We should be able to trust the medical profession, but what you’re reporting here, Bernard, shows that trust is seriously misplaced in the area of gender medicine.
And the two Ministers are negligent given the NHMRC review appointees appear so compromised.
I’ve wondered why we need another review, when the Cass Review was comprehensive, and since other countries have banned puberty blockers on the evidence available to them.
Thank you for your quality journalism, Bernard. If only MSM “journalists” were as thorough.
While our Federal Health Minister has apparently consulted experts on the issue of the legitimacy of the ‘Affirmative Model of Gender Care’, it would seem that a Minister of Health would have at least some basic understanding of health related issues.
Mark Butler’s entire pre-parliamentary work experience, as stated in the Parliamentary website:
A recent study found that Australian Trans individuals (who have not undergone ‘transition’) experience substantially elevated mortality risk over their non-trans peers.
Lancet Reg Health Western Pacific Medical Journal of Feb 9th 2026 , titled:
‘All-cause and cause-specific mortality among transgender and gender diverse people: a nationwide cohort study in Australia’
. . . An interesting paper that I attempt to summarise in a few lines:
A total of 19,347 trans people AMAB and 9,713 trans people AFAB were matched with 9.87 million and 10.3 million general population females respectively.
. . .Trans people, regardless, of their ‘birth assignment’, were found to have elevated all-cause mortality for Cardiovascular Disease, Suicide, Cancer and External Causes. The risks increased with age.
. . .We knew about comorbidities and early death for the poor souls who undergo ‘transition’ now it seems to even ponder the subject is fraught the high risk of dreadful outcomes.
Perhaps those at risk could find a less unhealthy outlet to pursue; archery, gardening, quantum mechanics?
Quite surreal that stating the facts isn't enough these days.
I don't understand what Dr. Pang is claiming:
For this statement:
" They cited an unnamed systematic review and plucked from it the only high-quality (cross-sectional) study which, as Dr Pang and his co-authors put it, “found significantly improved psychological outcomes. Puberty blockers reduced suicidal thoughts and actions in transgender adolescents compared to those who had not accessed the treatment.” "
Here is what the study actually says, itself!!
"the cross-sectional design of this study with different participants in the groups before and after puberty suppression may potentially limit the results with participants being different on characteristics not measured and controlled for. The present study can, therefore, not provide evidence about the direct benefits of puberty suppression over time and long-term mental health outcomes."
Am I looking at the wrong study? This one can " not provide evidence about the direct benefits of puberty suppression over time and long-term mental health outcomes."
Yes I recall that Women’s Forum Australia provided this when the committee said they needed to see evidence harms to women of self-ID. It was clear they had no intention of taking it seriously.
My faith in the medical bureaucracy plummets further. Great article. Very sad and depressing though. The experiments on children continue.
Very interesting article Bernard. Thank you for the work you do.
I want all these unethical people in jail.
We should be able to trust the medical profession, but what you’re reporting here, Bernard, shows that trust is seriously misplaced in the area of gender medicine.
And the two Ministers are negligent given the NHMRC review appointees appear so compromised.
I’ve wondered why we need another review, when the Cass Review was comprehensive, and since other countries have banned puberty blockers on the evidence available to them.
Thank you for your quality journalism, Bernard. If only MSM “journalists” were as thorough.
While our Federal Health Minister has apparently consulted experts on the issue of the legitimacy of the ‘Affirmative Model of Gender Care’, it would seem that a Minister of Health would have at least some basic understanding of health related issues.
Mark Butler’s entire pre-parliamentary work experience, as stated in the Parliamentary website:
Union Official from 1992 t0 2007
BEING TRANS IS A HEALTH HAZARD
A recent study found that Australian Trans individuals (who have not undergone ‘transition’) experience substantially elevated mortality risk over their non-trans peers.
Lancet Reg Health Western Pacific Medical Journal of Feb 9th 2026 , titled:
‘All-cause and cause-specific mortality among transgender and gender diverse people: a nationwide cohort study in Australia’
. . . An interesting paper that I attempt to summarise in a few lines:
A total of 19,347 trans people AMAB and 9,713 trans people AFAB were matched with 9.87 million and 10.3 million general population females respectively.
. . .Trans people, regardless, of their ‘birth assignment’, were found to have elevated all-cause mortality for Cardiovascular Disease, Suicide, Cancer and External Causes. The risks increased with age.
. . .We knew about comorbidities and early death for the poor souls who undergo ‘transition’ now it seems to even ponder the subject is fraught the high risk of dreadful outcomes.
Perhaps those at risk could find a less unhealthy outlet to pursue; archery, gardening, quantum mechanics?
Such a thorough piece Bernard. Your work is excellent, thank you!
A good example of the Iron Law of Politics: “ never undertake an enquiry, for which you don’t already know the answer”
Another excellent article and I’m so glad you now have audio available! So much better for busy people.
Thank you for laying all of this out.
Quite surreal that stating the facts isn't enough these days.
I don't understand what Dr. Pang is claiming:
For this statement:
" They cited an unnamed systematic review and plucked from it the only high-quality (cross-sectional) study which, as Dr Pang and his co-authors put it, “found significantly improved psychological outcomes. Puberty blockers reduced suicidal thoughts and actions in transgender adolescents compared to those who had not accessed the treatment.” "
Here is what the study actually says, itself!!
"the cross-sectional design of this study with different participants in the groups before and after puberty suppression may potentially limit the results with participants being different on characteristics not measured and controlled for. The present study can, therefore, not provide evidence about the direct benefits of puberty suppression over time and long-term mental health outcomes."
Am I looking at the wrong study? This one can " not provide evidence about the direct benefits of puberty suppression over time and long-term mental health outcomes."
Thank you!
You're right. It's worse than I thought. They not only cherry-picked but omitted the limitations section of the study. Will update, thanks BL
This study is quoted a lot. It is very weird.
Yes. Big names: de Vries & Steenma.
Some interesting insights from Qld parliament on Trans-women
I reference a link to Queensland Parliamentary document titled:
HARMS OF MEN CLAIMING TO BE WOMEN
https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/com/LASC-C96E/PPROLAB202-EF1C/Taken%20on%20Notice%20and%20Response,%20Womens%20Forum%20Australia.pdf#:~:text=(This%20list%20features%20only%20a,males%20are%20on%20this%20list.
Yes I recall that Women’s Forum Australia provided this when the committee said they needed to see evidence harms to women of self-ID. It was clear they had no intention of taking it seriously.