Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Health

Canadian media might not be able to ignore new studies on harmful gender transitions for minors

Published

8 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Jonathon Van Maren

When the UK National Health Service’s bombshell Cass Review condemning gender “transition” for minors was published, virtually the entire Canadian press engaged in a voluntary blackout.

Unless you were reading an alternative news source, an international news source, or the National Post, it was as if Cass Review — and its findings — had simply never existed. Many media outlets did not run a single story; the state-funded CBC ran precisely one, and it was a laughable hatchet job claiming that the massive study was “biased.” They did not interview a single person associated with the research.

The Canadian press has functioned for years as a propaganda arm for the transgender movement, even as the gender ideology house of cards topples in in the U.S. and the UK, where there have been genuinely robust debates informed by scientific evidence rather than ideology. Thus, I wonder how they will deal with new studies by Canadian researchers that reach many of the same conclusions.

As Sharon Kirkey of the National Post reported. “The evidence surrounding the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in children and teens identifying as transgender is of such low certainty it’s impossible to conclude whether the drugs help or harm, Canadian researchers are reporting.” The research was funded by the Society for Evidence-based Gender Medicine (SEGM) and McMaster University, considered to one of Canada’s top institutions of higher hearing, and published this week in the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood.

“There’s not enough reliable information,” said Chan Kulatunga-Moruzi, one of the authors of the two new reviews. “We really don’t have enough evidence to say that these procedures are beneficial. Few studies have looked at physical harm, so we have really no evidence of harm as well. There’s not a lot that we can say with certainty, based on the evidence.” (Here, I would note that there are now thousands of testimonies of detransitioners testifying to the harm that sex-change “treatments” have caused them, but this is a remarkable admission nonetheless.)

The researchers conclude that doctors should approach these “treatments” with extreme care, clearly communicating with parents and children and — notably — checking “whose values they are prioritizing” if they should decide to prescribe cross-sex hormones or puberty blockers. As Kirkey put it with devastating understatement: “Originally considered fully reversible, concerns are emerging about potential long-term or irreversible effects, the Canadian team wrote … Questions have been raised about the effects of fertility or what impact, if any, they might have on brain development.”

The researchers painstakingly went through the available evidence on both cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers (Kirkey irritatingly refers to them as “gender-affirming hormones”) for those up to 26 years old. To analyze the evidence, they “graded” it “using a scoring system co-developed by Dr. Gordon Guyatt, a celebrated McMaster University scientist who coined the phrase evidence-based medicine.” As Kirkey reported:

After screening 6,736 titles and abstracts involving puberty blockers, only 10 studies were included in their review. While children who received puberty blockers compared to those who don’t score higher on “global function” — quality of life, and general physical and psychological wellbeing — the evidence was of “very low certainty.” Very low, meaning researchers have “very little confidence in the effect estimate” and that the true effect “is  likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.”

It gets worse. The research also debunked the perpetually asserted claim utilized by trans activists and their political allies to enforce their agenda: that these drugs are necessary to prevent depression and suicidal ideation. According to the researchers: “We are very uncertain about the causal effect of the (drugs) on depression. Most studies provided very low certainty of evidence about the outcomes of interest; thus, we cannot exclude the possibility of benefit or harm.” Again, despite the careful understatement, this is devastating: Thousands of children have been subjected to these treatments on the premise that they prevent harm and are harmless.

Indeed, the second review, which analyzed 24 studies, reached the similar conclusion of “very low confirmatory evidence of substantive change” not just in depression or health overall but even in gender dysphoria itself. As Kirkey noted: “Many studies suffered from missing data, small sample sizes, or lacked a comparison group.” The researchers concluded: “Since the current best evidence, including our systematic review and meta-analysis, is predominantly very low quality, clinicians must clearly communicate this evidence to patients and caregivers. Treatment decisions should consider the lack of moderate- and high-quality evidence, uncertainty about the effects of puberty blockers and patient’s values and preferences.”

Featured Image

Jonathon’s writings have been translated into more than six languages and in addition to LifeSiteNews, has been published in the National Post, National Review, First Things, The Federalist, The American Conservative, The Stream, the Jewish Independent, the Hamilton Spectator, Reformed Perspective Magazine, and LifeNews, among others. He is a contributing editor to The European Conservative.

His insights have been featured on CTV, Global News, and the CBC, as well as over twenty radio stations. He regularly speaks on a variety of social issues at universities, high schools, churches, and other functions in Canada, the United States, and Europe.

He is the author of The Culture War, Seeing is Believing: Why Our Culture Must Face the Victims of Abortion, Patriots: The Untold Story of Ireland’s Pro-Life Movement, Prairie Lion: The Life and Times of Ted Byfield, and co-author of A Guide to Discussing Assisted Suicide with Blaise Alleyne.

Jonathon serves as the communications director for the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Health

RFK Jr. promises to identify cause of autism ‘epidemic’ by September

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explained that autism rates continue to climb, and are now expected to impact 1 in 31 children, up from ‘1 in 10,000 when I was a kid.’

Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that his agency has undertaken a multinational study involving “hundreds of scientists around the world” to identify the causes of the growing incidence of autism in children.

“We’ve launched a massive testing and research effort that’s going to involve hundreds of scientists from around the world,” Kennedy told President Trump during Thursday’s White House Cabinet meeting. “By September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic, and we’ll be able to eliminate those exposures.”

Kennedy explained that autism rates continue to climb, and are now expected to impact 1 in 31 children, up from “1 in 10,000 when I was a kid.”

 

“It’s a horrible statistic,” Trump said of the latest autism rate figures. “There’s got to be something artificial out there that’s doing this.”

“There will be no bigger news conference than when you come up with that answer,” predicted the president.

As recently as 2000, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) research showed that 1 in 150 children were diagnosed with autism.

While many mainstream autism researchers adhere to theories that the rising rate of autism is due to “increased awareness” and an evolving, broadening definition of autism, Kennedy holds to that belief that the cause will be found primarily in environmental factors, eating habits, and currently accepted standard medical protocols.

“We’re going to look at vaccines, but we’re going to look at everything. Everything is on the table, our food system, our water, our air, different ways of parenting, all the kind of changes that may have triggered this epidemic,” the HHS head told Fox News.

“We know that it is an environmental toxin that is causing this cataclysm,” said Kennedy, “and we are going to identify it.”

Kennedy is known for vehemently opposing vaccines, a stance he adopted after the mothers of vaccine-injured children implored him to look into the research linking thimerosal to neurological injuries, including autism. He went on to found Children’s Health Defense, an organization with the stated mission of “ending childhood health epidemics by eliminating toxic exposure,” largely through vaccines.

The federal government spent more than $300 million on autism research in 2023, according to a report by The Hill.

Continue Reading

Health

RFK Jr. Shuts Down Measles Scare in His First Network Interview as HHS Secretary

Published on

 The Vigilant Fox

CBS’s Jon LaPook tried to hype the measles panic, but Kennedy calmly dismantled the narrative and set the record straight.

The following is a streamlined and editorialized version of a thread that originally appeared on the American Values X page. It was edited and republished with permission. Click here to read the original thread.

HHS Secretary RFK Jr. recently set the record straight in an interview with CBS News’ chief medical correspondent, Dr. Jon LaPook. He pushed back on the claim that a second child had died from measles, exposing the narrative as not just misleading, but flat-out false.

But before that happened, Kennedy addressed the current measles outbreak and ongoing concerns about vaccine safety. He revealed that new safety trials are finally in motion.

“We don’t know the risks of many of these products,” he said. “They’re not adequately safety-tested.” He explained that “many of the vaccines are tested for only 3-4 days with NO placebo group.”

Kennedy made it clear this isn’t about banning vaccines—it’s about transparency. “I’ve always said … I’m not gonna take people’s vaccines away from them,” he said. “I’m gonna make sure that we have good science so that people can make an informed choice.” He added, “We are doing that science today.”

Kennedy was asked about Daisy Hildebrand, the young girl in Texas whose funeral he attended. Her death had been cited in headlines as proof of a growing measles crisis.

“It was very nice to be able to meet the parents in person and spend the whole day with them and share their lives with them and get to know their community,” he said. “The community was very welcoming and loving towards me.”

Kennedy described the experience warmly: “The Mennonite community was beautiful to me.” He added, “I went to a large lunch with the whole community and you had boys and girls sitting together and nobody was on a cell phone.”

That’s when Kennedy dropped the real bombshell: the child didn’t die from measles.

“The child whose funeral I attended this week was hospitalized three times from other illnesses,” he said. “She got measles and she got over the measles, according to her parents.” He added, “I saw the medical report on it today and the thing that killed her was not the measles, but it was a bacteriological infection.”

And it wasn’t the first time the media misled the public. Last month, another child’s death was falsely blamed on measles. But the truth is that it was a case of catastrophic medical error.

“Her death is the result of an egregious medical error,” CHD’s Mary Holland told Steve Bannon. “This girl wound up in the hospital because she did have some difficulty breathing, and instead of giving her breathing care, you’ll understand from the specialists with me that she got inaccurate, wrong-headed medical care, and that’s why she died.”

She added, “She did not die from measles. She died from a medical error, the third leading cause of death in this country.”

Share


Thanks for reading. If you value the work being published here, upgrading your subscription is the most powerful way to support it. The more this Substack earns, the more we can expand the team, improve quality, and create the best reader experience possible.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Trending

X