` ::My objection was to the oversimplicity of your clause. We haven't 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 people's problems, values, and preferences. It is simple-minded 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?  `