Opinion
Infertility: how celebrities are changing the conversation
By Professor Alison Campbell, chief scientific officer at Care Fertility

Celebrities can break down stigmas and build a sense of community around infertility and treatment but education and being realistic about an individual’s options is key, says Professor Alison Campbell, chief scientific officer at Care Fertility.
Infertility can be a lonely and isolating experience and may be incredibly difficult to discuss – especially with those unable to fully grasp what an individual or couple may be going through.
Fertility can be impacted by a number of factors such as age, lifestyle and medical factors. The main causes of fertility issues include ovulation problems, endometriosis, egg quality, sperm quality, PCOS, fallopian tube problems and premature ovarian insufficiency
For around a third of people, their infertility is considered unexplained; as there is no clear diagnosis.
However, there has been a significant shift in the conversation in recent years, partly driven by a growing number of celebrities who have spoken out about their own experiences.
From Chrissy Teigen’s openness about her infertility and miscarriages on her social channels to Khloe and Kourtney Kardashian’s very public journeys trying to conceive with IVF, celebrities have been much more transparent about their fertility journeys.
Such openness about issues and treatments has undoubtedly played a crucial role in raising awareness and normalising IVF treatments, along with shedding light on the challenges faced by millions of individuals and couples worldwide.
There are undeniable positives to be acknowledged when celebrities share their fertility journeys with the world.
Witnessing well-known figures discuss their journeys, struggles and successes, can encourage people to seek expert help and to feel less alone by fostering a sense of community, inclusivity and understanding.
It can also raise awareness of situations that might not be in the public eye, as with Courtney Cox discovering a rare condition preventing full-term pregnancy or Hugh Jackman’s openness about adoption and IVF.
When celebrities openly discuss their use of donors or surrogates, they contribute to an important conversation about solutions to infertility and the complexities of parenthood.
By sharing their stories, these celebrities help articulate and demonstrate how infertility and family-building can be diverse and multifaceted. This, in turn, may contribute to us becoming a more inclusive society that better understands the pain of infertility and accepts and promotes various paths to parenthood.
View this post on Instagram
Kourtney Kardashian announcing her pregnancy in June
The power of celebrity pregnancy reveals
When celebrities announce their pregnancies or the birth of their children, the media attention they receive often leads to an influx of public interest in fertility issues and treatments.
Searches for ‘Kourtney Kardashian IVF’ spiked (+700 per cent increase on 2022) * following her announcement, although it’s not known how the eldest Kardashian sister became pregnant.
Cameron Diaz and Priyanka Chopra have talked openly about using a surrogate which reportedly drove an increased interest in surrogacy.
View this post on Instagram
Priyanka Chopra used a surrogate to welcome her daughter, Malti
When Jennifer Aniston went public about her struggles to have a baby and said, “I would’ve given anything if someone had said to me, ‘Freeze your eggs. Do yourself a favour”, we saw a significant increase in interest in egg freezing and people also started asking more questions about fertility assessments.
This increased awareness can drive individuals to seek information and support, potentially encouraging those experiencing fertility challenges to explore fertility clinics, consult with specialists and consider IVF treatments.
Increased public awareness can bring issues front of mind at many levels. It may even prompt governments and healthcare institutions to allocate more resources and support for research towards infertility solutions.
Problematic aspects of celebrity pregnancy reveals
Whilst celebrity openness and pregnancy reveals have many positive aspects, there are also pitfalls to consider. It’s important to acknowledge that not every individual or couple can afford the same level of fertility investigations or treatments as celebrities.
When celebrities choose to share these issues, with sometimes millions of engaged followers, context and education is key.
The sometimes-high cost of repeated IVF treatments can create a sense of inequality, leaving many without access to the same options as those in the public eye. As fertility experts, we must strive to advocate for increased accessibility to fertility treatments and support for those facing financial barriers.
Not all celebrities will be as open with the more gritty or emotional details of their journeys. This can create a false sense of what appear to be seamless treatments, and successful pregnancies, which can inadvertently add pressure and stress to those struggling to conceive or undergoing fertility assessments or treatments.
Everyone’s fertility journey is unique, and not all cases end in immediate success. It is so important to remind the public that fertility treatments can be a challenging and emotionally taxing process, and that experiences and outcomes vary from person to person.
Celebrity influences can sometimes perpetuate unrealistic expectations about fertility treatments, leading some to believe that IVF guarantees a positive outcome or that it should be the first and only option.
As fertility experts, we must emphasise the importance of personalised treatment plans and individualised care for each patient, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.
While celebrity revelations can raise awareness and positively influence public perception, we must remain balanced and address the challenging aspects, as well as the wonder of success, that constitute both sides of infertility.
Our responsibility lies in supporting those undergoing fertility investigations and treatments, advocating for increased accessibility and affordability, and promoting accurate, transparent information about the complexities of fertility journeys.
By combining the power of celebrity influence with ethical and compassionate care, we can work towards becoming a society that truly understands and supports those facing fertility challenges.
Professor Alison Campbell is chief scientific officer at Care Fertility.
News
We built Ema like a nurse: Here’s why that matters

By Claire Pettengill, science intern and Jade Anstine, clinical AI intern, Ema EQ
Every year, Gallup asks Americans which professions they trust most. Every year, nurses win. Not doctors. Not scientists. Nurses. And if you spend any time thinking about why, the answer is not hard to find.
Medicine runs on the nurse noticing first. In other words, the diagnosis follows the nurse sounding the alarm. They ask questions that feel human, not procedural. They explain what is happening in language you can understand.
And, critically, they know when something is beyond their scope and get you to the right person without making you feel like a burden for needing more.
That is the model we built Ema on.
When we set out to build an AI companion for women’s health, we could have just built something that answers questions efficiently. Pattern matching. Fast retrieval. Clinically accurate outputs.
Those things matter, and Ema does all of them. But accuracy alone does not build trust, and trust is the entire game in healthcare.
A woman asking about her postpartum recovery, her fertility, or her breastfeeding supply is not looking for a search engine. She is looking for someone who will take her seriously.
Women’s concerns don’t just need to be ‘validated’; they also need to be believed. Dismiss a woman’s pain as anxiety once, and you’ve taught her to doubt her own body.
The nursing model of care is built on exactly that premise. It is care that is shaped by her story. It asks about context and symptoms.
It treats the person as a whole, and it recognises that the right answer is sometimes a referral, not a response.
We trained Ema to escalate. That may sound like a small thing, but in AI, it is a deliberate design choice.
Most AI systems are optimised to answer and maintain engagement. Ema is optimised to help, and sometimes helping means saying “you need to speak to a clinician” and making that path easy.
This matters especially in women’s health, where the clinical trust gap is well-documented.
In a 2022 nationally representative survey of over 5,000 women, nearly 1 in 3 reported that their doctor had dismissed their concerns, and 15 per cent said a provider simply didn’t believe them.
Women are more likely to have their symptoms dismissed, their concerns minimised, and their pain undertreated. Among women under 35, nearly half reported at least one of these experiences.
They have had to learn how to advocate within systems designed for efficiency, built on men’s health.
With Ema, every conversation is an opportunity to make a woman feel heard, informed, and directed to the right level of care, neither over-triaged nor undertreated.
The goal is not to replace clinicians. It is to create a trustworthy first point of support that listens carefully, explains clearly, recognises limits, and helps women move toward appropriate care.
The nurses who top those Gallup rankings every year earn that trust through consistency. They show up, listen, follow through, and know their limits.
Ema is simply that trust, built into technology. That is the standard we hold Ema to: a trustworthy presence that knows when to answer and when to hand off.
Medicine spent a long time teaching women not to expect to be believed. Ema is built by the people who never stopped listening.
Bios
Claire Pettengill is a psychiatric nurse and DNP-PMHNP candidate at Columbia University School of Nursing, specialising in women’s mental health across the lifespan and algorithmic justice – ensuring the AI tools shaping women’s care are built to actually listen. She joined Ema EQ as a science intern focusing on clinical safety standards for evaluating AI in women’s health.
Jade Anstine is a senior nursing student at Gustavus Adolphus College looking to bridge the gap between frontline medicine and digital health innovation. He joined Ema EQ as a Clinical AI Intern to assess the Ema AI model across different clinical populations, specifically pediatrics and LGBTQ+.
News
The technology exists: Why are women still waiting?

By Jane Lewis, chief operating officer, chief financial officer and women’s health lead, ABHI
For years, the conversation around women’s health has rightly focused on recognition.
Recognition that women wait longer for diagnosis. Recognition that symptoms are too often dismissed or normalised. Recognition that healthcare systems have historically been designed around male biology, leaving gaps in research, evidence and care.
That recognition matters. But awareness alone will not improve outcomes.
The challenge facing women’s health today is no longer simply identifying the problem. It is acting on the solutions already available.
At ABHI’s Women’s Health Summit earlier this year, leaders from across healthcare, government, academia and industry came together to discuss the future of women’s health.
One message emerged repeatedly throughout the day: we do not have an innovation problem.
Across medical devices, diagnostics, digital health and genomics, there are already technologies capable of transforming outcomes for women.
From self-sampling approaches for cervical screening and non-invasive diagnostics to AI-enabled tools and advanced imaging, innovation is happening. The question is whether healthcare systems can adopt it quickly enough.
Too often, promising technologies become trapped in pilot programmes, fragmented procurement processes or lengthy implementation pathways. Evidence generation, commissioning and adoption are frequently treated as separate challenges rather than part of a single journey.
The consequence is that innovations capable of improving quality of life and reducing pressure on health services take years to reach the women who could benefit from them.
This matters because women’s health extends far beyond reproductive health.
Historically, many discussions have centred on fertility, pregnancy and gynaecological conditions. These remain critically important, but they represent only part of the picture.
Women experience cardiovascular disease differently to men. They are disproportionately affected by autoimmune conditions. They face distinct health challenges throughout their lives, from adolescence to healthy ageing.

Jane Lewis
Yet healthcare systems often continue to approach these issues in isolation.
A woman does not experience her health in separate compartments. Pregnancy, cardiovascular risk, menopause, mental health and musculoskeletal conditions are interconnected.
Healthcare systems need to reflect that reality through more integrated, life-course approaches to care.
There has never been a better opportunity to do so.
Across the NHS, the shift towards prevention, community-based care and digital transformation aligns closely with the needs of women’s health.
Women’s Health Hubs are already demonstrating the benefits of bringing services together around the needs of women rather than organisational boundaries. Digital technologies are helping to identify risk earlier and support more personalised care.
Innovation can help deliver all three of the NHS’s major transformation ambitions: moving from treatment to prevention, from hospital to community, and from analogue to digital care.
But innovation alone is not enough.
Closing the women’s health gap also requires us to address longstanding gaps in research and evidence.
Women remain underrepresented in many areas of clinical research, and sex-disaggregated analysis is not always applied consistently. The result is that clinical pathways and treatment decisions are often based on evidence that does not fully reflect female physiology.
Better data, stronger research participation and greater focus on female-specific and female-predominant conditions will be essential.
There is also a compelling economic case for action.
Women’s health is often framed as an equality issue, and equality remains central. But poor health affects workforce participation, productivity and economic growth.
Improving outcomes for women benefits not only patients, but employers, healthcare systems and wider society.
Yet despite this, women’s health innovation continues to attract only a fraction of the investment directed towards other areas of healthcare.
That is beginning to change.
Across the UK and internationally, momentum is building. Governments, investors, researchers and innovators increasingly recognise that women’s health is both a societal necessity and an economic opportunity.
The conversation has moved on significantly in recent years. Topics that were once overlooked are now firmly on the policy agenda.
The next challenge is ensuring that awareness translates into action.
The technologies exist. The evidence is growing. The policy direction is increasingly clear.
ABHI is increasingly taking this agenda beyond national boundaries. Through our engagement with international industry associations, policymakers and healthcare leaders, we are working to ensure that women’s health is recognised as both a health and economic priority.
We are helping to shape discussions on innovation, regulation, investment and adoption, while sharing lessons from the UK with partners around the world.
Whether addressing the gender health gap, improving access to diagnostics or accelerating the uptake of new technologies, international collaboration will be essential.
The challenge now is not recognising the need for change, but delivering it.
Women have waited long enough for acknowledgement of the problem. They should not have to wait any longer for the benefits of the solutions that already exist.
ABHI is the UK’s leading industry association for HealthTech. Its members, ranging from multinationals to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), develop and supply technologies spanning everything from syringes and wound dressings to surgical robots, diagnostics, and digitally enabled healthcare solutions. ABHI’s 400 member companies represent approximately 80% of the UK HealthTech sector by value.
Opinion
Women’s Health has waited long enough for innovation

By Dr Fran Conti-Ramsden, clinician at Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, academic at King’s College London, and chief medical officer of MEGI Health.
A woman gives birth. A few days later she goes home, often with a bag of medication for her blood pressure, and then, very often, very little structured follow-up for her heart (cardiovascular) health.
In my clinical work, and through our collaboration with Action on Pre-eclampsia, I see and hear about this postnatal cliff edge again and again, and it still shocks me.
We invest a lot of medical care and attention whilst a woman or birthing individual is pregnant, then, at the very moment emerging evidence suggests we have a window of opportunity to modify long-term health, the support falls away.
That cliff edge is a symptom of a deeper issue: we have come to treat “women’s health” as a synonym for reproductive health. Pregnancy, periods and fertility, important as they are, have crowded out everything else.
Yet the conditions that do most to shorten and limit women’s lives are not reproductive at all.
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women worldwide, and it is still too readily thought of as a man’s problem.
Heart disease in women is more likely to be missed and under-treated, in part because for decades women were under-represented in the research that built our knowledge.
Pregnancy makes this vivid.
Conditions such as pre-eclampsia are not only risks to be managed for nine months; they are early warnings about a woman’s future, markers that she is more likely to develop heart disease and high blood pressure in the years to come.
We have the knowledge to act on that. What we mostly do instead is discharge her and look away.
This is exactly the kind of problem better tools should help us solve: spotting risk earlier, supporting women and their clinicians through the vulnerable postnatal window, and providing continuity where the system currently provides a drop due to lack of capacity.
Artificial intelligence and digital health have real potential here; in risk prediction, in monitoring blood pressure at home, and in helping stretched clinicians know who needs attention and when.
And yet this is not where most of the energy is going.
It is far easier to build, fund and scale an app that tracks a cycle than a tool that changes the trajectory of a woman’s heart.
So, innovation clusters at the lighter, lower-risk end of innovation, while the conditions that actually kill and disable women, and moments like the postnatal cliff, stay under-served.
Closing the women’s health gap could add at least a trillion dollars to the global economy each year, the World Economic Forum estimates, but the bigger prize is women living longer, healthier lives.
None of this means technology is a cure in itself. It is a tool, and a tool built carelessly can do harm.
Because women have been under-represented in medical data, systems trained on that data can quietly carry the same blind spots forward, deepening inequalities rather than closing them.
Responsible innovation, with clinical-grade evidence, privacy and equity designed in from the start, and tools built around real clinical pathways rather than bolted on afterwards, is not a brake on progress.
It is the only version of progress worth having.
I am optimistic, because a serious community is forming around exactly these questions and the appetite to get it right is real.
It is why, at MEGI, we are bringing clinicians, researchers, founders, regulators and investors together for our AI × Women’s Health summit on 25 June.
If we keep our focus on the conditions that matter most to women’s lives, and build the tools to meet them responsibly, the postnatal cliff edge could become something else entirely: the moment the system finally catches her and delivers preventative healthcare.
AI × Women’s Health: Innovation, Challenges and Opportunities summit is taking place on Thursday 25 June 2026 at the London Institute for Healthcare Engineering. The event is free and is fully booked and operating a waiting list. Join the waiting list here.
About Dr Fran Conti-Ramsden
Dr Fran Conti-Ramsden is a UK Obstetrics and Gynaecology registrar and Chadburn Clinical Lecturer at KCL passionate about transforming women’s health through technology and innovation.
Combining NHS clinical experience with an MRC-funded PhD, recent NHS Clinical AI fellowship and commercial role as Chief Medical Officer at Megi health, she works at the intersection of clinical medicine, data science, technology and AI.
Her current programme of research focuses on the intersection of healthcare and technology; leveraging advances such as smartphone based vital signs capture and large language models to drive forward scalable innovation in maternal cardiovascular care.
She has published over 20 peer-reviewed manuscripts (See gScholar, h-index 12), including award-winning work recognized by Hypertension Journal.
She was awarded an AI visionary award in 2025 by Health Innovation KSS was the recipient of the 2024 International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy Zuspan prize.
News2 days agoUK femtech investment surges 194% in a decade, research finds
Entrepreneur2 weeks agoFertility startup American Baby Company secures US$4m
Fertility2 weeks agoNatural Cycles receives sixth FDA clearance for fertility algorithm
Wellness7 days agoCancer patient receives ‘landmark’ treatment in world-first
Insight2 weeks agoExperimental treatment significantly slows progression of fatal brain disease in women, study finds
Sponsored Content2 weeks agoThe room is filling up at WHW Europe 2026 with super early bird pricing ending this Friday
Insight1 week agoJohnson & Johnson offers to pay US$5.5bn to settle talc cancer lawsuits
News2 weeks agoPlanetary Health Diet lowers heart risk in older women, study finds










