Scientific‑integrity accreditation standard

Require accreditors to enumerate 'scientific integrity' as an explicit criterion for programs, define how to treat 'contested' areas, and mandate procedures that protect open inquiry and competing clinical models (e.g., for youth gender medicine). This would tie program approval to demonstrated tolerance for debate, transparent evidence thresholds, and clear complaint protocols. — If adopted, such a standard would shift the leverage in professional disputes from ideological factionalism to procedural rules and evidence, affecting training pipelines, patient care standards, and public trust in professions.