Opinion
The hormone disruptors hiding in period products

By Ruby Raut, founder and CEO, WUKA
When we think of period products, the usual concerns are comfort, absorbency, cost and maybe sustainability. But there is another dimension — one less talked about but increasingly evidenced: chemical exposure via intimate-use products, and what this might mean for hormones, fertility, our microbiome and long-term health.
What Are Endocrine Disruptors?
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are substances that either mimic, block or interfere with the body’s natural hormones. These hormones regulate growth, development, reproduction, metabolism and more. Exposures to EDCs have been linked to irregular periods, early puberty, infertility, PCOS (polycystic ovary syndrome) and endometriosis, among other conditions.
Although most public conversation about EDCs centres on plastics, food packaging, and household chemicals, this issue is now being traced into period products too.
Why Period Products Are a Unique Exposure Route
The route of exposure matters — and for period products it matters a lot. External products like pads or period underwear sit on the skin; yes, there’s absorption, but the skin provides more of a barrier than the internal mucosal tissues of the vagina and vulva. When products are inserted (tampons, menstrual cups) or used intimately against highly vascular mucous membranes, chemical absorption can be 10–80 times higher than skin contact.
This means that a small amount of a problematic chemical in a tampon or reusable underwear could result in a greater internal dose than a similar substance used externally. Moreover, because the vaginal route can bypass the liver’s first-pass metabolism, the body’s defences are fewer — increasing the potential for impact.
What Research Is Finding
Recent reviews of menstrual product testing reveal worrying patterns:
- A systematic review found that menstrual products (tampons, pads, liners) contained a variety of EDCs including phthalates, parabens, volatile organic compounds, dioxins and dioxin-like compounds.
- Studies of PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) — the so-called “forever chemicals” — show these synthetic compounds are endocrine disruptors and are increasingly linked to fertility challenges, PCOS, early puberty, and other hormone-mediated outcomes.
- For example, one S. study found higher PFAS levels among women seeking fertility treatment and a link to increased PCOS risk.
- Another study found that many reusable period products had high levels of PFAS, even though PFAS aren’t strictly necessary for functionality — meaning the exposures are avoidable.
What Does That Mean for You?
It’s tempting to read these findings and feel overwhelmed. Yes, we live in a chemically complex world — from pollution in the air to additives in food — but what makes this different is frequency of use, intimate contact, and cumulative exposure.
Think of it like this: someone might use a tampon (or other internal product) many times a month, for decades. The small dose of an EDC each time may be low, but over time it adds up — especially if it bypasses detox filters and steadily influences hormone networks.
That’s why brands and regulators need to shift from “Is there some chemical present?” to “What is the dose, for how long, by what route?” — and what that means for human biology over years.
Steps Towards Better Protection
- Ask about disclosure and testing: Brands should publish test reports and confirm they’ve checked for EDCs, PFAS, and reproductive-toxic chemicals.
- Prefer products without unnecessary chemical finishes: For instance, water-repellent or “antimicrobial” coatings may add PFAS or biocides; research shows many products function fine without them.
- Consider internal vs external product choices: While convenience and comfort matter, understanding how products are used helps you make informed decisions.
- Advocate for regulation: Science is building, and policies are starting to reflect the risk. But consumers’ voices help accelerate change.
WUKA’s Commitment
At WUKA we believe that transparency and rigorous testing aren’t optional — they are essential. That’s why we test every period underwear batch (in China and again in the UK via Eurofins) to ensure no PFAS are detected and no known reproductive-toxic chemicals are present. If I wouldn’t use it myself, I wouldn’t make it for anyone else.
Looking Ahead
There’s still much we don’t know: the exact doses absorbed through vaginal tissues, how mixtures of chemicals interact in the body, or the long-term impact of low-level exposures. But that’s all the more reason to act now rather than wait. EDCs affect not just one body, but generations.
In the end, it’s about more than fear — it’s about empowerment. Knowing what is in the products we use gives us the power to insist on better safety, better transparency and better health. Because safe periods aren’t a luxury, they’re a basic human right.
Opinion
Femtech’s next chapter: Building a truly equal and comprehensive health tech category

By Wolfgang Hackl, MD, CEO OncoGenomX, Allschwil, Switzerland
FemTech is moving from a promising niche to a foundational part of modern healthcare.
Over the next decade and beyond, its real promise will not only be better products, but a more equitable system: one where women’s health is treated as an equal area for innovation, investment, clinical care, and public policy.
That shift matters because women’s health has long been under-researched, underfunded, and too often managed through systems that were not designed with female biology and life stages in mind.
The opportunity now is to change that trajectory.
If stakeholders act deliberately, FemTech can become a category that improves outcomes, expands access, and creates measurable value across the HealthTech ecosystem.
From niche to infrastructure
The most important change ahead is a mindset shift. FemTech should no longer be seen as a narrow consumer segment focused only on logging symptoms.
It should be understood as health infrastructure spanning puberty, fertility, pregnancy, postpartum recovery, menopause, pelvic health, chronic disease, mental health, and long-term preventive care.
This broader framing creates a more durable market and a stronger social case. It also encourages innovation that serves people across the full life course, rather than only at highly visible moments.
In practical terms, this means building tools that are clinically relevant, integrated into care pathways, and designed to work for different populations and health systems.
What needs to change
For FemTech to become a truly equal healthcare category and a genuine societal priority, several layers need to move together.
First, the evidence base must deepen. More sex-disaggregated data, more women-inclusive clinical studies, and more research on conditions that disproportionately affect women are essential.
Without stronger evidence, product development, diagnosis, reimbursement, and clinical adoption all remain constrained.
Second, policy and regulation must mature. Privacy protections need to be strong enough to build trust in highly sensitive health data.
Regulatory pathways should be clear enough to help innovators bring safe, effective products to market without unnecessary delay.
Reimbursement frameworks also need to evolve so that useful digital tools are not limited to those who can pay out of pocket.
Third, healthcare systems must become more open to integration. The best FemTech products should not sit outside the care journey as standalone apps.
They should connect with clinicians, diagnostics, telehealth, and care coordination so that patients experience continuity rather than fragmentation.
Finally, society needs a broader cultural shift. Women’s health should be discussed as a mainstream public health and economic issue, not as a side topic or a private concern.
That means normalizing conversations around menopause, miscarriage, postpartum health, chronic pain, infertility, and long-term preventive care.
The role of each stakeholder
A healthier FemTech future depends on the full value chain.
Founders and product teams need to design for clinical relevance, usability, and trust. The strongest solutions will be those that solve real problems, use data responsibly, and fit into everyday life and care.
Investors can help by backing long-term value creation rather than only consumer growth. FemTech deserves capital that supports rigorous validation, regulatory readiness, and scalable business models.
Healthcare providers and systems play a critical role in adoption. By integrating FemTech into clinical workflows, they can reduce delays in care, improve monitoring, and make support more continuous and personalised.
Payers and insurers can accelerate access by recognising the downstream value of early intervention, prevention, and better self-management. Coverage decisions will strongly shape which innovations become standard practice.
Policymakers and regulators should create environments where safety, innovation, and privacy coexist. Clear standards and supportive reimbursement policy can make the difference between isolated success and category-wide growth.
Employers and public institutions also have a role. Women’s health affects productivity, retention, and long-term wellbeing, which means workplace benefits and public programs can help expand access and reduce inequity.
FemTech is not only “women for women.” It is “everyone to solve a health and social issue that has been ignored for far too long.”
When stakeholders across the value chain recognise women’s health as a shared responsibility, FemTech moves from a segmented category to a mainstream force for better outcomes, fairer access, and stronger social impact.
Why the upside is larger than the market
The benefit of getting this right is not only commercial.
Better women’s health tools can improve early detection, support self-management, reduce avoidable complications, and lower the burden on social and healthcare systems.
They can also help close persistent gaps in access and outcomes that affect families, workplaces, and economies.
For HealthTech innovators, this is an opportunity to build products that are both mission-driven and scalable. For health systems, it is a chance to improve care quality and efficiency. For society, it is a way to move women’s health from an afterthought to an equal priority.
Actions that will move the field forward
The right direction will not happen automatically. It requires deliberate action across the ecosystem.
- Build products around real clinical needs, not only consumer engagement.
- Invest in women-inclusive research and validation from the start.
- Design privacy and governance into the product architecture.
- Create reimbursement models that reward prevention and continuity.
- Integrate FemTech into mainstream care pathways.
- Expand education for clinicians, employers, and the public.
- Expand the category to the invisible concerns to cover the full range of women’s health needs.
When these actions align, FemTech can mature into something larger than a market category. It can become a model for how health innovation should work: evidence-based, inclusive, trusted, and built to improve lives at scale.
A strong FemTech future is not just possible. It is a practical next step if the ecosystem chooses to treat women’s health as what it truly is: a core healthcare priority and a major driver of innovation.
Table: FemTech Focus Areas
| Field | Approximate number of active solutions/companies |
| Reproductive health & fertility | 120+ |
| Pregnancy & maternal care | 80+ |
| Menstrual health | 60+ |
| General women’s health & wellness | 50+ |
| Diagnostics & monitoring | 45+ |
| Menopause & perimenopause | 40+ |
| Pelvic & uterine health | 30+ |
| Chronic women’s health / integrated care | 30+ |
| Sexual health & wellness | 25+ |
Legend: FemTech is becoming a multi-category healthcare layer. Reports also show that software/apps remain the largest product type overall, while reproductive health continues to dominate as an application area. Best-effort estimates based on category listings, company directories, and market reports, not audited totals.
Opinion
Q1 momentum: Female founders are advancing, but the system still hasn’t caught up

By Melissa Wallace, CEO Fierce Foundry
The first quarter of 2026 tells a familiar but evolving story for female founders in the U.S.: measurable progress, paired with persistent structural gaps.
On the surface, the numbers suggest momentum.
A recent Pitchbook report showed female-founded companies captured 27.7 per cent of U.S. venture capital in 2025, up significantly from 19.9 per cent the year prior.
This is not a marginal shift, it reflects a broader recognition that women are building scalable, investable companies across sectors.
But the deeper cut tells a different story.
When you isolate companies founded solely by women, funding drops to just 1.1 per cent of total venture dollars.
As many of us continue to preach, this gap has remained largely unchanged for decades, hovering around 2 per cent on average.
This is the paradox: performance is not the issue—access is.
Research consistently shows that women-led companies generate stronger capital efficiency, yet they continue to receive a fraction of funding.
As Leslie Feinzaig has pointed out, the challenge is not a lack of ambition or quality, it’s that the system still evaluates women through a narrower lens, often expecting more proof, more traction, and more certainty before capital is deployed.
A Shift in How Women Are Getting Funded
What’s changed in Q1—and what’s most important—is not just how much funding is flowing, but how it’s being accessed.
Based on the data shared by Forbes in their 6 Trends Reshaping Women’s Health Investments this is what is clear:
- A rise of angel and operator capital: More women are entering the cap table as investors, not just founders, reshaping early-stage decision-making
- Alternative vehicles gaining traction: Donor-advised funds (DAFs), syndicates, and community-driven capital pools are stepping in where traditional VC has been slow
- Lower barriers to entry for investors: Smaller check sizes and structured angel education are expanding who participates in funding innovation
This diversification matters. Traditional venture capital has historically been concentrated both in who writes checks and what gets funded.
Broadening capital sources doesn’t just increase access; it changes what is considered “investable.”
At Fierce Foundry, this is a core assumption.
The venture studio model is not just about building companies, it’s about engineering capital access from day one.
By combining capital with shared services, investor networks, and early validation, the goal is to reduce the friction female founders face long before a Series A.
Why This Matters for Women’s Health
Nowhere is this shift more critical than in women’s health.
Despite being one of the fastest-growing sectors in healthcare, projected to exceed $200B globally in the next decade, FemTech and women’s health startups remain significantly underfunded. In 2024, only ~6 per cent of healthcare venture funding went to this category.
This disconnect is not due to lack of opportunity. In fact, the opposite is true.
Thanks to another incredible article from Geri Stenger in Forbes, we know women’s health has already generated over $100 billion in exits, with 27 billion-dollar transactions and increasing M&A activity.
This is not an emerging category, it is a proven one that has simply been misclassified, undercounted, and undervalued.
The implication is clear: capital is not flowing in proportion to outcomes.
The Role of New Models in Closing the Gap
This is where new models, particularly venture studios, are becoming essential.
The traditional startup pathway assumes equal access to networks, capital, and operational expertise.
Female founders, particularly in women’s health, are often navigating all three deficits simultaneously:
Limited access to early-stage capital
- Higher burden of proof in clinical and regulatory environments
- Fewer embedded operators with domain expertise
- The studio model addresses this by collapsing time and risk:
Co-building companies alongside founders
- Providing shared services across product, regulatory, and go-to-market
- Embedding investor alignment and exit pathways from the beginning
What Q1 Signals for the Future
If Q1 tells us anything, it’s that the narrative is shifting but the infrastructure is still catching up.
We are seeing:
- Increased participation of women across both sides of the cap table
- New funding mechanisms that challenge traditional VC gatekeeping
- Growing recognition that women’s health is not niche, but foundational
But we are also seeing that progress is uneven, and in many cases, still fragile.
The next phase of growth will not come from incremental increases in funding percentages.
It will come from rebuilding the systems that determine how capital flows in the first place. Because the real opportunity is not just funding more female founders.
It’s building an ecosystem where they don’t have to fight so hard to access what they’ve already proven they can return.
Learn more about Fierce Foundry at thefiercefoundry.com
Opinion
India’s top court rejects menstrual leave petition

India’s top court rejected a menstrual leave petition for women and female students, saying such a law could mean “no-one will hire women”.
The two-judge bench, headed by chief justice Surya Kant, said mandatory leave would make young women think they were “not at par” with their male colleagues and would be “harmful for their growth”.
The subject of menstrual leave has long divided opinion in India. While many agree with the judges’ view, others argue that a day or two off can help women manage painful periods.
Some states and a number of large private companies have already introduced menstrual leave for employees.
The court’s comments came while hearing a petition filed by lawyer Shailendra Mani Tripathi, who was seeking a national menstrual leave policy, legal website LiveLaw reported.
Tripathi later told news agency IANS that he had hoped working women would receive “two-to-three days of leave” to account for menstrual difficulties.
The judges, however, said introducing such a policy would not benefit women. Instead, they said it would reinforce gender stereotypes and affect employability.
They said this could make private-sector employers hesitant to hire women and might ultimately discourage their recruitment.
They added that “the government could come up with a menstrual leave policy in consultation with all stakeholders”, LiveLaw reported.
The comments from the top court have again put the issue in the spotlight in India, reviving debate over whether menstrual leave is a progressive step or whether it encourages stereotypes that women are weaker and unfit for the workplace.
Public health expert and lawyer Sukriti Chauhan told the BBC that by saying menstrual leave would make women “unattractive” as employees, the judges “reiterate the taboo around menstruation and rights that we have failed to address”.
She said there were laws in India covering “workplace dignity, gender equality, and safe working conditions” for women and that “denying menstrual leave violates these principles by forcing women into uncomfortable, undignified or hazardous work environments”.
“Providing menstrual leave not only supports women’s health and well-being, but also promotes productivity and efficiency in the workplace,” she added.
Some argue that giving women extra leave would be discriminatory to men and that, in a country where periods are often a taboo subject, with women barred from temples or isolated at home as “unclean”, menstruating women may be too shy to claim it.
But campaigners point out that countries such as Spain, Japan, South Korea and Indonesia already offer menstrual leave, and that studies have shown this time off can be beneficial to women.
Some Indian states also offer limited menstrual leave. Bihar and Odisha give two days per month to government employees, while Kerala provides it to university and industrial training institute staff.
Last year, the southern state of Karnataka introduced a law approving one day off a month for all menstruating women.
In the past few years, several companies have also introduced similar policies for female staff.
In 2025, industrial and services conglomerate RPG Group announced a two-days-a-month period leave policy for employees in its subsidiary CEAT.
Engineering giant L&T also introduced a similar policy, offering a one-day leave in a month, while food delivery company Zomato offers up to 10 days of period leave a year.
Events3 weeks agoThree sessions that show exactly where women’s health is heading in 2026
Entrepreneur2 days agoFuture Fertility raises Series A financing to scale AI tools redefining fertility care worldwide
Pregnancy3 weeks agoHow NIPT has evolved and what AI NIPT means in 2026
News3 weeks agoTwo weeks left to make your mark in women’s cardiovascular health
Opinion4 weeks agoQ1 momentum: Female founders are advancing, but the system still hasn’t caught up
Menopause2 weeks agoMore research needed to understand link between brain fog and menopause, expert says
Fertility1 week agoFuture Fertility partners with Japan’s leading IVF provider, Kato Ladies Clinic
News2 weeks agoSelf-employment linked to better cardiovascular health outcomes in Hispanic women












