disagree with the other descriptions of the process in the sentence