When doctors don't believe their patients' pain – experts explain the all-too-common experience of medical gaslighting
For people with chronic gynecological pain conditions, pain can be constant, making everyday activities like sitting, riding a bicycle and even wearing underwear extremely uncomfortable. For many of these people – most of whom identify as women – sexual intercourse and routine pelvic exams are unbearable.
Endometriosis and vulvodynia, or chronic genital pain, are common gynecological conditions that can cause severe pain. They each affect about 1 in 10 American women.
Yet many women face skepticism and gaslighting in health care settings when they seek care for this type of pain.
We know this well through our research on social cognition and on how people with misunderstood health conditions manage difficult conversations with their doctors and family, as well as through volunteer work alongside people living with these conditions.
We've consistently found that medical gaslighting around chronic gynecological pain is a complex societal problem, fueled by holes in medical research and training.
A 2024 study of patients who went to a clinic for vulvovaginal pain – pain experienced in the external female genitals and vagina – found that 45% of these patients had been told that they 'just needed to relax more' and 39% were made to feel that they were 'crazy'. A staggering 55% had considered giving up on seeking care.
These results echo what one of us – Elizabeth Hintz – found in her 2023 meta-synthesis: Female patients with chronic pain conditions frequently hear this 'It's all in your head' response from doctors.
Another study followed patients in two different major U.S. cities who were seeking care for vulvovaginal pain. The researchers found that most patients saw multiple clinicians but never received a diagnosis. Given the challenges of seeking medical care, many patients turn to social media sources like Reddit for support and information.
These studies, among others, illustrate how people with these conditions often spend years going to clinician after clinician seeking care and being told their pain is psychological or perhaps not even real. Given these experiences, why do patients keep seeking care?
'Let me describe the pain that would drive me to try so many different doctors, tests and treatments,' a patient with vulvovaginal pain said to her doctor. For her, sex 'is like taking your most sensitive area and trying to rip it apart.'
'I can now wear any pants or underwear that I want with no pain,' said another patient after successful treatment. 'I never realized how much of a toll the pain took on my body every day until it was gone.'
Many patients worldwide experience medical gaslighting – a social phenomenon where a patient's health concerns are not given appropriate medical evaluation and are instead downplayed, misattributed or dismissed outright.
Medical gaslighting is rooted in centuries of gender bias in medicine.
Women's reproductive health issues have long been dismissed as psychological or 'hysterical.' Genital and pelvic pain especially has been misattributed to psychological rather than biological causes: A century ago, Freudian psychoanalysts incorrectly believed that female sexual pain came from psychological complexes like penis envy.
These historical views help shed light on why these symptoms are still not taken seriously today.
In addition to the physical toll of untreated pain, medical gaslighting can take a psychological toll. Women may become isolated when other people do not believe their pain. Some internalize this disbelief and can begin to doubt their own perceptions of pain and even their sanity.
This cycle of gaslighting compounds the burden of the pain and might lead to long-term psychological effects like anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress symptoms. For some, the repeated experience of being dismissed by clinicians erodes their sense of trust in the health care system. They might hesitate to seek medical attention in the future, fearing they will once again be dismissed.
Although some chronic gynecological pain conditions like endometriosis are gaining public attention and becoming better understood, these dynamics persist.
Part of the reason for the misunderstanding surrounding chronic gynecological pain conditions is the lack of research on them. A January 2025 report from the National Academies found that research on diseases disproportionately affecting women were underfunded compared with diseases disproportionately affecting men.
This problem has gotten worse over time. The proportion of funding from the National Institutes of Health spent on women's health has actually declined over the past decade. Despite these known disparities, in April 2025 the Trump administration threatened to end funding for the Women's Health Initiative, a long-running women's health research program, further worsening the problem.
Without sustained federal funding for women's health research, conditions like endometriosis and vulvodynia will remain poorly understood, leaving clinicians in the dark and patients stranded.
As hard as it is for any female patient to have their pain believed and treated, gaining recognition for chronic pain is even harder for those who face discrimination based on class or race.
One 2016 study found that half of the white medical students surveyed endorsed at least one false belief about biological differences between Black and white patients, such as that Black people have physically thicker skin or less sensitive nerve endings than white people. The medical students and residents who endorsed these false beliefs also underestimated Black patients' pain and offered them less accurate treatment recommendations.
Studies show that women are more likely to develop chronic pain conditions and report more frequent and severe pain than men. But women are perceived as more emotional and thus less reliable in describing their pain than men. Consequently, female patients who describe the same symptoms as male patients are judged to be in less pain and are less likely to be offered pain relief, even in emergency settings and with female clinicians. Compared to male patients, female patients are more likely to be prescribed psychological care instead of pain medicine.
These lingering erroneous beliefs about gender and race are key reasons patients' pain is dismissed, misunderstood and ignored. The very real-life consequences for patients include delayed diagnosis, treatment and even death.
Correcting these problems will require a shift in clinical training, so as to challenge biased views about pain in women and racial minorities and to educate clinicians about common pain conditions like vulvodynia. Research suggests that medical training needs to teach students to better listen to patients' lived experiences and admit when an answer isn't known.
In the meantime, people navigating the health care system can take practical steps when encountering dismissive care.
They can educate themselves about chronic gynecological pain conditions by reading books like 'When Sex Hurts: Understanding and Healing Pelvic Pain' or educational information from trusted sources like the International Society for the Study of Women's Sexual Health, the International Pelvic Pain Society and the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease.
Although these steps do not address the roots of medical gaslighting, they can empower patients to better understand the medical conditions that could cause their symptoms, helping to counteract the effects of gaslighting.
If someone you know has experienced medical gaslighting and would like support, there are resources available.
Organizations like The Endometriosis Association and the National Vulvodynia Association offer support networks and information – like how to find knowledgeable providers. Additionally, connecting with patient advocacy groups like Tight Lipped can provide opportunities for patients to engage in changing the health care system.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Elizabeth Hintz, University of Connecticut and Marlene D. Berke, Yale University
Read more:
The Women's Health Initiative has shaped women's health for over 30 years, but its future is uncertain
Women's health is better when women have more control in their society
Arizona's now-repealed abortion ban serves as a cautionary tale for reproductive health care across the US
Elizabeth Hintz volunteers with Tight Lipped, a non-profit patient advocacy organization by and for people with chronic vulvovaginal and pelvic pain.
Marlene Berke volunteers with Tight Lipped, a non-profit patient advocacy organization by and for people with chronic vulvovaginal and pelvic pain.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Texas politicians lead effort to study a psychedelic drug. What is ibogaine?
Ibogaine is illegal in the U.S., but growing evidence shows its promise treating the effects of traumatic brain injury and substance use disorder. A once obscure traditional psychedelic plant from Africa has made headlines recently as Texas pushes for more research and a prominent Republican wrote a vigorous endorsement of its possible use for the treatment of addiction and for veterans experiencing mental health issues. Ibogaine is illegal for use in the United States, but a growing body of evidence has shown its promise treating the effects of traumatic brain injury and substance use disorder. Earlier in June, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed legislation to allocate $50 million for clinical trials approved by the Food and Drug Administration to study ibogaine. Texas is set to lead research into the drug's benefits treating mental health issues and addiction as a potential medication. Former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, also a former Texas governor, wrote a June 27 Washington Post op-ed supporting ibogaine research and criticizing the legacy of the war on drugs, started by President Richard Nixon and touted by President Ronald Reagan. Perry said he has 'come to realize just how wrong that narrative was.' 'That fear-based messaging kept us from exploring treatments that could have saved countless lives,' Perry wrote. Perry and a growing number of conservatives have argued ibogaine could be one of those treatments. Here's what to know about the drug. What is ibogaine? Ibogaine derives from the root of the iboga plant native to western-central Africa. It's been used in ceremonial rituals for centuries. It has hallucinogenic properties. The United States outlawed ibogaine in 1967 along with other psychotropic drugs. The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 placed it as a schedule I hallucinogenic drug, along with marijuana. Ibogaine's classification prevented researchers from studying its effects. But unlike other schedule 1 drugs such as heroin, ibogaine has anti-addictive properties. There are risks since ibogaine can delay the body's normal electrical signals that control heart rhythm, which could lead to death. Other countries, such as Mexico, have allowed its use. American veterans and others have traveled to smaller, clandestine clinics for treatment to deal with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and addiction. Many clinics are along the border and around cities such as Tijuana. Why is it in the news? At the state and federal level, there is growing interest in studying psychedelic drugs to treat veterans and others. Texas passed legislation earlier in June to study the drug with a public university alongside a company and hospital, Abbott's office said. Dr. Marty Makary, the FDA commissioner, has said expanding research on psychedelic drugs is a top priority for the Trump administration. In his op-ed, Perry cited the experiences of Morgan and Marcus Luttrell, twin combat veterans, who used ibogaine for recovery. Morgan Luttrell is now a Republican congressman from Texas who has advocated for ibogaine and other psychedelic drugs as treatment options. In January 2025, Perry and W. Bryan Hubbard, an advocate for ibogaine treatment, appeared on Joe Rogan's podcast to discuss ibogaine's benefits as a plant-based medicine. Hubbard led a Kentucky task force that sought to use opioid settlement funds to research ibogaine's effects to treat addiction, but the initiative failed to gain support in the state. Hubbard and Perry eventually launched the Texas Ibogaine Initiative, which helped spur the state funding. What has research shown? Research, such as a Stanford University study of 30 male combat veterans, has shown ibogaine's promise. Coupled with magnesium sulfate to address heart effects, ibogaine appeared to reduce symptoms of PTSD, anxiety and depression, and improve cognitive function from traumatic brain injury, according to the study, published in 2024 in the eminent journal Nature Medicine. Other studies have shown benefits treating addiction and depression. What do critics say? One issue with ibogaine is the ability to produce it, because it is derived from a rare plant and has mostly been used for ceremonial purposes. There is research to help innovate its safe production, but it could be difficult for the drug to be more widely available, as researchers at the University of California, Davis, Institute for Psychedelics and Neurotherapeutics have said. And while it's shown benefits with combat veterans, questions remain on its efficacy among randomized participants. With Texas' research, ibogaine could get closer to FDA approval for its use as a medication.


Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
This New Test Could Diagnose Parkinson's With AI
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new artificial intelligence (AI) tool analyzing short smile videos achieved high accuracy in screening for Parkinson's disease (PD), according to research published by Tariq Adnan, and colleagues in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) Thursday. The model was trained on the largest known video dataset of facial expressions to date, enrolling 1,452 participants, including 391 living with PD. An 87.9 percent overall accuracy in detecting PD using only smile video analysis, the NEJM AI study reported. Researchers reported that the AI model could accurately distinguish between individuals with and without PD based on the analysis of their smiles, even when applied in diverse population samples from North America and Bangladesh. Why It Matters The Parkinson's Foundation says an estimated 90,000 more people will be diagnosed this year, with the number of those suffering expected to be around 1.2 million by 2030. Diagnosing Parkinson's disease early remains a significant challenge because of limited access to clinical expertise and in-person evaluations. AI-driven remote screening tools promise scalable, cost-effective solutions to bridge these healthcare gaps. The findings align with the growing demand for digital healthcare solutions that remove geographical and economic barriers to early neurological disease diagnosis, which is especially relevant to rural and underserved American communities. What To Know The new screening method invited participants to record themselves mimicking facial expressions—including a smile—using an online platform. Research teams then extracted facial landmarks and measured action units to quantify hypomimia, a common motor symptom in PD where facial muscle movement is diminished. Machine learning models were developed using these features, distinguishing people with PD from those without. The approach relied on a broad recruitment strategy, involving participants from North America via social media, email, wellness centers, and research registries, alongside a high-risk cohort from Bangladesh. Trained solely on smile videos, the model achieved a 10-fold cross-validated accuracy of 87.9 percent, a sensitivity of 76.8 percent, and a specificity of 91.4 percent. Validation in external test sets revealed 80.3 percent accuracy in a U.S. clinic dataset and 85.3 percent accuracy in the Bangladesh cohort. While the negative predictive value remained above 92 percent in all settings, the positive predictive value dropped to 35.7 percent among the Bangladeshi participants, reflecting variations in population characteristics. The study found no significant differences in model performance across sex and ethnic subgroups, except for marginally higher accuracy in female participants in Bangladesh. The authors emphasized the generalizability and fairness of the approach, key considerations in the development of clinical AI tools. The video-processing and machine-learning code supporting the study is available to the public on GitHub. However, the study authors noted that raw video data sharing is restricted to comply with U.S. healthcare privacy law (HIPAA), limiting access to de-identified derivative features only. The research received funding from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the National Institutes of Health, among other sources. The work was a collaborative effort involving academic and clinical partners such as the InMotion Parkinson's Disease wellness center and the University of Rochester Center for Health and Technology. The research process also benefited from contributions by staff at Google Research and the University of Rochester, particularly in statistical analysis. Stock image of brain MRI taken November 21, 2018. Stock image of brain MRI taken November 21, 2018. Getty What People Are Saying Tariq Adnan, lead author said in the study conclusion: "Smiling videos can effectively differentiate between individuals with and without PD, offering a potentially easy, accessible, and cost-efficient way to screen for PD, especially when access to clinical diagnosis is limited." What Happens Next? Future steps for the research team involve wider validation of the AI screening method in additional, real-world populations and further refinement of the algorithm to maximize early detection accuracy. Regulatory and clinical translation pathways will determine if and when this technology becomes available in the United States healthcare system.


Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
Doctor Discusses Fishy Surgery That Saved Bald Eagle's Life
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Thanks to an innovative surgery using fish skin grafts, Kere, a rescued bald eagle, returned to flight over Wisconsin on June 22 after surviving a life-threatening leg injury. Why It Matters Bald eagles, the national symbol of the United States, have faced near extinction in the past, with each rescue effort highlighting conservation progress and ongoing challenges. In Kere's case, the pioneering use of fish skin grafts to heal traumatic wounds in wildlife opens a potential new chapter in animal medical care. The bald eagle's release came days ahead of July Fourth celebrations, restoring an emblem of American freedom to the wild. What To Know Kere's 10-month recovery was led by Dr. Kim Ammann, a raptor specialist and founder at the Winged Freedom Raptor Hospital, a press release provided to Newsweek said. The treatment represented the first time a bald eagle received this type of skin graft that was provided by Icelandic firm Kerecis. Kere was discovered in Hayward, Wisconsin, in September 2024 with a 360-degree wound running from her knee to her ankle. The injury left no healthy skin for traditional treatments and infection threatened her survival. Ammann then stepped in to provide care. "With no traditional options left, she turned to innovative alternatives and discovered an Icelandic company called Kerecis that uses intact fish skin from sustainably sourced North Atlantic Cod to support tissue regeneration," the press release said. Kerecis, known for developing fish skin grafts for humans, had only recently begun offering veterinary products. Over 10 months, the cod skin grafts supported tissue regeneration and helped combat infection, which improved Kere's prospects. "The trust she put in me made it possible to accomplish what we did. She tolerated bandage changes every few days for months," Ammann said. Ammann, who treated over 200 birds in the past year, including 75 bald eagles, noted that Kere's case demonstrates the importance of innovative veterinary efforts. The successful use of fish skin grafts may open doors for wildlife rescue centers and veterinarians nationwide. Stock photo. A bald eagle flies over the Massapequa Preserve on March 25 in Massapequa, New York. Stock photo. A bald eagle flies over the Massapequa Preserve on March 25 in Massapequa, New York. Photo byWhat People Are Saying Dr. Kim Ammann, founder of Winged Freedom Raptor Hospital, said about Kere: "She left the wraps and dressings alone as they were healing her wound. She was eating well and taking necessary medications the whole time." Marta Hines, veterinary business development manager at Kerecis, said in the press release: "Our fish skin grafts are used in a variety of different wounds, whether those are traumatic wounds or some that have been out there for a while, and they have not closed in a while, like chronic wounds." What Happens Next The Winged Freedom Raptor Hospital continues to seek support for its conservation and rehabilitation activities. Kerecis, meanwhile, has indicated continued research and development of its veterinary products.