Connect with us

Opinion

The NHS data breach demonstrates the urgent need for reforming the online advertising industry- femtech can show the way

By Lucy Purdon, senior tech policy fellow at Mozilla Foundation

Published

on

Lucy Purdon

Any femtech company worth their hormones cares about their users’ privacy. However, for privacy to really matter, it must be met by concrete actions that keep advertisers’ hands out of the data jar.

The recent investigation by The Observer reveals tracking tools embedded into NHS websites in the UK, which collected browsing information and shared it with Facebook for years. What is going on?

The internet is built on advertising revenues, dependent on collecting as much personal data as possible. The reality is that companies developing online advertising technologies devise ever more sophisticated ways to collect and exploit your customers’ most sensitive information. It is hard to avoid and femtech and health apps are falling into this trap and falling foul of regulators.

The list of fines slapped on the industry is growing globally: Flo, BetterHelp, GoodRX and most recently Premom in the USA; Bounty, Emma’s Diary, Doctissimo in the UK and EU. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in the UK is considering investigating the NHS case.

It is unfortunately quite often the case that women’s safety and wellbeing is not at the centre of commercial data gathering on their health. The impact on women is unique when it comes to reproductive rights such as menstruation, sex, pregnancy, IVF, birth, miscarriage, abortion and menopause.

Most blatantly, as in the example of Bounty and Emma’s Diary, some companies sell customer information they have collected themselves – often sensitive – to data brokers, who then use this information to profile people and sell those profiles back to advertisers, decision makers and political parties, often without the user’s knowledge or informed consent.

This could be exploited in endless ways: by targeting women desperate to conceive or manage menopause symptoms with unnecessary or fake products; digitally following a woman who has lost her baby with adverts for baby products and raising safety concerns around which organisations have a woman’s home address, phone number or precise location data and why.

Beyond selling databases packed with personal info, there are layers of complexity when it comes to extracting valuable personal data at a technical level through third party cookies, pixels, analytics tools and software development kits (SDKs).

Online trackers, commonly known as cookies or pixels, placed on websites by adtech companies collect personal data and track activity across the web also for the purposes of profiling. This landed Doctissimo a fine, a leading health website in France.

Third party cookies are thankfully on the way out, mainly due to web browsers fighting back. Firefox and Safari already block most third party cookies for cross-site tracking, and Chrome is slowly catching up with the trend.

That’s good news for customers, but tracking capabilities are also embedded deep into many popular analytics tools and developer toolkits used by companies to build their products, such as the “Meta pixel”, a piece of code a developer puts on their own website to track users activity on that website and help with targeting or retargeting users with advertising on Facebook.

This is tripping companies up when it comes to their legal commitments not to share data and it appears this is what happened in the NHS case through using the Meta pixel.

In 2019, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the US found that the Flo Period & Ovulation Tracker disclosed data on millions of customers to Facebook, Google, Fabric and AppsFlyer for analytics and marketing and did not limit what these companies could do with the information.

The Wall Street Journal reported that this information included a unique advertising identifier, that can be matched to a device or profile as well as the user’s intention to get pregnant, and when the user was having her period.

The FTC found BetterHelp, an online counselling app whose users are reportedly mostly young and female, continually broke their privacy promises by sharing data extensively with Facebook, monetising consumers’ sensitive health information to target them and others with advertisements.

Part of the FTC complaint against Premom detailed how the company requested access to a customer’s location in order to pair a bluetooth thermometer, and then shared that precise location data with two analytics firms based in China, which could then sell that information onto others.

In the case of Premom the FTC said their actions were likely to cause “stigma, embarrassment, or emotional distress, and may also affect their ability to obtain or retain employment, housing, health insurance, disability insurance, or other services.”

It could be argued that the online advertising ecosystem is stacked against consumer-facing companies, cornered into using “industry standard” tools that are extractive and exploitative. So what are you going to do about it?

Don’t just change your privacy policy. This is not just about data protection but also unfair consumer practices, the cornering of the market by big tech and looking closely at reforming the online advertising industry.

A gender perspective needs to be one of the cornerstones of these reforms and it is going to take an industry wide effort to push back against the well documented harms.

Femtech can get ahead by raising the bar and exploring alternatives to the current extractive status quo. Refuse, loudly, to be a source for data brokers. Remove the Meta Pixel and look deep into analytics tools and SDKs to check what data is being shared with who and for what purpose. Seek help from regulators. For example, the ICO offers a regulatory sandbox in order to test and embed privacy by design into products and services.

The femtech industry is revolutionising women’s healthcare. I am sure she can revolutionise the online advertising industry as well.

Lucy Purdon is a senior tech policy fellow at Mozilla Foundation, where she focuses on driving legal and policy reforms related to the online advertising industry and its impact on women. She was previously policy director at Privacy International, a UK charity challenging governments and companies who exploit our data for power and profit.

Opinion

Femtech’s next chapter: Building a truly equal and comprehensive health tech category

Published

on

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

FieldApproximate number of active solutions/companies
Reproductive health & fertility120+
Pregnancy & maternal care80+
Menstrual health60+
General women’s health & wellness50+
Diagnostics & monitoring45+
Menopause & perimenopause40+
Pelvic & uterine health30+
Chronic women’s health / integrated care30+
Sexual health & wellness25+

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.

Continue Reading

Entrepreneur

Q1 momentum: Female founders are advancing, but the system still hasn’t caught up

Published

on

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

Continue Reading

Opinion

India’s top court rejects menstrual leave petition

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025 Aspect Health Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.