Silence Speaks Volumes: Nike, Doctors Go Quiet on Controversial Trans Youth Athlete Study

It’s been over six weeks since OutKick first broke the story about a youth transgender athlete study allegedly backed by Nike. In that time, the company has offered little clarity, and the lead researchers at the center of the project have gone conspicuously silent—despite multiple attempts to get answers.

The key figure at the heart of the controversy is Dr. Kathryn Ackerman, a Harvard-affiliated physician and leading voice in female sports medicine. Ackerman was named as the study’s lead researcher and is currently hosting The Female Athlete Conference in Boston, a major bi-annual event focused on advancing care and understanding for women in sports.

But when confronted this week by OutKick, Ackerman made it clear: she doesn’t want to talk.

A Study Shrouded in Mystery

The study in question has raised serious concerns about transparency, ethics, and accountability. Both Ackerman and co-researcher Joanna Harper—a trans woman and sports scientist—have said publicly since 2023 that the study was funded by Nike.

And yet, Nike now claims the project “was never initialized” and “is not moving forward.” The statement came from a Nike executive shortly after OutKick’s original report. The executive did not go on the record but insisted that “no one was wrong,” adding there may have been “gaps in the information chain.”

That’s a diplomatic way of saying something doesn’t add up.

If the study never existed, why did Ackerman and Harper discuss it publicly for two years? If it did exist, why is everyone refusing to talk about it now?

Dodging Questions, Deflecting Accountability

In an effort to get answers, OutKick traveled to Boston to speak directly with Ackerman at her conference. Before delivering her opening remarks, she was approached by our reporter.

“I introduced myself and asked if she’d be willing to answer a few questions,” the reporter recounts. “She said it wasn’t a good time since she was about to go on stage. Fair enough. So I asked when I could return. She seemed hesitant and asked for my name.”

When the reporter replied, “Dan,” Ackerman visibly reacted.

“Oh, I’ve heard of you,” she said. “I know what you want to talk about.”

Pressed further, Ackerman said, “I’d rather not,” and later added, “I think you have your story.”

When told that Nike had essentially disavowed the study, implying she’d been lying about it, Ackerman deflected again.

“We’re doing a female athlete conference here today, and I don’t want to have this interview,” she said firmly.

A Missed Opportunity—or a Calculated Move?

The irony of her refusal wasn’t lost. The Female Athlete Conference includes sessions on fairness in women’s sports, training disparities between men and women, and notably, a presentation titled “The Role of Gender in Sport Science: The Science of Transgender Athletic Performance”—led by none other than Joanna Harper, her co-researcher on the study Nike denies exists.

If not here, where? If not now, when?

Joanna Harper: “I’m Not Supposed to Talk About That”

Later in the day, OutKick attempted to speak with Harper directly. She, too, refused to answer questions.

“I’m really not supposed to talk about that,” Harper said with a strained smile.

When asked why, Harper confirmed there was a reason, but wouldn’t share it. When asked if the study was still ongoing, she simply replied: “I can’t talk about it.”

Within minutes, a hotel security manager approached our reporter and politely asked him to leave the building. It seems someone at the conference was uncomfortable with questions being asked.

Perhaps they weren’t prepared for anyone to ask the hard ones in person.

What Is Nike Hiding?

At this point, the silence appears strategic. Nike won’t go on the record. The researchers won’t answer basic questions. The only acknowledgment is a cryptic statement that the project “was never initialized,” followed by corporate radio silence.

Boston Children’s Hospital—the prestigious institution where Ackerman works—promoted the study in its internal magazine in 2024. So how can something be widely acknowledged by doctors and major institutions for years, only for the primary sponsor to pretend it doesn’t exist?

And if it does exist, why can’t anyone talk about it?

The stakes are high. The subject—transgender youth participation in sports—is one of the most contentious in modern athletics. Questions about fairness, biology, and policy intersect with medicine, ethics, and big money from corporate sponsors like Nike.

Is There a Gag Order?

While there’s no direct evidence of a legal gag order, the coordinated silence strongly suggests a top-down directive. Nike has the leverage and legal muscle to impose nondisclosure agreements or influence public messaging—especially when dealing with high-profile researchers and institutions.

So far, the only consistent message from everyone involved is: “We’re not talking.”

Final Thoughts: Transparency Matters

In an era where sports science is increasingly shaping policy decisions—from school boards to Olympic committees—transparency should not be optional. If Nike funded research into youth transgender athletes, the public has a right to know what was studied, how the results were interpreted, and why the study now seems buried.

When everyone refuses to speak, it raises more questions than it answers. And those questions won’t go away—not for Nike, not for Ackerman, and not for the institutions involved.