Health
UK’s NHS set to launch detransitioning services for ‘transgender’ patients

From LifeSiteNews
A report showing that clinical practice for ‘transgenders’ is built on ‘shaky foundations’ prompted the UK’s Health Service to work toward ‘detransitioning’ services.
The National Health Service of England (NHS) is slated to launch its first “detransitioning” service aimed at returning “transgender” individuals to physical conformity with their biological sex.
The move was prompted by the recommendations of a review of Gender Identity Services by pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, The Telegraph reported. Dr. Cass’ report found an “exponential” spike in the number of young people who were presented to the UK NHS Gender Identity Service (GIDS) beginning in 2014.
General Practitioners in England were found to be “pressurized to prescribe hormones” by patients who had not consulted with a private clinician, and Dr. Cass concluded that the current practice of so-called “gender medicine” in the U.K., involving the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, was built on “shaky foundations.”
Dr. Cass reportedly went so far as to recommend that GPs resist efforts by private practitioners to prescribe puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, “particularly if that private provider is acting outside NHS guidance.”
NHS England has decided to fully adopt Dr. Cass’ recommendations, and on Wednesday published its plans to reform its gender services accordingly. Sir Stephen Prowis, medical director of the NHS, praised Dr. Cass’ work as “invaluable” and said the NHS would now embrace a “fundamentally different and safer model of care for children.”
According to Health Service officials, the NHS’ next step is to “define” a “pathway” for those who decide to detransition, since there is currently no official guidance on how to care for such individuals. Their work will involve examining the proportion of patients who detransition, and their reasons for detransitioning, The Telegraph reported.
The plan involves the creation of six new clinics by 2026 specialized to care for minors struggling with their biological sex.
Despite this impending reform, the NHS is set to begin clinical trials of puberty blockers for minors, since Dr. Cass’ report cited lack of long-term studies as a reason that puberty blockers should not be prescribed to minors.
Critics have warned that these trials are “ethically unjustifiable,” with the warning that they “pose the very real risk of the NHS sacrificing the otherwise good health of vulnerable children and causing them grave physical harm in the name of research.”
Lucy Marsh of the Family Education Trust has called upon the NHS to address the roots of gender dysphoria and has decried its planned trials of administering puberty blockers to teenagers as “unethical” and “dangerous.”
‘We do not need more gender clinics, instead the NHS should be looking at the root causes of gender dysphoria including mental health issues, autism, sexual abuse and issues within the family,” said Marsh, according to The Daily Mail.
“It is not ‘kind’ to lead children down a pathway that leads to irreversible harm and destroys families,” she said, adding that it is a “a huge waste of taxpayer’s money to roll out gender clinics to every area of England.”
Transgender hormonal and surgical interventions are known to cause lifelong mental and physical damage and to exacerbate psychological issues in those subjected to them.
Studies find that more than 80 percent of children experiencing gender dysphoria outgrow it on their own by late adolescence, and that even full “reassignment” surgery often fails to resolve gender-confused individuals’ heightened tendency to engage in self-harm and suicide – and may even exacerbate it, including by reinforcing their confusion and neglecting the actual root causes of their mental strife.
Many oft-ignored detransitioners have attested to the physical and mental harm of reinforcing gender confusion as well as to the bias and negligence of the medical establishment on the subject, many of whom take an activist approach to their profession and begin cases with a predetermined conclusion that “transitioning” is the best solution.
Health
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!

Deadline: June 16, 2025
Draw: June 26, 2025
|
|
|
The 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery Dream Home, designed by Sorento Custom Homes, continues Sorento’s tradition of award-winning designs. This gorgeous bungalow features 2,824 sq ft of developed living space and showcases a tall, vaulted ceiling.
Located at 128 Emmett Crescent in the neighbourhood of Evergreen, this outstanding home features a screened deck off the dining room, a large family room on the lower level, and of course, a beautiful primary suite. Sorento’s ensuites are always something to behold, and this one features a claw foot tub. There’s an office on the main level, two bedrooms below, and a large fitness room that includes a two-person infrared sauna. Enjoy the convenience of a walk-in pantry, main floor laundry, and chef quality appliances. The design of this unique home is complemented by gorgeous furnishings by Urban Barn.
Our Grand Prize Dream Home package is valued at $1,074,472! You won’t want to miss seeing this outstanding home or your chance to live in it.
Aristotle Foundation
The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine

By Dr. J. Edward Les
The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide from its shelves — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs
Physicians have a duty to put forward the best possible evidence, not ideology, based treatments
Late last month, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) announced that it, along with three Alberta doctors, had filed a constitutional challenge to Alberta’s Bill 26 “to protect the relationship between patients, their families and doctors when it comes to making treatment decisions.”
Bill 26, which became law last December, prohibits doctors in the province from prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapies for those under 16; it also bans doctors from performing gender-reassignment surgeries on minors (those under 18).
The unprecedented CMA action follows its strongly worded response in February 2024 to Alberta’s (at the time) proposed legislation:
“The CMA is deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care, including the Alberta government’s proposed restrictions on gender-affirming treatments for pediatric transgender patients.”
But here’s the problem with that statement, and with the CMA’s position: the evidence supporting the “gender affirmation” model of care — which propels minors onto puberty blockers, cross-gender hormones, and in some cases, surgery — is essentially non-existent. That’s why the United Kingdom’s Conservative government, in the aftermath of the exhaustive four-year-long Cass Review, which laid bare the lack of evidence for that model, and which shone a light on the deeply troubling potential for the model’s irreversible harm to youth, initiated a temporary ban on puberty blockers — a ban made permanent last December by the subsequent Labour government. And that’s why other European jurisdictions like Finland and Sweden, after reviews of gender affirming care practices in their countries, have similarly slammed the brakes on the administration of puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to minors.
It’s not only the Europeans who have raised concerns. The alarm bells are ringing loudly within our own borders: earlier this year, a group at McMaster University, headed by none other than Dr. Gordon Guyatt, one of the founding gurus of the “evidence-based care” construct that rightfully underpins modern medical practice, issued a pair of exhaustive systematic reviews and meta analyses that cast grave doubts on the wisdom of prescribing these drugs to youth.
And yet, the CMA purports to be “deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care,” which begs the obvious question: Where, exactly, is the evidence for the benefits of the “gender affirming” model of care? The answer is that it’s scant at best. Worse, the evidence that does exist, points, on balance, to infliction of harm, rather than provision of benefit.
CMA President Joss Reimer, in the group’s announcement of the organization’s legal action, said:
“Medicine is a calling. Doctors pursue it because they are compelled to care for and promote the well-being of patients. When a government bans specific treatments, it interferes with a doctor’s ability to empower patients to choose the best care possible.”
Indeed, we physicians have a sacred duty to pursue the well-being of our patients. But that means that we should be putting forward the best possible treatments based on actual evidence.
When Dr. Reimer states that a government that bans specific treatments is interfering with medical care, she displays a woeful ignorance of medical history. Because doctors don’t always get things right: look to the sad narratives of frontal lobotomies, the oxycontin crisis, thalidomide, to name a few.
The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: it illustrates what happens when a government drags its heels on necessary action. Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide, given to pregnant women for morning sickness, from its shelves, three months after it had been banned everywhere else — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs, along with other severe anomalies. It’s a shameful chapter in our medical past, but it pales in comparison to the astonishing intransigence our medical leaders have displayed — and continue to display — on the youth gender care file.
A final note (prompted by thalidomide’s history), to speak to a significant quibble I have with Alberta’s Bill 26 legislation: as much as I admire Premier Danielle Smith’s courage in bringing it forward, the law contains a loophole allowing minors already on puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to continue to take them. Imagine if, after it was removed from the shelves in 1962, government had allowed pregnant women already on the drug to continue to take thalidomide. Would that have made any sense? Of course not. And the same applies to puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones: they should be banned outright for all youth.
That argument is the kind our medical associations should be making — and would be making, if they weren’t so firmly in the grasp, seemingly, of ideologues who have abandoned evidence-based medical care for our youth.
J. Edward Les is a Calgary pediatrician, a senior fellow with the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy, and co-author of “Teenagers, Children, and Gender Transition Policy: A Comparison of Transgender Medical Policy for Minors in Canada, the United States, and Europe.”
-
Health9 hours ago
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
-
Business1 day ago
Carney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty
-
conflict16 hours ago
“Evacuate”: Netanyahu Warns Tehran as Israel Expands Strikes on Iran’s Military Command
-
Crime2 days ago
Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert
-
Aristotle Foundation12 hours ago
The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine
-
Energy15 hours ago
Could the G7 Summit in Alberta be a historic moment for Canadian energy?
-
Bruce Dowbiggin15 hours ago
WOKE NBA Stars Seems Natural For CDN Advertisers. Why Won’t They Bite?