Gender Ideology Takes (Another) Massive Hit

A sign indicating male and female facilities at Sydney Airport in Australia on Oct. 12, 2025. Susan Mortimer/The Epoch Times

Commentary

The claim that it’s possible to transition from male to female (and vice versa) is an extraordinary statement. So it’s reasonable to demand extraordinary evidence before supporting the practice of “gender-affirming care,” which involves treatment with puberty blockers, cross-gender hormones (estrogen or testosterone), and in some cases surgery to remove breasts or modify genitalia.

And what do we find? An extraordinary lack of evidence in its favour.

Multiple comprehensive analyses, including the United Kingdom’s “Cass Review” and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ “Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria: Review of Evidence and Best Practices,” have exposed the thin evidence underpinning this therapeutic model, and have strongly suggested that rather than providing benefit, these practices cause real and lasting harm.

And now we have another large high-quality study, recently published by Finnish researchers in the peer-reviewed journal Acta Paediatrica, which casts grave doubt on the efficacy of “gender-affirming care.”

The Finns reviewed the psychiatric well-being of almost 2,100 adolescents and young adults who sought therapy for gender dysphoria between 1996 and 2019 and compared them to age- and  gender-matched controls.

The findings are startling.

Not only did the gender dysphoria cohort have significantly more mental health problems, but their mental health worsened after receiving “care” at gender identity clinics. For “male to female” patients, mental health problems (such as depression and anxiety) rose from 10 percent before gender reassignment to 61 percent afterwards; for “female to male” patients, the increase was from 22 percent to 55 percent.

We’ve long been fed the dogma by transgender advocates that “affirming” troubled young people in their cross-gender identities is the only responsible thing to do—that it’s essential to their well-being. In many cases, parents of gender-confused youth have been scared into transitioning their children by clinicians mouthing a version of “Would you rather have a dead daughter or a live son?”

But the findings of the Finnish researchers pour ice-cold water on the notion that “gender-affirming care” results in improved psychiatric well-being. Turns out, just the opposite is true.

It’s worth noting that one of the authors of the Finnish study is Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala, a psychiatrist at Tampere University, who founded one of Finland’s two pediatric gender clinics in 2011. As she documented her observations over the years, Dr. Kaltiala grew increasingly concerned about the harms inflicted by the gender affirmation model, and she was instrumental in significantly restricting that model’s suggested medical interventions for minors. Finland now instead prioritizes psychological support over puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.

Dr. Kaltiala expressed her battle-tested viewpoint in a much-read piece in The Free Press titled “Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.”

Various other European jurisdictions have similarly tapped the brakes. On this side of the pond, caution is taking root in the United States. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons, for instance, recently issued a statement (subsequently endorsed by the American Medical Association), which recommends that surgeons delay gender-related breast, genital, and facial surgery until patients are at least 19 years old.

In Canada, however, not much has changed (apart from in Alberta, where the government has taken flak for restricting medical and surgical interventions in gender-confused youth). The gender-affirmation model remains the standard of “care” for kids in this country, with the full-throated endorsement of the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Pediatric Society, and provincial medical associations. In light of all we now know about the dangers of this approach, that too is truly extraordinary.

One can choose, as Canadian doctors and medical leaders have inexplicably done, to ignore the facts of human biology and deny the binary nature of our species. But as Aldous Huxley once noted, “Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”

And we ignore those facts to the detriment of our children.

Edward Les is a pediatrician in Calgary and senior fellow at the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.