Here’s my take on a few things in tech and science that have been happening recently: Fertility tracking. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the growing femtech industry and the problems women face with the contraception options currently available. There are many period tracking apps on the market at the moment which women use to either avoid or attempt pregnancy. Last week, reproductive health researchers at University College London’s Institute for Women's Health published a pre-proof of their paper analysing 90 fertility apps. Their results suggest that many of these apps are unreliable, particularly if they don’t measure at least one fertility-awareness-based method (FABM). These are: oral basal-body temperature, changes in cervical fluid consistency and urinary luteinising hormone (uLH) levels. Looking at menstrual cycle dates alone, as many calendar apps on the market do, cannot be used to accurately identify when a woman is fertile. The paper suggests that only apps that measure at least one FABM should be allowed to be marketed as fertility tracking apps. There doesn’t appear to be much regulation in this space, so any period tracking app is able to claim to help women identify their fertile window and ovulation. It’s important for fertility apps to empower and educate women to be in control of their bodies. Both accuracy and transparency are key here: apps should make it clear what kind of data needs to be tracked for accurate predictions, and they should not display fertile windows if there is insufficient data.
Sunday Newsletter (No. 11): Fertility tracking, fermentation tech & is Facebook watching you?
Sunday Newsletter (No. 11): Fertility…
Sunday Newsletter (No. 11): Fertility tracking, fermentation tech & is Facebook watching you?
Here’s my take on a few things in tech and science that have been happening recently: Fertility tracking. A few weeks ago, I wrote about the growing femtech industry and the problems women face with the contraception options currently available. There are many period tracking apps on the market at the moment which women use to either avoid or attempt pregnancy. Last week, reproductive health researchers at University College London’s Institute for Women's Health published a pre-proof of their paper analysing 90 fertility apps. Their results suggest that many of these apps are unreliable, particularly if they don’t measure at least one fertility-awareness-based method (FABM). These are: oral basal-body temperature, changes in cervical fluid consistency and urinary luteinising hormone (uLH) levels. Looking at menstrual cycle dates alone, as many calendar apps on the market do, cannot be used to accurately identify when a woman is fertile. The paper suggests that only apps that measure at least one FABM should be allowed to be marketed as fertility tracking apps. There doesn’t appear to be much regulation in this space, so any period tracking app is able to claim to help women identify their fertile window and ovulation. It’s important for fertility apps to empower and educate women to be in control of their bodies. Both accuracy and transparency are key here: apps should make it clear what kind of data needs to be tracked for accurate predictions, and they should not display fertile windows if there is insufficient data.