Stressful times (war, famine) are associated with people experiencing more anovulatory and abnormal menstrual cycles.

But what about the pandemic? This paper used data from 18,076 ppl tracking their cycles with @NaturalCycles app to investigate… 🧵…
The authors looked at user data entered from March - September 2019 (pre-pandemic) compared to March - September 2020 (Pandemic). They also asked users to rate their stress levels (retrospectively) in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. 2/
The average cycle length decreased from 29.4 to 29.q6 days, and the average period of menstruation increased from 4.21 to 4.23 days.

Neither of these changes is clinically significant. 3/
7.7% of participants experienced more anovulatory cycles in the pandemic, and 19.5% experienced more abnormal cycles. 4/
But, *surprisingly*, 9.6% of participants experienced fewer anovulatory cycles, and 19.6% experienced fewer abnormal cycles.

So overall (and contrary to what we see in wars and famines) ppl were just as likely to have more regular, ovulatory cycles as fewer. 5/
Finally, self-reported stress level made no difference to how likely people were to experience abnormal cycles. 6/
So what does this tell us?

First, we find no evidence in this population to support the anecdotal reports that I have heard from some of my colleagues in gynae that they were approached with more complaints of cycle irregularities during the pandemic. 7/
(Not to say my colleagues are wrong, of course. They are looking after different populations, or maybe people were more likely to be *bothered* by irregular cycles during the pandemic. But in this dataset we don’t see more actual abnormal cycles.) 8/
But there are some limitations here. Mainly that this is a highly educated cohort who may have been shielded from the worst of the pandemic by their type of job (likely to be doable from home) and greater financial security. 9/
Further, the six month “pandemic” period may not have been uniformly stressful. For example, I was *off my tits on stress at all times* from March - June, homeschooling in the day and working at night. But June to September was by comparison quite pleasant. 10/
The way the data is collected can’t account for this.

(Unsurprising side finding: the participants who reported that most stress were engaged or married and had children.) 11/
It’s also important to say that this dataset doesn’t tell us anything about the effects of COVID infection on menstrual cycles - although some studies have indicated it does have an impact. 12/…
So these findings may not be completely generalisable. By what we can say is that, contrary to expectations, this dataset does not suggest that he pandemic markedly altered people’s menstrual cycles. 13/13

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Viki Male

Viki Male Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @VikiLovesFACS

17 Oct
Are you #breastfeeding? Thinking about whether to get the #COVID19 #vaccine?


This is a thread for you!

People who are breastfeeding can sometimes get forgotten in the focus on pregnancy. But your questions matter too! And I particularly want to make space to address those questions because a lot of people have contacted me, worried about one particular blog post... 2/
I'll get to that later. But let's start by saying that @RCObsGyn and @MidwivesRCM recommend the COVID vaccine if you are breastfeeding. 3/…
Read 18 tweets
14 Oct
Wondering if antibodies raised against #COVID19 #vaccines can bind to the placental protein syncytin-1 and harm #fertility?


Out yesterday! More data that addresses this question!

Spoiler alert: they don’t... 🧵…
But why would anyone even think that such a thing might happen? Is it even worth researching?

The rumours that COVID19 vaccines would impact fertility were started by a vaccine skeptic who proposed that this might occur, so this is something that a lot of ppl may have heard. 2/
People who work in this area never thought this was very likely, for a number of reasons.

Not least, if this did happen COVID 🦠 would be associated with infertility or problems in early pregnancy, and luckily we don’t see that. 3/

Read 7 tweets
12 Oct
A question I get asked *a lot* is…

“What are the long-term effects on babies born after #COVID19 #vaccination in #pregnancy?”

So let’s talk about what we know… 🧵
Let’s start by looking at the effects at birth. We now have eight large datasets from four countries looking at almost 79,000 people vaccinated in pregnancy. The outcomes for the babies are all normal. 2/
(The CDC has recently put out data from 2 more US studies, bringing the total to 10. But there is some overlap between the participants in these studies and the ones quoted above, so I didn't add those in as unique participants.)

From V-safe... 3/

Read 12 tweets
28 Sep
Let's take a look at the data from the @CDCgov ACIP meeting last week on #COVID19 #vaccine safety in #pregnancy.

It continues to be reassuring!

First, let's take a look at the new data from the V-safe pregnancy registry... 🧵…
As of the 13th September, the registry contained 5096 participants. 2/ Among 5096 people in the re...
After they have joined, the participants are interviewed in every trimester, shortly after giving birth, and again when their babies are more than three months old. 3/ Participants are interviewe...
Read 9 tweets
8 Sep
This study looked at the effectiveness of the Pfizer #COVID19 #vaccine in #pregnancy.

👉🏻 96% effective vs. any infection

👉🏻 97% effective vs. symptomatic infection

👉🏻 89% effective vs. hospitalisation

A few additional points…

Why is effectiveness vs hospitalisation lower than against all infection? This is the opposite of what we see in larger studies of the whole population, eg. this PHE data… 2/…
Very few people were hospitalised (5/10,861 in the unvaccinated group compared to 0/10,861 in the vaccinated group).

This means the confidence interval for effectiveness vs hospitalisation was wide (43 - 100%) which is likely to have lowered the central estimate. 3/
Read 6 tweets
17 Aug
On holiday without much in the way of internet, but wow! My notifications blew up when I hit some WiFi this afternoon. A few points on this… 1/
First, I’m surprised neither of them checked our national guidance, which is set out in detail for medical professionals here… 2/…
Or the guidance from @RCObsGyn and @MidwivesRCM, which makes a clear recommendation that #pregnant people get the #COVID19 #vaccine. You can find it here… 3/…
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!