Post-Menopausal Vaginal Hemorrhage Related to the Use of a Hop-Containing Phytotherapeutic Product

Two 54-year-old women developed abdominal cramps and vaginal hemorrhage as a result of endometrial hyperplasia during treatment with a hop-containing phytotherapeutic product (MenoCool®) for post-menopausal complaints. The women used the hop-containing phytotherapeutic product (418 mg of hop per tablet) twice daily (1 and 0.5 tablets by both patient A and B). Patient A developed abdominal cramps and vaginal hemorrhage after 2 months of use. After gynecological examination, she was diagnosed with endometrial hyperplasia. The patient was treated with a curettage. The hop-containing phytotherapeutic product was discontinued, and the patient recovered. Patient B developed abdominal pain/cramps and vaginal hemorrhage after 5 months of use. A cervix smear, internal examination, and ultrasound were performed. Due to the thickness of the endometrium, a pipelle endometrial biopsy was performed. Results showed no indication for cervix cancer. The use of MenoCool®was ceased; follow-up information received from the patient shortly thereafter indicated that she had almost entirely recovered from the abdominal pain/cramps and vaginal hemorrhage. Hop (Humulus lupulus) has phytoestrogenic properties that may be the cause of endometrial hyperplasia and subsequent vaginal hemorrhage. A Naranjo assessment score of 5 was obtained for both cases, indicating a probable relationship between the patient’s endometrial proliferation and subsequent vaginal hemorrhage and their use of the suspect drug

Analysis of Safety Concerns on Herbal Products with Assumed Phytoestrogenic Activity

Phytoestrogens (PEs) are plant-based compounds that can interact with estrogen receptors and are mainly used to treat menopausal complaints. However, the safety of products with assumed phytoestrogenic activity is not fully understood. This study aimed to identify plant species with assumed phytoestrogenic activity, review existing literature on their use and safety, and critically evaluate adverse reaction (AR) reports of single-herb, multi-herb, and mixed-multiple products, as submitted to the Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb and to VigiBase of the World Health Organization (WHO). In the Lareb database, the most commonly reported plant species to cause ARs (total of 67 reports) were Actaea racemosa L. (black cohosh) (47.8%), Humulus lupulus L. (hops) (32.8%), and Glycine max (L.) Merr. (soybean) (22.4%). In the VigiBase database (total of 21,944 reports), the top three consisted of Glycine max (L.) Merr. (71.4%), Actaea racemosa L. (11.6%), and Vitex agnus-castus L. (chaste tree) (6.4%). In the scoping review (total of 73 articles), Actaea racemosa L. (30.1%), Glycine max (L.) Merr. (28.8%), and Trifolium pratense L. (13.7%) were the most frequently mentioned plant species. ARs were most frequently reported in the system organ classes "gastrointestinal disorders", "skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders", "reproductive system and breast disorders", and "general disorders and administration site conditions". Furthermore, from the scoping review, it appeared that the use of products with assumed phytoestrogenic activity was associated with postmenopausal bleeding. It was concluded that, while the potential benefits of products with assumed phytoestrogenic activity have been extensively pursued, the potential occurrence of ARs after using these products is less well understood. This study highlights the need for further investigation and careful monitoring of these products to better understand their effects and ensure the safety and well-being of individuals using them. </p

Addressing climate change with behavioral science: a global intervention tournament in 63 countries

Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions’ effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior—several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people’s initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors

Addressing climate change with behavioral science:A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions' effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior-several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people's initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors.</p

Addressing climate change with behavioral science:A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions' effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior-several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people's initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors.</p