Clinical pages are checked against the current position statements of The Menopause Society and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists before publication. Where those bodies disagree with each other, or the evidence is genuinely unsettled, we say so on the page rather than picking whichever version reads better.
Why it matters here
A field where old advice does harm
Menopause advice carries a problem most health topics do not, since guidance issued confidently across Austin in the early 2000s now reads very differently. Between 2002 and roughly 2017, a great deal of published menopause advice was shaped by an interpretation of the WHI trial that later analysis substantially revised. Women were told to stop treatment, or never to start it, on the strength of that interpretation.
Content written in that period still circulates and still ranks. Some of it advises a blanket five-year limit that no current guideline supports, and some of it treats all hormone therapy as carrying the risk profile of one oral formulation studied in women over 60.
That is why the review date on a menopause page matters more than on most health topics, and why ours are dated and revisited rather than written once and left. The detail sits in hormone testing, menopause reading and hormone replacement therapy go further into it. Check the review date on any Austin menopause page you read, including this one, and treat an undated page as older than it looks.
