September 26th, 2005
Earlier this month the North American Menopause Society (NAMS) issued a position statement through a PR company entitled ‘The role of testosterone therapy in postmenopausal women’. This statement was also simultaneously published in the September/October 2005 issue of the NAMS journal, Menopause.
At first glance this document appeared to offer opportunities for understanding women’s health and a critical challenge towards the overmedicalisation of sex.
Sadly this promise was not delivered. Instead NAMS produced a document that was flawed and inaccurate.
Luckily for us there are scholars out there who can critically evaluate such documents as the NAMS paper, and reveal to the public where we may be being spun a line.
So today I’m handing over to Leonore Tiefer who has written a response to the NAMS paper entitled “Omissions, Biases, and Nondisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Is There a Hidden Agenda in the NAMS Position Statement?” that you can read in full here.
You may have read the media hype around the NAMS paper that’s already been in the news – here’s a more accurate, transparent and evidence-based view.Tweet