The poll, completed on Sunday, was conducted over a four-day period that saw Trump throw three major news organizations out of the White House and muse that Washington’s iconic Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts — named after slain President John F. Kennedy — could be torn down if Trump’s own name could not be added to it.

It found voters leaning away from supporting Trump’s fellow Republicans in the Nov. 3 midterm elections that will determine control of Congress for the next two years.

Trump’s overall approval was down from a reading of 35% in last week’s Reuters/Ipsos poll, with support among his own Republicans down to 73% from 82% a week earlier.

Trump returned to the White House in January 2025 on promises to tame inflation and end foreign wars. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in the hours after he was sworn in, he enjoyed a 47% approval rating.

Just 17% of respondents in the new poll approved of his handling of the cost of living — the top issue Americans say will determine how they vote in November.

Iran takes a toll

Dissatisfaction among Republicans on inflation has been growing since Trump launched the war on Iran in February that has pushed gasoline and diesel prices sharply higher. Now for the first time, Republicans who disapprove of Trump’s handling of the cost of living outnumber those who give him a thumbs up — 51% to 44%.

Trump’s approval rating is lower than any recorded for his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, whose presidency was also marked by surging inflation and who ultimately ended his reelection bid after a poor debate performance heightened concerns about his age. Biden’s low was 35%, reached in late October 2024.

Only 34% of the most recent poll respondents approve of the strikes on Iran. The conflict has cut the world off from a significant slice of the oil and gas produced in the Middle East, and threatens to stoke higher inflation in the US and elsewhere as businesses pass on higher fuel costs to consumers.

Trump initially said the conflict would last a few weeks and that Iran needed to be bombed to stop it from developing nuclear weapons. Earlier this month, the Republican leader pledged the war would end “immediately after” the election. But Iran has shown no sign of giving up, and in recent weeks Tehran and its allies have threatened further disruptions to oil markets.

Some 82% of poll respondents — including nine in ten Democrats and three-quarters of Republicans — said the conflict would likely go on for an “extended period of time.”

The Reuters/Ipsos poll showed registered voters in the poll picked Democrats over Republicans — 43% to 35% — when asked how they would vote in the midterms. The eight-point gap was the biggest lead for Democrats in Reuters/Ipsos polling this year. For Republicans, losing control of either chamber could complicate Trump’s agenda in the last two years of his term.

The poll results on congressional voting plans provide an overall view of which party Americans nationwide want to see ​in charge in Congress, though the results don’t capture all the nuances of the state-by-state and district-by-district contests that determine control of the ​Senate and House of Representatives.

Trump remains popular among Republicans on the issue of immigration — with 79% of his party backing him — but only 36% of Americans overall support his approach to the matter and 55% disapprove. Some Republican allies in Congress have warned that his aggressive campaign to deport people in the country illegally risks alienating voters with family who recently immigrated to America, like some Hispanics.

Some 35% of poll respondents approve of Trump’s approach to fighting crime, compared to 50% who disapprove.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online and gathered 1,277 responses from US adults nationwide. It had a margin of error of 3 percentage points.

Col. Kellie Courtland, commander of the 37th Training Wing out of Joint Base San Antonio-Lackland, said the Air Force’s Basic Military Training Next’s evolution, now in version BMT 3.0, is turning fledgling airmen into strategists by orienting them to the fight earlier on.

“Everybody’s into BMT Next. We can create you the best air-minded badass warrior you’ve ever seen, but that is of no value if when they get to tech training, it’s lost there, and those things are not continued … or you get out to your first operationalized unit, and that fire you’ve got burning, all those skills you learned, everything that you saw is lost at that doorstep because nobody keeps it going,” Courtland said. “So we have to pull that thread all the way through into the operational Air Force, or it’s lost right at our doorstep.”

“It used to be, [trainees] would ask you those very simple questions about, you know, when will I get to fly home and see my parents next,” she continued. “Now it’s the really tough questions … ‘Ma’am, if they’re targeting us so closely and we’re actually hunted out there when we go out and deploy, how do we work through that? What tools are we going to have for that?’”

BMT 3.0, which did a partial launch in April, purports to put trainees in closer touch with combat conditions, giving them, for example, the opportunity to touch, load and rearm an F-16 Fighting Falcon — a chance they previously wouldn’t have until follow-on technical training.

A new air training range at San Antonio-Lackland will include two C-130 Hercules aircraft and space to perform exercises focused on “defend, operate, generate, sustain,” Cortland said, with the full range expected to be nearly complete by the end of 2027.

But Courtland and her senior enlisted advisor, Chief Master Sgt. Caleb Vaden, emphasized that the core of the amped-up training wasn’t just about getting closer to combat airframes and operations. They are also stressing the airmen more in situations akin to combat operational tempo.

“We’ve got some sleep deprivation involved, so they’re built to endure at the foundational level, and then integrated to win,” Vaden said. “They know how it is to integrate as a team, read a mission order, execute that order, debrief that order, troops leading procedures — all those foundational things that should happen in Basic are now happening.”

Despite the added intensity, though, Courtland said the course hasn’t seen higher trainee attrition rates compared to the legacy program.

“People want this,” she said. “They like that connection to the mission and what they’re going to do, and I think they’re motivated by the success of others, too. Watching their teammates get involved in this, and being excited about this and being ready for this, and just that ability to go out there and touch and feel the mission instead of … folding clothes up in the dormitory, is massive for what they get to do.”

Leaders are still working, Cortland and Vaden said, to develop the right kind of training for the military training instructors so they can deliver the rigor and the combat focus the new program calls for.

But Courtland said more prospective instructors are now “knocking at the door.” Maintainers and support personnel who previously weren’t interested in an MTI role are now applying, she said, because of the increased emphasis on operational requirements.

Now, Courtland said, she wants the home station units that receive newly trained airmen to keep challenging them and encouraging the combat-focused mindset so the benefits of the changes don’t get lost.

While the changes to BMT might not be fully complete until the early 2030s, Courtland said, officers are already asking about incorporating similar combat-focused updates to Officer Training School. And that’s a real possibility, she added, though the decision is ultimately up to “the powers that be.”

“Everybody has heard that, and that feedback is out there,” she said. “But it’s good, because it shows people want that. They know it’s the right time. They understand the environment’s change, and with that, we have to change. And that starts with training.”

On Friday, a new FQ-42 Vengeance aircraft was delivered to Creech Air Force Base, according to a Monday company release, and will continue regular test and evaluation operations to experiment with the new jet.

“Every week, the Air Force is pushing forward with new and more impressive accomplishments using Vengeance. It’s amazing to think of how far this program has come in such a short amount of time,” Vice President of Advanced Programs Mike Atwood said in the release.

The announcement follows two months after Creech conducted an Agile Combat Employment exercise using Anduril’s FQ-44 Fury, allowing airmen to carry out sorties and build foundational tactics and procedures that will mold how CCA are integrated into the force.

Anduril has yet to announce which Air Force base will house Fury.

Vengeance, which has an internal weapons bay and other low observability and boosted survivability features, flew alongside F-35 and F-15E Strike Eagles in preparation for collaborative control operations with manned aircraft, per the statement.

Recently, Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink revealed that the service expects to have at least 500 autonomous aircraft in service by 2032, with them meant to perform many of the same missions manned fighters complete currently.

“By then, our special operators will have the ability to employ thousands of autonomous one-way attack systems, and we will have autonomous fighters like the Collaborative Combat Aircraft,” Meink said during last week’s keynote address at the Air & Space Forces Association’s 2026 Air, Space & Cyber Conference.

General Atomics said the company completed a new “low-observable paint facility” aimed at supporting CCA production with increased manufacturing space, and the company is on track to deliver six aircraft per month.

Vengeance’s production is underway on General Atomics’ dime as “government funding plans mature,” per the statement, in an effort to prevent delays in delivery.

The service’s fiscal 2027 request included $996.5 million in procurement funding for the CCA program. It also requests $150 million in advanced procurement for the following fiscal year and $1.37 billion in continued research and development. The total program request is $2.37 billion.

The Air Force began a new initiative in 2025 called the Future of Undergraduate Pilot Training, shifting flight training from traditional military pilot training to civilian flight schools. The ability to add 1,500 pilots this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, confirms the validity of the FUPT to bridge the gap of the service’s 2,407-pilot shortfall, according to a recent release.

“Reaching 1,500 pilots is a milestone, but it is not the finish line,” Lt. Gen. Clark J. Quinn, commander of Air Education and Training Command, said in the release. “FUPT was built to overcome long-standing constraints including instructor shortages and aircraft availability to deliver the aviators our combatant commanders require.”

In the FUPT model, AETC and civilian aviation programs are paired together to allow student pilots to complete foundational flight training at Federal Aviation Administration Part 141-certified civilian flight schools across Texas, Arizona, Florida and Georgia, before using military aircraft.

The framework allows the Air Force to reserve military aircraft, instructor capacity and flying hours for advanced military training, while permitting students to earn their private pilot license, instrument rating and multi-engine rating.

Student pilots enter the military pipeline with around 120 flight hours, instead of only 30 under the previous Initial Flight Training structure.

After the “civilian phase,” student pilots transition to a military syllabus focused on the T-6A Texan II trainer aircraft and advanced simulation to gain their wings, the release states.

Because the students arrive with foundational knowledge, military instructor pilots can focus on tactical fundamentals, rather than basic skills, according to the Air Force.

The 19th Air Force, which oversees and manages all formal aircrew flying training, redesigned the T-6 curriculum into a “competency-based syllabus” that matched operational requirements, reducing T-6 training days by 31%.

“Achieving 1,500 validates that we can scale future undergraduate pilot training, and we now continue the focus on refining the training to ensure the quality of our graduates matches the scale,” Quinn said.

“Our instructor pilots, maintainers, and support teams adapted this enterprise to meet the need, ensuring a steady flow of skilled aviators for our combatant commands,” he concluded.

In his first statement since being charged with 10 specifications under three UCMJ articles, Watson shared that his oath to the Constitution made him act, saying that it was nonpartisan and he would’ve protested any office that violated the law.

Chris Mutimer, Watson’s civilian attorney, said in the Friday preliminary hearing at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, Washington, D.C., that the case at hand is whether a crime was committed, not if his words were wise.

Watson is charged with three specifications of Article 88, contempt toward officials, five specifications of Article 92, failure to obey order or regulation, and two specifications of Article 133, conduct unbecoming of an officer.

The Air Force major called for the removal, conviction and impeachment of President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance on the steps of the U.S. Capitol in early July. A month prior, he interviewed with the Defenders of Our Republic Substack as well as CNN in August, which led to specifications in Article 88.

Watson’s defense argued that criticism is not a charge of contempt, and Article 88 is rarely charged and, when it is, it is inconsistent, saying that this case should be referred to a special court-martial instead of a general court-martial.

A special court-martial is for misdemeanor-level offenses, while a general court-martial is the most severe for felony offenses.

His defense rested heavily on the previous case of Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller, a Marine Corps officer who spoke out against U.S. leaders in October 2021 over the withdrawal from Afghanistan while wearing his uniform in viral social media videos.

Scheller pleaded guilty to all six violations of the UCMJ that were levied against him: Article 88, Article 89, Article 90, two charges of Article 92, and 27 specifications of Article 133.

Scheller was sentenced to forfeit one month’s pay of $5,000 and to receive a punitive letter of reprimand. After serving in the Corps for 17 years, he later left in December 2021.

The Marine Corps officer was only in pretrial confinement for nine days, while Watson has been in solitary confinement for 35 days thus far as of Monday.

The defense showed a video of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth praising Scheller on Fox & Friends at the time, telling him he “showed the kind of backbone the vast majority of politicians would never show, to cut against the grain and put their career on the line, to speak truth, to take accountability when no one else did.”

Scheller was later appointed by Hegseth as Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel and Readiness in 2025.

“The law will not make the same word a virtue in one officer’s mouth and a felony in another’s,” his lawyers argued, highlighting that Scheller’s case was resolved in special court-martial even though he had the same charges as Watson with more specifications.

Maj. Joshua Wendell, the hearing’s preliminary officer, questioned where the anchor is in these cases, saying, “Which one is the right outcome? Was Scheller properly disposed of and how do I determine that?”

Mutimer said that perception is the anchor, and while making his recommendations, the officer should look toward making both sides equal. But the government’s counsel rebutted, saying that “we cannot do [name calling],” referring to how Watson spoke of Trump.

The government’s counsel brought forth 29 evidence exhibits and one witness, Maj. Bethany Evans, the 811th Force Support Squadron commander, who took command in mid-July at JBAB to speak on Watson’s charge regarding his alleged refusal to wear his Physical Training Gear uniform while performing his duties on JBAB.

It was “quickly determined” that Watson would Permanent Change of Station to JBAB with Evans as his commander due to his investigation, instead of sending him back to his previous post in Bydgoszcz, Poland.

From the hearing date, Wendell has eight business days to make his recommendations to the Special Court-Martial Convening Authority.

Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg gave industry leaders until Aug. 26 to submit plans for “significantly faster, more aggressive delivery schedules and/or increased production for critical capabilities,” according to his Aug. 5 memo.

Feinberg directed companies to identify ways to accelerate production and delivery, propose capital investments and facility expansions and explain how the Pentagon could enable higher production.

The memo identified 16 critical programs under consideration for accelerated production or increased procurement. The responses were intended to inform the department’s fiscal 2028 budget request.

The request came as the use of U.S. weapons during the Iran war put pressure on stocks of air-defense interceptors and other precision munitions.

U.S. inventories of Patriot interceptors had fallen from about 2,330 before the war to between 759 and 827 by the end of July, according to a Center for Strategic and International Studies analysis. THAAD stocks had fallen from 452 to between 234 and 278.

CSIS estimated production timelines of about 42 months for PAC-3 MSE interceptors and 53 months for THAAD interceptors.

The Pentagon did not respond to questions about how many companies responded to Feinberg’s request or whether the department had accepted or funded any of the proposals.

General Dynamics also declined to discuss its communications with the department.

“We are not able to comment on our communications with the Department of War,” a General Dynamics spokesman said.

Lockheed Martin, a major supplier of U.S. missile-defense systems, did not provide a specific production timeline in response to questions from Military Times.

“We continue to have dialogue with the U.S. government to deliver what the department is asking of us and our team is pushing to do even more, faster,” a Lockheed Martin spokesman said. “We’re making significant investments in our workforce, infrastructure and production capacity and working with key suppliers to accelerate delivery of the critical capabilities that strengthen America’s Arsenal of Freedom.”

Lockheed separately announced Thursday that it had received its first PAC-3 MSE housing components from GM Defense, 22 days after the companies signed a production contract. The company said the components, which can traditionally take months or years to produce, were manufactured using GM’s casting and machining capabilities.

Lockheed said it is investing $8 billion to $9 billion to expand munitions production, including new buildings, facility expansions and thousands of jobs at more than 20 U.S. sites. The company also said planned expansions will increase its munitions production and warehousing space by nearly 50%.

The company did not say whether those investments were submitted as part of Feinberg’s Aug. 5 request.

New agreements

The Pentagon was already using framework agreements and contracts to accelerate production before Feinberg’s deadline.

On July 27, the department announced seven-year framework agreements intended to boost production of propulsion components for PAC-3 MSE and THAAD interceptors. L3Harris said its PAC-3 agreement would nearly triple production of certain propulsion products, while its THAAD agreement was intended to quadruple production of key propulsion components.

On Aug. 3, the defense department, in cooperation with Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin, announced two framework agreements to expand production capacity for critical PAC-3 and THAAD interceptor components. The agreements were intended to support the department’s goals of tripling PAC-3 production capacity and quadrupling THAAD production capacity.

On Aug. 14, DoD announced two separate framework agreements with Boeing and RTX to increase production of components for SM-3 Block IB and SM-3 Block IIA interceptors.

On Aug. 17, the Pentagon announced a $22.9 billion Navy contract with RTX to accelerate production of Tomahawk missiles.

On Aug. 31, five days after the industry deadline, the Pentagon announced additional seven-year multiyear procurement agreements with Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics designed to increase production quantities and accelerate delivery schedules for critical missile subcomponents supporting PAC-3 MSE and THAAD.

The Pentagon separately identified production goals of tripling PAC-3 MSE production capacity and quadrupling THAAD production capacity, with funding subject to annual appropriations from Congress.

The public announcements did not identify those agreements as resulting from companies’ responses to Feinberg’s Aug. 5 request.

What remains unclear is whether the 21-day exercise changed what the Pentagon plans to buy, how quickly it expects industry to deliver it or what additional funding and infrastructure the department will seek in its fiscal 2028 budget request.

So far in 2026, four Chinese research vessels have conducted work offshore in the U.S. Arctic, compared to a total of five in 2025, Rear Adm. Bob Little, commander of the U.S. Coast Guard’s Arctic District, told Reuters.

The Chinese ships sailed in the maritime zones off the U.S. state of Alaska, including the Aleutian Islands, into the Bering Strait and as far north as the North Pole, he said during a visit to Oslo to speak at a conference on Arctic security.

“Where I have responsibility, interest and concern is when they are operating in and around U.S. sovereign space,” said Little.

“So inside of our exclusive economic zones, or over our extended continental shelf, we certainly have a security concern. And so those are the types of activities that we see that we’re watching very closely.”

The ships remained in international waters but had not notified the U.S. of their presence in advance through diplomatic channels, as would be the usual practice.

“When we challenge them and query them as to the purpose of their activities, their response typically is either ‘we are conducting operations in international waters’ or ‘we are conducting scientific research,’” he said.

CONCERNS

The concern is two-fold. One is that China may be involved in scientific research focused on the mineral exploitation of the seabed in an area that belongs to the U.S., Little said.

The other is that these vessels conduct activity that might “provide [the Chinese] with a military advantage or pose a security threat to the United States,” said Little, whose area of operations is nearly as vast as Europe.

China, which calls itself a “near-Arctic” state and wants to create a “Polar Silk Road” in the Arctic, has stepped up its presence in the polar region in recent years, sometimes in joint operations with Russia and sometimes alone.

While in Norway, Little discussed with international colleagues how they were dealing with similar activities by Russian research vessels.

“Whether it’s the Barents (Sea) or the Baltic (Sea), it’s easy to find examples of hybrid threats and activities,” he said.

“So I certainly watch that very carefully, because it’s the same nation-state that’s my neighbor on the western side of the Arctic,” he said, referring to Russia.

Moscow denies that its research vessels conduct illegal activity or that it poses any threat to U.S. interests.

Announced in the Federal Register Sept. 11, the Homeland Defense Board aims to fill a gap Hegseth sees in providing military guidance to homeland security missions.

“The specific, integrated advice required by the SecWar regarding the military’s mission of defense of the Homeland and Homeland security cooperation is not available from any other Federal advisory committee, government agency, or alternative source,” establishing documents state.

“Department of war” and “secretary of war” are the Trump administration’s preferred monikers for the Defense Department and its head. Legislation to legally change the agency name is pending in Congress.

“While other agencies and departments operate within specific mission or geographic areas, their advisory mechanisms are statutorily constrained to their respective non-military domains,” the panel’s establishing documents add. “Relying solely on internal DoW staff or contracted studies is also insufficient, as it fails to provide the consensus-based, independent, and external peer review required at the highest levels of strategic decision-making.”

The board is to consist of up to 20 members, including the secretary of defense, who will serve as chair; the assistant secretary of defense for Homeland Defense and Americas Security Affairs as vice chair; and the deputy assistant secretaries of defense for Homeland Defense and Defense Continuity and Mission Assurance.

Also on the board will be one civilian and one field- or mid-grade officer from each military branch and “such other members as the SecWar or the Deputy Secretary of War may appoint or designate,” establishing documents state.

Asked for comment, an official said the Pentagon had “nothing to provide” about the new board’s creation.

The advisory board is the first of its kind for the Pentagon focused on homeland security, and the announcement argues that no other agency’s board can fill the need that defense leaders now see. The Department of Homeland Security’s Homeland Security Advisory Council cannot fill the role because it focuses on civilian law enforcement and “lacks the mandate to advise on Title 10 or Title 32 [domestic troop] deployments” and military-specific crises, it states.

It also finds the Department of State’s International Security Advisory Board, with its focus on diplomacy and arms control, “underequipped” to deliver strategies for military campaign plans in the Americas.

“Over the past 10 years, rather than lessening, the threat from peer, near-peer, and rogue-state adversaries, in addition to non-state actors and hostile asymmetric activities, has become more intense and complex,” justifying documents continue. “The DoW provides for the common defense of American citizens and the Homeland by deploying and maintaining the premier warfighting force across the globe to provide a multi-domain, layered defense … In an era where peer and near-peer adversaries are actively projecting economic, cyber, and military power into the Western Hemisphere, the HDB will provide critical, independent assessments of the DoW’s hemispheric defensive posture and domestic security preparedness.”

The large-scale deployment of National Guard troops to U.S. cities to support law enforcement; the ongoing deployment of troops to the southern border; and the aggressive move into drug interdiction missions traditionally executed by the U.S. Coast Guard have all blurred the lines between the mission sets of the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security. The establishing memo suggests the new board will create a bridge between the two that didn’t previously exist.

“The [Homeland Defense Board] will … provide the SecWar advice and recommendations necessary for strategic oversight for multi-theater security cooperation and multi-domain actions, validating that DoW resource investments and allocations are successfully countering foreign influence, disrupting transnational criminal networks, and building robust partner-nation military capabilities,” it states.

“Finally, the HDB’s advice and recommendations will serve an essential function by bridging the gap between the military and domestic Homeland security agencies to secure the defense critical infrastructure, vital transport networks and logistics nodes and the defense industrial base. Without this advisory body, the DoW risks strategic blind spots in its primary mission to protect the Homeland.”

According to the General Services Administration, there are now roughly 40 federal advisory committees serving the Pentagon. In March 2025, shortly after taking office, Hegseth dismissed all members of existing boards to conduct a “zero-based review” of their necessity and contribution to “warrior ethos.” Among boards terminated at the review’s conclusion were the 75-year-old Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services and the Defense Advisory Committee for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct.

The president cited national security concerns for the move, echoing the rationale offered for the roughly $400 million ballroom complex being built on the site of the White House’s former East Wing, which was demolished to make way for the project. He did not identify any specific threats.

The projects are part of Trump’s ambitious effort to reshape Washington, including a push to add his name to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The plans have drawn criticism from preservationists and others who argue they could alter or diminish historic landmarks.

In a social media post, Trump said that at the “strong request” of the military he had agreed to turn the 250-foot (76-meter) arch “into a top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch, to house, store, and have the rapid ability to use large numbers of drones, plus Snipers, on both the roof and plaza areas, and additionally have and hold large quantities of sniper ammunition in storage.”

The White House and the Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Federal Aviation Administration said last week that the arch would not pose a hazard to aircraft but would be required to have an “eternal flame” on top, clearing an aviation hurdle for the arch, which Trump proposed to mark the nation’s 250th anniversary.

Aviation experts have raised safety concerns given its proximity to Reagan Washington National Airport, while veterans have sued to block the arch, arguing it would destroy the historic sightline between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery.

The initiative, first announced in a July memo by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is part of the agency’s Warfighter Performance Optimization program, which Hegseth announced in May.

On Sept. 3, the Pentagon temporarily rescinded its published clinical guidance for a new, mandatory testosterone-deficiency screening policy, with an official telling Reuters, “The draft [document] published on September 2, 2026, has been temporarily rescinded to allow for updates.”

The Defense Health Agency’s latest guideline indicates that every male service member over 30 — and some under that age, if they show symptoms of low testosterone and request testing — should be tested at Periodic Health Assessments, or PHAs.

According to the new document’s executive summary, symptoms of low testosterone include “reduced libido, loss of spontaneous morning erections, erectile dysfunction, diminished energy and physical performance, impaired concentration, reduced muscle mass, and depressed mood.”

It also notes that those symptoms can “overlap substantially with the effects of sleep restriction, caloric deficit, psychological stress, mild traumatic brain injury, and mood disorders, all of which are prevalent in the operational population.”

Hegseth’s July memo indicated all service members would undergo testosterone testing, but the recent announcement clarified that only men would be required to do so. Clinical guidance for women is forthcoming, according to a department release.

But the Pentagon has not publicly clarified whether women service members would be tested for estrogen or testosterone therapy, the Associated Press reported.

Clinical research supports the effectiveness of testosterone therapy in older men, particularly with hypogonadism, a condition in which the body is incapable of producing adequate testosterone. However, the benefits for younger men and men who are aging normally are not as clear. There are also potential long-term risks such as infertility.