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

From LifeSiteNews

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.”

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.

Up Next

Groups CriDemocracy Watch Calls Hogue Foreign Interference Report “Mostly a Coverup”

Don't Miss

WEF 2025: AI CEO Says Facial Recognition Will Replace Digital IDs in Smart Cities

Todayville

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

Hegseth Planning Huge Shakeup Of Top Military Command: REPORT

Daily Caller / 5 hours ago

Paris Climate Deal Now Decade-Old Disaster

International / 5 hours ago

FBI didn’t think it had cause to raid Trump but DOJ did it anyway

Health

Saskatchewan woman approved for euthanasia urged to seek medical help in Canada rather than US

Published on December 16, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe encouraged Jolene Van Alstine, who has a rare disease, to work with his government on a solution.

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe is urging a woman with a rare disease, who has been approved to die by euthanasia because she can’t get proper care, to instead work with his government on a solution.

As reported by LifeSiteNews last week, Saskatchewan resident Jolene Van Alstine was approved to die by state-sanctioned euthanasia because she has had to endure long wait times for what she considers to be proper care for a rare parathyroid disease.

Van Alstine’s condition, normocalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism (nPHPT), causes her to experience vomiting, nausea, and bone pain.

As a result of Van Alstine’s frustrations with the healthcare system, she applied for Canada’s Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) and was approved for a January 7, 2026, death date.

Her case drew the attention of American media personality Glenn Beck, who has been in contact with Van Alstine to determine whether she can get the surgery done in the United States. Even the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has been briefed on the matter.

According to Moe, Van Alstine has taken her case to Saskatchewan Health Minister Jeremy Cockrill, asking for help.

“There has been an opportunity to see specialists in Saskatchewan and outside of Saskatchewan, and those conversations about maybe potentially seeing additional specialists continue with the minister’s office and the Ministry of Health,” Moe said yesterday at a press conference.

“I would hope that she’d continue to work with the Ministry of Health, because I think there’s work going on to see even additional specialists at this point,”

A recent Euthanasia Prevention Coalition report revealed that Canada has euthanized 90,000 people since 2016, the year it was legalized.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, over 23,000 Canadians have died while on wait lists for medical care as Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberal government focuses on euthanasia expansions.

Health

Canadian gov’t considers sharing census data on gender-confused children

Published on December 16, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Statistics Canada recently consulted LGBTQ+ groups on releasing 2021 census data about gender-confused children ages 0-14, citing research that toddlers could be ‘transgender.’

Statistics Canada is seeking to collect and share data on gender-confused children in its latest move to promote the LGBT agenda to minors.

From November to mid-December, Statistics Canada held consultations with various LGBT groups to discuss how to release 2021 census data on gender-confused children ages 0-14, according to a report shared with the National Post.

“For the upcoming 2026 Census, Statistics Canada has been consulting with the Canadian population, experts and stakeholders on gender,” the government agency wrote in a recent report.

“The Agency has finished conducting extensive qualitative and quantitative testing, notably to assess the impact of modifying the gender response categories to include ‘man’ and ‘woman,’ and ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ for those younger than 15 years,” it continued.

In 2021, StatsCan conducted the first-ever census to collect data on sex assigned at birth as well as how Canadians later ‘identified’ as their gender. The census collected data from Canadians of all ages but only published that of Canadians 15 years and older.

According to the information, released April 2022, 0.33% of the Canadian population age 15 or older were gender-confused, with 0.19% believing they are transgender and 0.14% believing they are non-binary.

The report noted that “younger generations may be more comfortable reporting their gender identity than older generations.”

Now, StatsCan is seeking to further push the LGBT agenda on young children by releasing data to support their argument that young children can be “transgender.”

According to a copy of its most recent report, “children and youth are often assumed to be cisgender (people whose reported gender corresponds to their birth sex) from birth until they ‘come out’ as a different gender on their own accord.”

“Research also suggests that, like cisgender children, transgender and non-binary children may recognize their own gender identity as early as 2 to 3 years old or during later childhood or early adolescents,” the document read.

The StatsCan report conveniently ignores scientific data on the harms of gender-transitioning interventions, both on the physical and mental health of individuals, particularly children.

A significant body of evidence shows that “affirming” gender confusion carries serious harms, especially when done with impressionable children who lack the mental development, emotional maturity, and life experience to consider the long-term ramifications of the decisions being pushed on them, or full knowledge about the long-term effects of life-altering, physically transformative, and often irreversible surgical and chemical procedures.

Studies find that more than 80 percent of children suffering gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence and that “transition” procedures, including “reassignment” surgery, fail to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide – and even exacerbate it, including by reinforcing their confusion and neglecting the actual root causes of their mental strife.

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.