Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Health

UK pediatrician who led review of child ‘transitions’ says US medical groups ‘misleading the public’

Published

6 minute read

Dr. Hilary Cass, author of the Cass Review

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

The typically left-wing New York Times published an interview on Monday with consultant pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass on her comprehensive review of so-called “gender medicine” in the United Kingdom, indicating that awareness of the damage due to surgical and chemical “transitioning” continues to spread despite the best efforts of LGBT activists.

Released in April, 366-page Cass Review was commissioned by National Health Service (NHS) England following ongoing scandals about the practices of British “gender clinics” such as the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), operated by the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust. The four-year project consisted of comprehensive reviews of current research and international standards, as well as extensive interviews with gender-confused children and adults, family members, detransitioners, doctors, and activists.

It found that “gender medicine” is “built on shaky foundations” and that while such interventions require a great deal of caution, “quite the reverse happened in the field of [so-called] gender care for children,” and that “[w]hile a considerable amount of research has been published in this field, systematic evidence reviews demonstrated the poor quality of the published studies, meaning there is not a reliable evidence base upon which to make clinical decisions, or for children and their families to make informed choices.” Her findings led NHS to stop prescribing puberty blockers to children with gender confusion earlier this year.

Speaking to the Times, Cass explained that she was planning her retirement when she was first asked to tackle the project and was initially apprehensive about wading into the controversy.

“The most important concern for me is just how poor the evidence base is in this area,” she said. “Some people have questioned, ‘Did we set a higher bar for this group of young people?’ We absolutely didn’t. The real problem is that the evidence is very weak compared to many other areas of pediatric practice.”

The Times acknowledged that her “findings are in line with several European countries that have limited the treatments [sic] after scientific reviews. But in America, where nearly two dozen states have banned the care outright, medical groups have endorsed the treatments as evidence-based and necessary,” including groups the paper contacted for its latest story. Cass described American medical consensus as “out of date” on the issue.

“When I was president of the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health, we did some great work with the A.A.P. [American Academy of Pediatrics],” she elaborated. “They are an organization that I have enormous respect for. But I respectfully disagree with them on holding on to a position that is now demonstrated to be out of date by multiple systematic reviews.”

“It wouldn’t be too much of a problem if people were saying ‘This is clinical consensus and we’re not sure,” she added. “But what some organizations are doing is doubling down on saying the evidence is good. And I think that’s where you’re misleading the public. You need to be honest about the strength of the evidence and say what you’re going to do to improve it.”

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.

Yet while mounting evidence against youth “gender transitions” is prompting European nations such as the United Kingdom and France, which are normally to the left of America, to move away from the practice, in America, the medical establishment and the Biden administration continues to dig in their heels, despite Biden’s own Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) releasing a since-deleted report last year acknowledging that “lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults are more likely than straight adults to use substances, experience mental health conditions including major depressive episodes, and experience serious thoughts of suicide.”

The White House’s comprehensive pursuit of the transgender agenda has included reopening the military to recruits afflicted with gender dysphoria, promoting gender ideology within the military (including “diversity” and drag events on military bases), holding White House events to “affirm transgender kids,” condemning state laws against underage “transitions” as “close to sinful,” promoting underage “transitions” (potentially at taxpayer expense) as a “best practice,” and trying to force federally funded schools to let males into female athletic competitions and restrooms.

Health

News RFK Jr.’s vaccine committee to vote on ending Hepatitis B shot recommendation for newborns

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Andreas Wailzer

The goal is to examine whether vaccines on the recommended schedule are contributing to the rise in allergies, autoimmune diseases, and other conditions such as autism.

Vaccine advisors to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. plan to vote on ending the recommendation of the Hepatitis B shot for infants and discuss other changes to the childhood vaccination schedule.

The federal advisers, selected by RFK Jr., will meet on Thursday and Friday to review the childhood vaccination schedule, according to a report from The Washington Post. The goal is to examine whether vaccines on the recommended schedule are contributing to the rise in allergies, autoimmune diseases, and other conditions such as autism.

The vaccine panel, headed by Kirk Milhoan, a pediatric cardiologist and critic of the COVID shots, plans to vote on ending the Hepatitis B vaccine recommendation for infants within 24 hours of birth. The panel will decide whether to delay the first dose to a later time.

Critics of the very early administration of the first Hepatitis B vaccine dose argue that it represents an unnecessary risk, as the vast majority of children are not at risk of infection.

The vaccine committee makes recommendations to the CDC director on the vaccine schedule. Directors have typically adopted the panel’s recommendations, compelling insurers to cover certain vaccines. These recommendations also provide a guideline for most pediatricians and medical organizations.

READ: Florida moving to be first state to end all childhood vaccine mandates

“We’re looking at what may be causing some of the long-term changes we’re seeing in population data in children, specifically things such as asthma and eczema and other autoimmune diseases,” Milhoan told The Washington Post.

“What we’re trying to do is figure out if there are factors within vaccines,” he added.

He said that the committee is examining the potential dangers of using aluminum as an adjuvant, an ingredient meant to trigger an immune response strong enough for the body to develop antibodies and protect the person from the disease.

The CDC recently revised its website on the issue of autism and vaccines, now stating, “The claim ‘vaccines do not cause autism’ is not an evidence-based claim because studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.” The CDC had previously held that there was definitely no link between vaccines and autism. The change was made at the direct order of RFK Jr.

The McCullough Foundation, founded by famous cardiologist and COVID response critic Dr. Peter McCullough, goes even further in its critique of childhood vaccines. In a recent extensive report, the authors analyzed 12 studies comparing routinely vaccinated with unvaccinated children. According to the report, all of these studies showed “superior overall health outcomes among the unvaccinated, including significantly lower risks of chronic medical problems and neuropsychiatric disorders such as ASD [Autism spectrum disorder].”

Continue Reading

Health

23,000+ Canadians died waiting for health care in one year as Liberals pushed euthanasia

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

Tens of thousands of Canadians have died while on waitlists in recent years, according to new data. Meanwhile, euthanasia now accounts for five percent of all deaths in Canada.

Over 23,000 Canadians have died while on waitlists for medical care as Liberals focused on euthanasia expansions.

According to government figures published on November 26 by Canadian think tank SecondStreet.org, 23,746 patients died on government waiting lists for health care between April 2024 and March 2025.

“What’s really sad is that behind many of these figures are stories of patients suffering during their final years – grandparents who dealt with chronic pain while waiting for hip operations, people leaving children behind as they die waiting for heart operations, so much suffering,” SecondStreet.org President Colin Craig explained.

“It doesn’t have to be this way. If we copied better-performing European public health systems, we could greatly reduce patient suffering,” he continued.

According to the data, collected through Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, there has been a three percent increase of deaths while on waitlists compared to last year. The number is likely much higher, as the reports did not include figures from Alberta and some parts of Manitoba.

Data further revealed that 100,876 Canadians have died while waiting for care since 2018, thanks to increased wait times and insufficient staffing.

“It’s interesting that governments will regularly inspect restaurants and report publicly if there’s a minor problem such as a missing paper towel holder,” Craig noted. “Meanwhile, no government reports publicly on patients dying on waiting lists. It’s quite hypocritical.”

At the same time, the Liberal government has worked to expand euthanasia 13-fold since it was legalized, making it the fastest growing euthanasia program in the world. Meanwhile, Health Canada has released a series of studies on advance requests for assisted suicide.

As LifeSiteNews reported earlier this week, so-called “Medical Assistance in Dying” (MAID) is responsible for five percent of all deaths in Canada in 2024.

Currently, wait times to receive genuine health care in Canada have increased to an average of 27.7 weeks, leading some Canadians to despair and opt for assisted suicide instead of waiting for medical aid. At the same time, sick and elderly Canadians who have refused to end their lives have reported being called “selfish” by their providers.

In one case, an Ontario doctor revealed that a middle-aged worker, whose ankle and back injuries had left him unable to work, felt that the government’s insufficient support was “leaving (him) with no choice but to pursue” euthanasia.

Other cases included an obese woman who described herself as a “useless body taking up space,” which one doctor argued met the requirements for assisted suicide because obesity is “a medical condition which is indeed grievous and irremediable.”

The most recent reports show that euthanasia is the sixth highest cause of death in Canada. However, it was not listed as such in Statistics Canada’s top 10 leading causes of death from 2019 to 2022.

Continue Reading

Trending

X