Skip to main content

Democratic senators want answers about Hegseth’s military testosterone plan

Paratroopers assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division, walk the final mile of the 12-mile ruck march during E3B on Fort Liberty, North Carolina, Sept. 21, 2024. (U.S. Army)

(WASHINGTON) — Senate Democrats are pressing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for answers about his directive requiring the military to measure troops’ testosterone levels, seeking details on how the policy will be carried out amid concerns over how it will apply to women and whether it could inadvertently encourage service members to self-medicate with potentially dangerous supplements.

In a letter to Hegseth, Sens. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, Gary Peters of Michigan, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Ruben Gallego of Arizona said the Pentagon has provided little explanation for the new requirement, raising questions about its scientific basis, cost and potential consequences.

“The Department has provided no evidence that this sweeping new policy will improve force readiness or health, nor has it explained the scientific basis, costs, or risks associated with implementing it across the force,” the senators wrote.

Last week, Hegseth directed the military to begin screening testosterone levels for all service members, including women, age 30 and older as part of their annual physical health assessments, expanding routine exams that have traditionally focused on baseline health measures such as vision, hearing and other standard medical screenings. Troops under 30 may opt into testing voluntarily, and any recommendation for testosterone replacement therapy, or TRT, would also be voluntary for all ages.

The policy has yet to be formally implemented, thus the specifics have not yet been figured out and it remains unclear when service members will begin undergoing testosterone screenings as part of their annual health assessments, though Hegseth directed a plan be ironed out by Aug. 15. 

The cost is also unknown and the Defense Department could require additional medical personnel to be hired for the screenings at routine annual exams.

The move comes as a broader focus on fitness has been core to Hegseth’s tenure — an unusual move for a role traditionally focused on large operations and the macro workings for the Pentagon — which includes regular videos from the Pentagon of Hegseth working out with troops. 

Hegseth has directed the services to adjust their fitness tests and reassess body-fat standards, including new measurement methods introduced earlier this month. The Army has also begun integrating gender-neutral fitness requirements for soldiers serving in ground combat roles.

Among the unresolved questions are whether service members could face administrative consequences if their testosterone levels fall below a threshold the Pentagon has yet to define and how the policy will apply to women.

“Coupled with the Department’s recent repeated efforts to redefine military culture around an exaggerated conception of masculinity, this initiative risks undermining years of work to ensure that women service members are evaluated and valued based solely on their ability to perform the mission,” the senators wrote.

Some welcomed the expanded access to testosterone screening and treatment, arguing that obtaining testosterone replacement therapy through Tricare, the military’s health insurance program, can be cumbersome. But others warned the policy could create unintended incentives for troops to use unregulated supplements or anabolic steroids to avoid being flagged for potential health issues, while raising concerns about embarrassment for those found to have low testosterone.

“I think this is a great idea on paper, but we need to be careful about how it’s implemented,” said one official who works in fitness coaching and spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

Low testosterone has long been a concern in some parts of the military, particularly within the special operations community, where prolonged stress, intense physical demands and inadequate caloric intake are believed to contribute to lower hormone levels, though there’s little detailed research on the subject. 

At the same time, testosterone replacement therapy, or TRT, has surged in popularity across podcasts, social media and the broader wellness industry, where it is often promoted as a way to boost energy, muscle mass and overall vitality. Medical experts caution, however, that clinically low testosterone is relatively uncommon.

Testosterone deficiency affects roughly 2% of men, according to the American Urological Association, and physicians have warned that the growing popularity of TRT has created the misleading impression that the condition is far more widespread than medical evidence suggests.

Moreover, factors such as insufficient sleep and poor nutrition can contribute to lower testosterone levels, studies show, two issues the military has long struggled to address.

Nutrition, in particular, has been a persistent challenge across the services, with troops often reporting inconsistent access to high-quality, protein-rich meals. Military dining facilities have faced criticism for menus heavy on fried foods and carbohydrates, sugar, limited portions and operating hours that do not always align with the schedules of service members working long or irregular shifts.

“It’s a readiness, retention, recruiting and long-term health issue,” Rob Evans, an Army veteran whose app Hots & Cots collects reviews from service members on housing and food on military bases, told ABC News about issues with nutrition on military facilities.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Trump needs to get tough on China to get tough on Iran’s economy. He’s been reluctant to do that

(CNN) — The Trump administration appears to have landed on a fallback strategy in the Iran war after military strikes and negotiations failed to deliver victory: threats of harsh economic sanctions.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has called them the “toughest sanctions in history,” which will “collapse this regime.” He’s even called it an “economic D-Day” for Iran, comparing it to the historic invasion of Nazi-occupied France during World War II.There’s just one problem: Making good on those tough words requires not just getting tough on Iran, but also getting tough on China, which is Tehran’s No. 1 trading partner.And Trump and his administration have proved quite reluctant to do that.When Bessent rolled out the economic strategy Monday, he didn’t name specific countries that would be punished — or lay out timelines — if they don’t cut ties. And the announcement notably did not include secondary sanctions on the large Chinese banks that facilitate Beijing’s purchases from Iran.China buys as much as 90% of Iran’s oil. Economic analysts have told CNN that targeting these banks and Chinese companies would be crucial to exacting a major toll on Iran’s economy.But not for the first time in recent days, Bessent punted on exactly what would be done on that front. He suggested messages were being sent — saying “no one is above the reach of US sanctions” — but didn’t detail what will happen with China.“If they facilitate transactions and are part of the ecosystem that turns Iranian oil into money, into repression, they will be targeted,” Bessent said. “We find that the best way to engage with countries is through quiet diplomacy.”He added: “So when the hammer of US Treasury actions falls upon them, they will have no one to blame but themselves.”But you could be forgiven for thinking this might be lots of sound and fury signifying relatively little.That’s because not only has the administration regularly backed off the threats it’s made in the Iran war, but it has a track record of treading gently around China, whose leader, Xi Jinping, is set to visit the White House next month.While Trump has made a big show about getting tough on China over the years, he backed off his trade war with Beijing in October, agreeing to a one-year truce. That followed shortly after Beijing upped its leverage by restricting access to critical rare-earth minerals and halting purchases of American soybeans.Trump last year also ignored federal law to help save the Chinese-owned video app TikTok, despite his first administration having labeled it a grave national security threat because of its ability to spy on Americans.Fast forward to Trump’s visit to China in May, and rather than pressing Xi publicly on a potential invasion of Taiwan, Trump made some major Taiwan-related rhetorical concessions.He also backed off his previous promises to get China to free Jimmy Lai, a former Hong Kong media tycoon who criticized the Chinese Community Party, as well as to ban Beijing from buying American farmland and to “aggressively” revoke Chinese student visas.By July, Trump delivered a primetime address in which he claimed China effectively interfered in the 2020 US election (which is not what the evidence actually showed). But rather than punish China for this seemingly major purported provocation, Trump downplayed the need for retaliation.The president seemed to prefer to use China to try to substantiate his still-baseless claims of stolen elections, without going to the trouble of holding the alleged thief accountable.And even in the context of the Iran war, Trump has been gentle with China.He has repeatedly shrugged off the idea that Beijing is helping Iran. And on his way back from China in May, he said he was considering lifting sanctions on Chinese companies that buy Iranian oil.Trump at the time was trying to secure a deal with Iran. But it’s telling that he’s been willing to telegraph potential carrots involving China, even as his administration is reluctant to publicly threaten to use the stick against it. In the latter case, it prefers “quiet diplomacy.”Also telling would seem to be Bessent’s comments Monday when CNN asked why the major secondary sanctions he previewed didn’t start immediately.“Well, we are giving everyone the opportunity to remedy bad behavior,” he said. “Why would I want to blow up the global financial system?”The administration appears well aware that getting tough on Iran would entail going after China — a risk that it might decide isn’t worth it.There’s an argument to be made that these topics are best addressed next month, during Xi’s state visit to Washington.But such pomp and circumstance can drain Trump of his resolve to get tough (as seen during his May visit to China) — and that’s if he even wants to get tough on China right now.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story