Supermarket loyalty card data suggests more than a quarter of women buying menstrual products also buy pain relief at the same time.

The findings also suggest women in lower-income areas are significantly less likely to do so, pointing to disparities in access to over-the-counter pain relief across England.

The study was led by Dr Victoria Sivill of the University of Bristol and colleagues.

The authors said: “The study highlights the need for greater awareness and policy interventions to address the high prevalence of menstrual pain as well as socioeconomic dimensions of menstrual pain.

“Public health initiatives should incorporate menstrual pain relief as part of broader efforts to improve health equity.”

Researchers analysed anonymised loyalty card data from a major UK health and beauty retailer, covering 211m transactions by 3.4m people between 2006 and 2015.

The study examined how often shoppers bought menstrual products and pain relief in the same transaction, and compared this with a customer’s usual rate of buying pain relief.

It found that 26.7 per cent of customers who bought menstrual products also bought pain relief at the same time.

These customers were nearly four times more likely to buy pain relief when buying menstrual products than on other shopping trips.

As a check on the approach, researchers found the most common interval between consecutive menstrual product purchases was exactly 28 days, consistent with the average menstrual cycle.

Menstrual pain is common and can affect daily activities, including school and work attendance.

Regional income was the strongest predictor of menstrual pain purchases.

Customers in the lowest-income areas were 32 per cent less likely to buy pain relief at the same time as menstrual products than those in the highest-income areas.

The authors said lower rates of pain relief purchases in deprived areas are likely to reflect an inability to afford over-the-counter medication rather than lower rates of menstrual pain itself.

Co-author Dr James Goulding said: “It is wonderful that smart data research in the UK is able to bring issues which may have once been overlooked in scientific settings, such as the sheer scale and impact of menstrual pain, to light. This is well overdue.

Co-author Dr Anya Skatova said: “Like many women, I was aware of how common menstrual pain is, but the scale of painkiller purchases alongside menstrual products was still striking.

“Using shopping data, we can see just how widespread the need for pain relief really is. This kind of evidence helps make menstrual pain visible at a population level and provides a strong foundation for systemic change in how it is recognised, treated, and prioritised in public health.”

The Women and Equalities Committee (WEC) has warned against “financial half measures” on women’s health as the government published its response to the report.

Ministers launched the renewed Women’s Health Strategy in April after the committee’s March report concluded it was not convinced that the menstrual and gynaecological needs of young women and girls had been sufficiently prioritised in wider healthcare reforms.

It followed the committee’s 2024 “medical misogyny” report, which found women with painful reproductive health conditions such as endometriosis, adenomyosis and heavy menstrual bleeding were frequently finding their symptoms “normalised” and their “pain dismissed” when seeking help.

In both reports, MPs called on the government to recognise the benefits of increased investment in early diagnosis and treatment of women’s reproductive health conditions and provide additional funding needed to transform the support available to millions of women.

In its response, published on 26 May as a command paper, the Department of Health and Social Care outlined action on reducing gynae waiting times, ensuring procedures are conducted with women’s full consent and adequate pain relief, and improving access to contraception for menstrual healthcare in line with the committee’s recommendations.

It said: “The government agrees with the committee’s overarching findings and recommendations for improving women’s health outcomes and experiences.

“We acknowledge the impact that menstrual health conditions can have on women’s lives, relationships, and participation in education and the workforce.

“We recognise that more needs to be done to support women with menstrual health conditions, particularly around listening to women, improving information and education, and enhancing patient experience.”

However, there was no commitment to increase school nurse provision, no measurable actions and targets on countering online misinformation, no new commitments to end inappropriate censorship of women’s online health content, and no further initiatives on tackling racial discrimination or understanding the menstrual wellbeing needs of young disabled and Deaf women.

The response comes after analysis by The Times suggested the government is allocating 60 per cent more funding to its men’s health strategy than to its renewed strategy for women’s health.

Sarah Owen, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee and Labour MP, said: “WEC’s 2024 ‘medical misogyny’ report warned 18 months ago of women in unnecessary pain and undiagnosed for years and called on the Government to recognise the benefits of increased investment in early diagnosis and treatment.

“Our follow up report this March cautioned girls’ and women’s health are not being sufficiently prioritised in system-wide NHS reforms, while initiatives which have proven to be successful in reducing waiting lists and improving women’s healthcare access, such as women’s health hubs, risked being scaled back or discontinued.

“While it’s welcome to see a focus on tackling ‘medical misogyny’ in April’s renewed Women’s Health Strategy and an emphasis on women’s voices being heard, this must be backed by adequate funding, not financial half measures, particularly when compared to men’s health.

“Significant questions remain following today’s response publication over the adequacy of investment being provided, including for workforce training, menstrual health education in schools, research and additional ring-fenced funding for women’s health hubs to deliver services within the emerging neighbourhood health framework.

“There are both opportunities and risks when it comes to increasing use of technology in women’s healthcare.

“As the Committee’s report set out, social media companies should be held to account for inappropriate and disgraceful ‘shadow banning’ censorship of important women’s health content and there should be a rigorous approach to tackling the risks from ineffective, unsafe and exploitative for-profit FemTech apps.

“The Government should take the problem of ‘shadow banning’ more seriously.

“A strategy which does not fully address the concerns set out in WEC’s report, alongside measurable actions and timescales, will only scratch the surface of the issues facing women’s health.

“WEC will keep a close eye on progress and continue to push for long overdue tangible change for women and girls.”