Health
Radio-Canada journalist defends report exposing ‘gender clinics’ for ‘transitioning’ children

From LifeSiteNews
Radio-Canada journalist Pasquale Turbide revealed that concerns from parents were what originally sparked her investigative report on the gender ‘transitioning’ of children in Quebec.
A Radio-Canada journalist is defending her investigative report that exposed a “gender” clinic in Quebec for prescribing potentially sterilizing hormones to an actress posing as a young teen in less than ten minutes.
In a March 3 interview on Tout le Monde en Parle, Radio-Canada journalist Pasquale Turbide revealed that concerns from parents were what originally sparked her investigative report on the gender “transitioning” of children, and that she stands by her work despite backlash.
“Parents began writing to us last summer, when there was a bit of a controversy about names, pronouns, all-gender bathrooms, etc,” said Turbide in French.
“But the letters we were getting were not about those issues, they were talking about medical transitions,” she explained.
According to Turbide, the parents who contacted Radio-Canada revealed that their children, who believed they were “transgender,” were being offered sterilizing “puberty blockers” in the name of care.
“We started to look into it, and we easily found fifteen to twenty people who were all telling us more or less the same story,” said Turbide. “They were often very open-minded parents, open to homosexuality, open to all sorts of things but were panicking at the speed of the transgender healthcare system.”
The documentary, published by Radio-Canada, the French arm of the state-funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), delved into the dangers of giving children “puberty blockers” as well as the regrets of detransitioners, the term for people who have undergone irreversible surgeries in an attempt to “change” their gender but now regret it.
The report also followed an actress posing as a 14-year-old patient at a private “gender clinic” in Quebec where she was prescribed testosterone and advised on life-altering mutilating surgeries during a consultation that lasted a meagre nine minutes.
During her interview, Turbide exposed the dangers of taking puberty blockers, especially considering many of the side effects are still unknown.
“We’re beginning to realize that they may have an impact on brain development,” she stated.
“Girls take testosterone, boys take estrogen and that’s semi-irreversible,” Turbide added. “Some things don’t come back even if they stop. One’s voice will stay changed most of the time. The face of their shape is another thing that’s affected. You can become infertile if you are a girl. It’s not yet clear how far it can go.”
Turbide further pointed out that some Scandinavian countries are seeking to ban the irreversible treatments for children.
The documentary went viral online the same week leaked internal communications show doctors who offer so-called “gender-affirming care” know that transgender hormones cause serious diseases, including cancer.
Journalist Michael Shellenberger released the internal documents from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which “is considered the leading global authority” on so-called “gender medicine,” despite being an LGBT activist group.
The “WPATH FILES” include emails and messages from an internal discussion forum by doctors, as well as statements from a video call of WPATH members. The files reveal that the doctors working for WPATH know that so-called “gender-affirming care” can cause severe mental and physical disease and that it is impossible for minors to give “informed consent” to it.
As LifeSiteNews has previously noted, research does not support the assertions from transgender activists that surgical or pharmaceutical intervention to “affirm” confusion is “necessary medical care” or that it is helpful in preventing the suicides of gender-confused individuals.
In fact, in addition to asserting a false reality that one’s sex can be changed, transgender surgeries and drugs have been linked to permanent physical and psychological damage, including cardiovascular diseases, loss of bone density, cancer, strokes and blood clots, infertility, and suicidality.
There is also overwhelming evidence that those who undergo “gender transitioning” are more likely to commit suicide than those who are not given irreversible surgery. A Swedish study found that those who underwent “gender reassignment” surgery ended up with a 19.2 times greater risk of suicide.
Indeed, there is proof that the most loving and helpful approach to people who think they are a different sex is not to validate them in their confusion but to show them the truth.
A new study on the side effects of transgender “sex change” surgeries discovered that 81 percent of those who had undergone “sex change” surgeries in the past five years reported experiencing pain simply from normal movement in the weeks and months that followed — and that many other side effects manifest as well.
Additionally, LifeSiteNews compiled a list of medical professions and experts who warn against transgender surgeries, warning of irreversible changes and lifelong side effects.
Addictions
Canada must make public order a priority again

A Toronto park
Public disorder has cities crying out for help. The solution cannot simply be to expand our public institutions’ crisis services
[This editorial was originally published by Canadian Affairs and has been republished with permission]
This week, Canada’s largest public transit system, the Toronto Transit Commission, announced it would be stationing crisis worker teams directly on subway platforms to improve public safety.
Last week, Canada’s largest library, the Toronto Public Library, announced it would be increasing the number of branches that offer crisis and social support services. This builds on a 2023 pilot project between the library and Toronto’s Gerstein Crisis Centre to service people experiencing mental health, substance abuse and other issues.
The move “only made sense,” Amanda French, the manager of social development at Toronto Public Library, told CBC.
Does it, though?
Over the past decade, public institutions — our libraries, parks, transit systems, hospitals and city centres — have steadily increased the resources they devote to servicing the homeless, mentally ill and drug addicted. In many cases, this has come at the expense of serving the groups these spaces were intended to serve.
For some communities, it is all becoming too much.
Recently, some cities have taken the extraordinary step of calling states of emergency over the public disorder in their communities. This September, both Barrie, Ont. and Smithers, B.C. did so, citing the public disorder caused by open drug use, encampments, theft and violence.
In June, Williams Lake, B.C., did the same. It was planning to “bring in an 11 p.m. curfew and was exploring involuntary detention when the province directed an expert task force to enter the city,” The Globe and Mail reported last week.
These cries for help — which Canadian Affairs has also reported on in Toronto, Ottawa and Nanaimo — must be taken seriously. The solution cannot simply be more of the same — to further expand public institutions’ crisis services while neglecting their core purposes and clientele.
Canada must make public order a priority again.
Without public order, Canadians will increasingly cease to patronize the public institutions that make communities welcoming and vibrant. Businesses will increasingly close up shop in city centres. This will accelerate community decline, creating a vicious downward spiral.
We do not pretend to have the answers for how best to restore public order while also addressing the very real needs of individuals struggling with homelessness, mental illness and addiction.
But we can offer a few observations.
First, Canadians must be willing to critically examine our policies.
Harm-reduction policies — which correlate with the rise of public disorder — should be at the top of the list.
The aim of these policies is to reduce the harms associated with drug use, such as overdose or infection. They were intended to be introduced alongside investments in other social supports, such as recovery.
But unlike Portugal, which prioritized treatment alongside harm reduction, Canada failed to make these investments. For this and other reasons, many experts now say our harm-reduction policies are not working.
“Many of my addiction medicine colleagues have stopped prescribing ‘safe supply’ hydromorphone to their patients because of the high rates of diversion … and lack of efficacy in stabilizing the substance use disorder (sometimes worsening it),” Dr. Launette Rieb, a clinical associate professor at the University of British Columbia and addiction medicine specialist recently told Canadian Affairs.
Yet, despite such damning claims, some Canadians remain closed to the possibility that these policies may need to change. Worse, some foster a climate that penalizes dissent.
“Many doctors who initially supported ‘safe supply’ no longer provide it but do not wish to talk about it publicly for fear of reprisals,” Rieb said.
Second, Canadians must look abroad — well beyond the United States — for policy alternatives.
As The Globe and Mail reported in August, Canada and the U.S. have been far harder hit by the drug crisis than European countries.
The article points to a host of potential factors, spanning everything from doctors’ prescribing practices to drug trade flows to drug laws and enforcement.
For example, unlike Canada, most of Europe has not legalized cannabis, the article says. European countries also enforce their drug laws more rigorously.
“According to the UN, Europe arrests, prosecutes and convicts people for drug-related offences at a much higher rate than that of the Americas,” it says.
Addiction treatment rates also vary.
“According to the latest data from the UN, 28 per cent of people with drug use disorders in Europe received treatment. In contrast, only 9 per cent of those with drug use disorders in the Americas received treatment.”
And then there is harm reduction. No other country went “whole hog” on harm reduction the way Canada did, one professor told The Globe.
If we want public order, we should look to the countries that are orderly and identify what makes them different — in a good way.
There is no shame in copying good policies. There should be shame in sticking with failed ones due to ideology.
Our content is always free – but if you want to help us commission more high-quality journalism,
consider getting a voluntary paid subscription.
Business
Canada’s health-care system is not ‘free’—and we’re not getting good value for our money

From the Fraser Institute
By Nadeem Esmail and Mackenzie Moir
In 2025, many Canadians still talk about our “free” health-care system. But in reality, through taxes, we pay a lot for health care. In fact, according to the latest data, a typical Canadian family will pay $19,060 (or about 24 per cent of their total tax bill) for health care this year.
Given the size of that bill, it’s worth asking—do Canadians get good value for all those tax dollars? Not even close.
First, Canadians endure some of the longest wait times for medical care—including primary care, specialist consultations and non-emergency surgery—among developed countries with universal health care. In fact, the wait in Canada for non-emergency care is now more than seven months from referral to treatment, which is more than three times longer than in 1993 when wait times were first measured nationally.
Why the delays?
Part of the reason is the limited number of medical resources available to Canadians. Compared to our universal health-care peers, Canada had some of the fewest physicians, hospital beds and medical technologies such as MRI machines and CT scanners.
And before you wonder if $19,000 per year isn’t enough money for world-class universal coverage, remember that Canada has one of the most expensive universal health-care systems in the developed world, which means Canadians are among the highest spenders on universal health care yet have some of the worst access to health-care services.
Fortunately, countries such as Switzerland and Australia, which both provide far more timely access to high-quality universal care for similar or even lower cost than Canada, offer lessons for reform. Compared to Canada, both countries allow a larger degree of private-sector involvement and, perhaps more importantly, competition in their universal health-care systems.
In Switzerland, for instance, health insurance coverage is mandatory and provided by independent insurers that compete in a regulated market. Swiss citizens freely choose between insurers (which must accept all applicants) and can even personalize some aspects of their universal insurance policy. Patients also have a choice of hospitals, more than half of which are operated privately and for-profit.
In Australia, citizens can purchase private insurance, which covers the cost of treatment in private hospitals. Higher income Australians are actively encouraged to purchase private health insurance and even have to pay additional taxes if they do not. Some 39 per cent of hospitals in Australia are private and for-profit, providing care to both privately and publicly insured patients.
Vitally, competition between private health-care businesses and entrepreneurs in both countries (and many others including Germany and the Netherlands) has helped create a more cost-effective and accessible universal health-care system. Back here in Canada, the lack of private-sector efficiency, innovation and patient-focus has led to the opposite—namely, long waits and poor access.
Health care in Canada is not free. It comes with a substantial price tag through our tax system. And the size of that bill leaves less money for savings and other things families need.
Getting better value for our health-care tax dollars, and solving the longstanding access problems patients face, requires policy reform with a more contemporary understanding of how to structure a truly world-class universal health-care system. Until that reform happens, Canadians will continue to be stuck with a big bill for lousy access to health care.
-
Business2 days ago
Bill C-8 would allow minister to secretly cut off phone, Internet service
-
Fraser Institute2 days ago
Carney government should scrap gun ‘buyback’ program and save taxpayer money
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days ago
When Did Traditional Values Become Hate Speech?
-
Automotive2 days ago
America’s Troubled EV Industry Loses Its Subsidized Advantage – Now What?
-
Crime2 days ago
Drug trafficker says Trump battle with the cartels is making an impact
-
Business16 hours ago
LA skyscrapers for homeless could cost federal taxpayers over $1 billion
-
Alberta16 hours ago
Alberta’s E3 Lithium delivers first battery-grade lithium carbonate
-
Censorship Industrial Complex17 hours ago
Hurting someone’s feelings could be punishable under Canadian hate crime bill: legal expert