Not so long ago, the discovery of metals in period products broke the news and became a viral sensation across social media platforms. A US study examining 14 different brands of tampons found that they all contained measurable concentrations of lead and other metals. The study was founded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and it highlighted the lack of research on the long-term safety of feminine hygiene products, specifically regarding the absorption of chemicals into the body.
Many women were outraged that they had been unknowingly exposing themselves to lead, cadmium, and arsenic. With women’s health already historically underresearched, until recently, period products were tested with saline solution instead of blood. Covid vaccines were designed primarily for men, similar to many other treatments, and even car safety features. On top of this, news came out that birth control was potentially carcinogenic – a finding that has necessitated calls for greater understanding of the dangers facing women’s health
The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) published an article in March this year explaining why we know so little about women’s health. They explored the historical and ongoing underrepresentation of women in medical research and clinical trials. For decades, women were often excluded from studies as their bodies were viewed as atypical, while men’s bodies were deemed as the ‘norm’. Unsurprisingly, this has led to a gap in knowledge about how medications and medical devices affect females. Biological sex can contribute to physiological, metabolic, hormonal, and even cellular differences, which in turn can influence how diseases present themselves.
Since then, there have been several crucial policy changes. This includes in 1993, when the FDA reversed its 1977 guidance to exclude women of reproductive potential from participating in early phase clinical research, officially mandating the inclusion of women in research unless there is a justification for exclusion (for example, if the health issue in question only affects men). Similarly, in 2001, The Institute of Medicine released a report that demonstrated how sex difference influences biology and should be studied as a variable in clinical research.
“As of 2019, were still substantially underrepresented in clinical trials for leading diseases”
However, despite these policy changes, a Harvard Medical School study in 2022 found that women, as of 2019, were still substantially underrepresented in clinical trials for leading diseases.
The AAMC has also highlighted that despite progress, women, particularly women of colour, are still underrepresented in trials.
Greater gaps were outlined in a report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine: “Women’s health has been underresearched throughout its history,” said Christopher Zahn, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. “Not including women in research on topics such as cardiovascular disease (CVD), HIV medications, and COVID-19 vaccination has led to harm.”
Recounting the deeply unethical research conducted on Black individuals throughout history, Angela Doyinsola Aina, from Black Mamas Matter Alliance (BMMA), emphasised the disproportionate impact of the maternal health crisis on Black mothers and birthing people in the U.S.Evidently, there is still a lot of room for improvement regarding women’s health, and iIt is not only medical research that lacks depth. Everyday period products and contraceptives making news for their potential negative health risks has left many questioning whether they are safe at all.
One fourth-year Medicine student, Olga, told Trinity News that the safety of period products is often overlooked: “any new drug has to go through several clinical stages of research before it is approved for commercial use. However, the same cannot be said for everyday products such as pads or tampons.” However, she stated that she does not know the details regarding the process of putting these products on the market.
Further investigation is also needed to determine if these metals can cross the vaginal tissue into systemic circulation and be absorbed by the body.
“We found 12 of the 16 metals we tested for, including some toxic metals like lead, present in 100% of the tampons we tested,” Jenni Shearston, a postdoctoral scholar in the Environmental Science, Policy, & Management department at the University of California, Berkeley, explained on NIEHS News. “However, we want to urge people not to panic because we don’t yet know if these metals can come out of the tampons or be absorbed by the body, and so we don’t know if they could have any impact on health.”
Two of the main metals found in period products, lead and arsenic, did incite widespread panic online. Popular news channels like CNN, Mdecialnewstoday, and Sky news published articles on the topic. Many women also shared their opinions on TikTok, Instagram, Threads, and X (formerly Twitter) making the topic go viral.
Lead is a metal found throughout the earth and is used in a variety of products: gasoline, paint, batteries, and even cosmetics. It remains a significant public health concern because of persistent lead hazards in the environment. Lead can cause long-term harm in adults and children. It mainly increases the risk of high blood pressure, cardiovascular problems and kidney damage.
Arsenic is also a naturally occurring, semi-metallic element widely distributed in the Earth’s crust. It is found in water, air, and soil. Many scientists, paediatricians, and public health professionals are concerned about the health effects of low-level exposure to arsenic. “I have already for years tried to stray away from one-use-only products, mostly for ecological reasons,” Olga comments. “In the light of the newest findings, I’m really glad I did.”
“The possible risk of cancer linked to hormonal birth control has also prompted people to question the safety aspect of women’s health”
Period products are not the only female health products that have made the news recently. The possible risk of cancer linked to hormonal birth control has also prompted people to question the safety aspects of women’s health.
The National Cancer Institute has explored the relationship between the contraceptive pill and the prospect of cancer, providing statistics on the risks associated with their use. According to their findings, the contraceptive pill slightly increases the risk of breast cancer (7% increase for women who have ever taken the contraceptives and 24% for those currently taking them) and cervical cancer (risk increase varies from 10% to 60%). The risk increase, however, is temporary and can diminish ten years after stopping the pill. Meanwhile, it lowers the risk of ovarian (30% to 50% lower) and endometrial cancer (reduced by at least 30%).
“When it comes to the carcinogenic effects of hormonal birth control, we usually refer to the increased risk of developing e.g. breast cancer. At the same time, however, they decrease the risk of ovarian cancer, which is much more malignant. Therefore we could argue, without taking into account other side effects of hormonal birth control, that it may do more good than bad.” Olga added. “It is also crucial to mention that there is no perfect drug. Even such popular drugs such as some targeting diabetes may increase the risk of certain tumours, which doesn’t mean we should stop administering them, as they may save some people’s lives here and now.”
Although health organisations are making progress with including women in their studies, women’s health is still widely underresearched, especially when it comes to women of different gender, race, or of older age.
“Honestly, I’m not sure how much of an impact systemic sexism could have had on research when it comes to other aspects to [consider], pad-like products have been used for centuries. I suppose, when humanity finally gained access to such materials like plastic, they just went all for it.” Olga asserted.
Throughout the last decade, there has been a push to conduct research in a more inclusive way, although as said previously, many women are still underrepresented. There are ways to support the change through NIHR, the Society for Women’s Health Research (SWHR), or the Women’s Health Research Institute (WHRA), with such support crucial for eliminating the dangerous gender disparity in the medical sphere.
