PART 3 of 7: Women Turn to Social Media for Answers

Because the system didn’t prepare providers, and the marketplace rushed into the silence.

If you’ve ever sat in an exam room, described your symptoms, and walked out with more questions than answers…

If you’ve ever gone home and immediately typed your symptoms into a search bar…

If you’ve ever turned to Instagram, TikTok, podcasts, or private Facebook groups to figure out what is happening in your body…

I want you to hear this clearly:

You did not do anything wrong. You were not “self-diagnosing.” You weren’t bypassing care.

You were doing what millions of women do because the system left you without real support. Women are underserved.

The Training Gap: Providers Were Not Prepared

This isn’t a judgment of clinicians; it is a documented systems failure.

The data is consistent:

• Only 7% of OB-GYN residents feel prepared to manage menopause (2019 residency survey; reported by Axios, 2025)

• Only 20.8% of residency programs include a formal menopause curriculum.(Contemporary OB/GYN, 2024)

• The median amount of menopause education in U.S. OB-GYN residency is around 30 minutes total.(North American Menopause Society residency training data)

  
  

Thirty minutes. For something every woman will experience if she lives long enough.

This gap is evident in clinical encounters, not because providers don’t care, but because they were never given the training they deserve. As a result, women are often:

• dismissed

• minimized

• told they’re “too young for perimenopause”

• told symptoms are “just stress”

• told their labs are “normal”

• or encouraged to “ride it out”

  
  

So what do women do?

They go where the conversations are actually happening: online.

The Research Gap: When Evidence Is Limited, Guidance Becomes Inconsistent

The training problem is only part of the story.

Women were excluded from most clinical research until 1993. Even today, large reviews show women remain underrepresented, and hormonal transitions like perimenopause are rarely studied in long-term, high-quality trials.

This creates:

• thin, inconsistent evidence

• guidelines that contradict each other

• differing recommendations between countries

• expert opinions that vary depending on training or philosophy

  
  

So when women receive mixed messages, it’s not because they’re “confused.”

The information itself is inconsistent.

A Real-World Example: Progesterone for Sleep

Progesterone is the perfect example of how contradictory menopause care can be.

🇨🇦 In Canada:

Many menopause specialists do not recommend progesterone specifically for sleep. Why? Because the evidence is limited, short-term, and not strong enough to treat insomnia as a primary indication.

🇺🇸 In parts of the United States:

Some clinicians do prescribe oral micronized progesterone at night. Their reasoning? Small studies suggest progesterone may reduce night wakings or improve sleep continuity for some women.

Both perspectives come from providers who care deeply about women. Both are interpreting the same limited research.

And women are stuck in the middle:

“One provider says never. Another says it’s the best thing ever. Who am I supposed to believe?”

My Experience (Professionally Framed)

I’ve been on the receiving end of this confusion, too.

I had a hysterectomy but kept my ovaries, so I didn’t immediately need hormone therapy. Later, I used a blend of estrogen and progesterone, and at one point, a naturopath recommended progesterone for sleep. For me, it caused grogginess and didn’t feel helpful. In the end, mindfulness tools, nervous system support, and better sleep routines made more of a difference than medication.

At the same time, I have friends who take progesterone at night and absolutely love how it helps their sleep and mood.

Both experiences are valid.

That’s the point:

Women’s bodies respond differently. The evidence is still emerging. And the guidance women receive is not consistent.

The confusion women feel is not a flaw; it reflects genuine uncertainty in the field.

When Evidence Is Thin, Marketing Gets Loud

This landscape of inconsistent medical guidance and thin research creates the perfect storm and the marketplace moves fast.

A 2025 analysis captured it perfectly:

“The market is falling over itself to ensure women can enjoy a ‘good menopause’…”(Takhar et al., 2025)

Not because the science is strong.Because the demand is enormous and the evidence gaps are wide.

So into this silence rushes:

• “menopause-safe” skincare

• teas and gummies marketed as “hormone-balancing”

• powders, supplements, and protocols

• pricey at-home hormone testing kits

• “menopause-specific” fitness programs

• influencer-driven treatment plans

• subscription-based symptom platforms

But the problem? Most of these products aren’t backed by strong evidence.

Even Harvard dermatologists warn women not to expect skin-care “menopause miracles.”As Dr. Kourosh notes, many of these products contain the exact same ingredients used throughout adulthood, and none undergo FDA review before being sold.

So women face a landscape where:

• Guidelines vary by country

• Providers offer conflicting advice

• Research is limited

• Influencers sound confident

• Algorithms amplify fear

• Branding is polished

• Marketing is aggressive

  
  

Of course, women feel overwhelmed. Of course, they seek answers online. Of course, they question themselves.

This is not a personal failing. This is a systemic problem.

Women Turn to Social Media Because the System Didn’t Show Up for Them

Women deserve:

• clinicians trained in menopause

• clear, evidence-based guidance

• research that includes their bodies

• information that isn’t locked behind subscriptions

• community that supports, not sells

• care that respects their lived reality

  
  

The confusion you feel is not yours to carry alone; it reflects decades of neglect in women’s health research and training.

You are not imagining the mixed messages. You are not alone in the noise. And you are not doing menopause “wrong.”

You deserve clarity, compassion, and evidence, not fear-based marketing or conflicting advice.