Gender gap in health care for women using peptides and PIEDs

What happened: women report gaps in care for PIED and peptide use

A University of Queensland-led study interviewed women who use performance- and image-enhancing drugs (PIEDs), including steroids and peptides, and found many felt health care has not kept pace with their needs.

The researchers report that participants described difficulty accessing reliable information and said they encountered limited clinical expertise and formal health care support related to women’s PIED use.

• The work is published in Drug and Alcohol Review (2026).
• Lead researcher Hannah Schuurs conducted qualitative interviews with women who used PIEDs mainly to enhance body composition, physical appearance, or sporting performance.
• Participants described experiences ranging from clinicians having “no knowledge of PIEDs” to finding a GP who was open, nonjudgmental, and willing to do blood testing.

What the evidence shows: qualitative interviews with nine women

The evidence comes from qualitative interviews with nine women who use PIEDs, focused on how they managed their health during use and how they accessed health care support.

In these interviews, participants said they were active in self-monitoring and sought formal care, but found it hard to access comprehensive blood and hormone testing or clinicians familiar with women’s PIED-related health concerns.

• Study type: qualitative interview study (not a trial).
• Population: nine women who use PIEDs; findings reflect their reported experiences and may not generalize to all users.
• Reported barriers: limited reliable information, limited clinician familiarity, and limited access to comprehensive testing.

Why the gender gap matters for peptides and metabolic-health readers

The study suggests women using PIEDs such as peptides may face a “male-dominated” research landscape that leaves gaps in understanding women’s health care needs, which can shift more harm-reduction responsibility onto the individual.

Participants said a strong motivator for seeking health care and self-monitoring was awareness of sex-specific risks, including hormonal disruption and virilization (development of masculine physical traits due to high androgen levels).

• If clinicians are unfamiliar with women’s PIED concerns, patients may need to spend more time finding a provider who will discuss risks and monitoring without judgment.
• Participants described tracking bodily changes and trying to coordinate care, but encountering structural barriers that made this harder.
• Several participants emphasized that openness, collaboration, and respect mattered as much as technical expertise.

Practical context: what support looked like when it worked

In the interviews, women did not necessarily expect health professionals to “have all the answers,” but said they wanted clinicians to be open, collaborative, and willing to work with them despite knowledge gaps.

Some participants described spending considerable time educating themselves about PIEDs and their risks and then educating their health care providers—rather than receiving guidance tailored to their circumstances.

• One participant described finding a GP who had worked with athletes, was open about PIED discussions, performed blood testing, and “never judges.”
• Participants said respectful, nonjudgmental relationships could make it easier to seek support even when clinical knowledge was limited.
• The researchers argue stereotypes that PIED users are indifferent to health may oversimplify real-world behavior and discourage care-seeking.

Limitations and what this study does—and does not—tell us

This study reports experiences from nine interview participants and is designed to describe themes, not to estimate how common these problems are or to measure health outcomes.

The findings highlight perceived barriers and support needs, but they do not test interventions, compare different clinical approaches, or establish cause-and-effect links between PIED use and specific metabolic outcomes.

• Small sample size and qualitative design limit generalizability.
• Results rely on participant reports and may not capture all settings or health systems.
• The paper points to a need for more research and better education and clinical guidance that incorporates women’s lived experience.