Mia Hughes: Finnish data shows gender treatments increase psychiatric needs. Canada lags behind

Article content

To be sure, there is a need for caution when interpreting these findings. The study is observational, so it cannot prove that the medical treatments caused the sharp rise in psychiatric care. It shows only that the surge happened, and all the authors can do is offer hypotheses for why that might be.

Article content

One possible explanation given is that estrogen therapy might cause depression in young males as seen in women and adult trans-identified males. For the female cohort, the sharp decline is more puzzling, since testosterone often boosts energy and quickly brings desired cosmetic changes, which should alleviate gender dysphoria and improve mental health. Instead, the opposite occurred.

Article content

In measured language, the authors suggest that this may arise from “treatments not meeting the expectations placed upon them.”

Article content

Article content

These concerning findings raise the obvious question: if these interventions do not improve mental health, and unquestioningly compromise physical health, what possible defence remains for continuing this experiment on young people?

Article content

Article content

And what does all this mean for Canada?

Article content

Though some will undoubtedly try to wave this study away as irrelevant, the parallels are impossible to ignore. Our gender clinics saw the same explosion in referrals, the same sudden shift from young boys to adolescent girls, and the same accompanying array of complex psychiatric comorbidities.

Article content

The crucial difference? Unlike Finland, which always required comprehensive psychiatric assessment before any medical intervention, many of Canada’s gender clinics offer puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones on the first appointment without any need for psychological assessment.

Article content

And while Finland drastically restricted access to these treatments in 2020 after a systematic review found no solid scientific basis, Canada continues to rely on that same evidence that is consistently rated as low to very low quality. Of note, much of the evidence that purportedly shows improved mental health relies on self-reported surveys — a notoriously unreliable measure.

Article content

Still, for all its strengths, this latest study is unlikely to pierce the ideological armour that surrounds Canadian gender medicine.

Article content

Article content

After all, Sweden and Finland’s systematic reviews, and the U.K.’s landmark Cass Report changed nothing. The comprehensive 2025 report by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has been effectively ignored. Even a systematic review conducted on home soil at McMaster University failed to shift clinical practice.

Article content

This stubborn willful blindness points to one simple truth: Gender medicine in Canada is driven by ideology, not science — so no study, no matter how strong, will inspire the field to self-correct. Meaning, unless Canadians force a reckoning and demand safer and better care for these vulnerable youth, this medical scandal will continue unabated.

Article content

National Post

Article content

Mia Hughes specializes in researching pediatric gender medicine, psychiatric epidemics, social contagion and the intersection of trans rights and women’s rights. She is the author of “The WPATH Files,” a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and director of Genspect Canada.

Article content