Misleading Social Media Drives Unnecessary Testosterone Visits to NHS Clinics for Men

Authorities warn that misinformation on social media is pushing men to NHS clinics for unnecessary testosterone treatments, exacerbating already strained waiting lists.

Testosterone therapy is a prescription-only treatment recommended under national guidelines for men who display clinically verified deficiencies, validated through symptoms or consistent blood tests.

However, a surge of viral content on platforms like TikTok and Instagram is promoting blood tests as a means to receive testosterone as a lifestyle supplement, marketing it as a cure for issues like low energy, diminished focus, and decreased libido.


Medical professionals warn that taking unwarranted testosterone can inhibit natural hormone production, result in infertility, and elevate risks for blood clots, heart disease, and mood disorders.

The increasing demand for online consultations is becoming evident in medical facilities.

Professor Channa Jayasena from Imperial College London and chair of the Endocrine Society Andrology Network noted that hospital specialists are witnessing a rise in men taking these private blood tests, often promoted through social media, and being inaccurately advised that they require testosterone.

“We consulted with 300 endocrinologists at a national conference, and they all reported seeing patients in these clinics weekly,” he said. “They’re overwhelming our facilities. We previously focused on adrenal conditions and diabetes, and it’s significantly affecting NHS services. We’re left wondering how to manage this situation.”

While advertising prescription medications is illegal in the UK, the Guardian discovered that several TikTok influencers collaborate with private clinics to promote blood tests legally marketed as part of testosterone therapy.




Advocates of testosterone replacement therapy, who boast large followings, receive compensation or incentives from private clinics to promote discount codes and giveaways. Photo: TikTok

Supporters of testosterone replacement therapy, amassing thousands of followers, are incentivized by private clinics to advertise discount offers and promotions to encourage men to assess their testosterone levels and possibly pursue treatment.

One popular post shows a man lifting weights, urging viewers: “Get your testosterone tested… DM me for £20 off.” Another video suggests that a free blood test is available as part of an incentive to “enhance” his performance.

The Guardian notified the Advertising Standards Authority about these posts for potentially violating regulations regarding prescription drugs, triggering an investigation by the oversight body.

Jayasena stated, “I recently attended the National Education Course for the Next Generation of Endocrine Consultants, where many expressed concerns about reproductive health and the escalating trend of men being pushed to boost their testosterone levels.”

He added: “Beyond just influencers, this issue is significant. Healthcare professionals are encountering patients who come in for private blood tests, possibly arranged through influencers, and being incorrectly advised by inexperienced medical personnel that they should commence testosterone therapy. This guidance is fundamentally flawed.”

In private clinics, the initial year of Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT) ranges from £1,800 to £2,200, covering medication, monitoring, and consultations.

Originally a specialized treatment for a limited group of men with clinically diagnosed hormone deficiencies, TRT is now increasingly viewed as a lifestyle or “performance enhancement” option. Online clinics are also offering home blood tests and subscription services, making such treatments more easily accessible outside conventional healthcare routes.




In private clinics, the initial year of comprehensive testosterone replacement therapy costs approximately £1,800 to £2,200. Photo: Ian Dewar/Alamy

These messages imply that diminished motivation, exhaustion, and aging signify “low T,” leading more men to seek testing and treatment, despite medical advice restricting TRT to individuals with confirmed hormonal deficiencies.

Professor Jayasena remarked: “There are specific clinical protocols dictating who should or shouldn’t consider testosterone therapy. Some symptoms, like erectile dysfunction, undeniably correlate with low testosterone, whereas others, like muscle mass or feeling down, do not. A man might express dissatisfaction with his muscle tone and be advised to get tested, yet evidence supporting the necessity of such testing remains scarce.”

“What’s particularly alarming is that some clinics are now administering testosterone to men with normal testosterone levels. Research shows there’s no benefit to testosterone levels exceeding 12 nmol/L. I have also received reports of clinics providing testosterone to individuals under 18, a significant demographic.”

He explained that unnecessary testosterone usage can lead to infertility: “It inhibits testicular function and the hormonal messages from the brain necessary for testicular health, compelling us to combine and administer other drugs to counteract this effect. This is akin to the strategies used by anabolic steroid users.”

TikTok has been approached for a comment.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Misleading Ideas: AI-Written ADHD Books on Amazon | Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Amazon offers books from individuals claiming to provide expert advice on managing ADHD, but many of these appear to be generated by AI tools like ChatGPT.

The marketplace is filled with AI-generated works that are low-cost and easy to publish, yet often contain harmful misinformation. Examples include questionable travel guidebooks and mushroom foraging manuals promoting perilous practices.

Numerous ADHD-related books on online stores also appear to be AI-authored. Titles like Navigating Male ADHD: Late Diagnosis and Success and Men with Adult ADHD: Effective Techniques for Focus and Time Management exemplify this trend.

The Guardian examined samples from eight books using Originality.ai, a US company that detects AI-generated content. Each book received a 100% AI detection score, indicating confidence that it was authored by a chatbot.

Experts describe the online marketplace as a “wild west” due to the absence of regulations on AI-generated content, increasing the risk that dangerous misinformation may proliferate.

Michael Cook, a computer science researcher at King’s College London, noted that generative AI systems often dispense hazardous advice, including topics related to toxic substances and ignoring health guidelines.

“It’s disheartening to see more AI-authored books, particularly in health-related fields,” he remarked.

“While Generative AI systems have been trained on medical literature, they also learn from pseudoscience and misleading content,” said Cook.

“They lack the ability to critically analyze or accurately replicate knowledge from their training data. Supervision from experts is essential when these systems address sensitive topics,” he added.

Cook further indicated that Amazon’s business model encourages this behavior, profiting on every sale regardless of the reliability of the content.

Professor Shannon Vallar, director of the Technology Futures Centre at the University of Edinburgh, stated that Amazon carries an ethical responsibility to avoid promoting harmful content, although she acknowledged that it’s impractical for a bookstore to monitor every title.

Issues have emerged as AI technology has disrupted traditional publishing safeguards, including author and manuscript reviews.

“The regulatory environment resembles a ‘wild west’, lacking substantial accountability for those causing harm,” Vallor noted, incentivizing a “race to the bottom.”

Currently, there are no legal requirements for AI-authored books to be labeled as such. The Copyright Act only pertains to reproduced content, but Vallor suggested that the Tort Act should impose essential care and diligence obligations.

The Advertising Standards Agency states that AI-authored books cannot mislead readers into believing they were human-written, and individuals can lodge a complaint regarding these titles.

Richard Wordsworth sought to learn about his recent ADHD diagnosis after his father recommended a book he found on Amazon while searching for “Adult Men and ADHD.”

“It felt odd,” he remarked after diving into the book. It began with a quote from psychologist Jordan Peterson and spiraled into a series of incoherent anecdotes and historical inaccuracies.

Some of the advice was alarmingly harmful, as Wordsworth noticed, particularly a chapter on emotional dysregulation warning friends and family not to forgive past emotional harm.

When he researched the author, he encountered AI-generated headshots and discovered a lack of qualifications. Further exploration of other titles on Amazon revealed alarming claims about his condition.


He felt “upset,” as did his well-educated father. “If he could fall prey to this type of book, anyone could. While Amazon profits, well-meaning individuals are being misled by profit-driven fraudsters,” Wordsworth lamented.

An Amazon spokesperson stated: “We have content guidelines that govern the listing of books for sale, and we implement proactive and reactive measures to detect violations of these guidelines.

“We continually enhance our protections against non-compliant content, and our processes and guidelines evolve as publishing practices change.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

Is Australia at Risk of Misleading Clickbait Surge on Facebook and Instagram Following Meta’s News Ban?

MExperts say powerful viral clickbait has taken over Facebook and Instagram in Canada after Meta removed news from the platforms nine months ago. Now Australia could face a similar scenario online, with the company preparing to battle the Australian government over payments to news organizations.

Last week, Meta announced it would no longer make payments to Australian news publishers, prompting the Australian government to consider using its legislative powers to force the platform to negotiate payments with news publishers. Ta.


The controversy could prevent Australian news organizations from posting links to their content on Facebook or Instagram, as Meta did for six days in 2021, and as Canada has done since mid-last year. The possibility is increasing.

Experts say Canada’s ban has done little damage to the social media giants, but it has hurt the news organizations Canada most wanted to support.

In June 2023, the Canadian federal government introduced Bill C-18, which aims to increase revenue for Canadian journalism publishers by requiring Meta and Google’s parent company Alphabet to compensate publishers for hosting and linking content. (Online News Act) was passed.

Both tech companies initially balked at the prospect, but Alphabet ultimately agreed to a deal with the government in November. Under the terms of the deal, Google’s parent company will contribute C$73.6 million (A$83 million) annually to be distributed to Canadian news publishers. Experts said the deal was in part because C-18 targeted link sharing and indexing, key aspects of Alphabet’s business model.

But Mehta is resisting the law’s restrictions, arguing it is “fundamentally flawed”. In response, it blocked all news sharing on its platforms, including Instagram and Facebook. Prior to the ban, Meta also announced it was ending its partnership with the Canadian Press, which had funded 30 reporting fellowships for young journalists starting in 2020.

The ban took effect in August amid the worst wildfire season in the country’s history, but lawmakers feared it would prevent Canadians from accessing the latest news in their communities and prevent evacuations. . The broadcaster denounced the move as “anti-competitive behavior” and said it violated regulations. federal law.

Mehta said in a statement at the time: “The Online News Act is based on the false premise that Meta is unfairly profiting from the news content shared on our platforms, when the opposite is true. We voluntarily share content on Facebook and Instagram to help grow our audience and generate revenue.”

Non-news content created by viral content makers is filling the space left by news articles.


“Real Facebook without news has turned out to be more harmful than I expected,” said Jean Hughes-Roy, a journalism professor at the University of Quebec.

2022, Roy conducted a simulation He said he conducted a study on what users would see on Facebook if news was banned, but the reality of the ban was worse than the simulation predicted.

“Viral content creators take news content, make it more sensational by adding misleading information or false details, and publish it on their Facebook pages or Instagram accounts. Such content is blocked by Meta. No, but the actual news will be blocked.”

However, the move doesn’t seem to have affected how Canadians use Facebook.

The number of daily active users on Facebook and the amount of time spent on the social network have changed little since the news block began, according to figures from two digital analytics firms shared with Reuters.

Part of Meta’s argument against compensating Canadian journalistic outlets was that links to news articles accounted for less than 3% of Facebook feeds in the country. This was also the argument made regarding Australia’s decision.

Chris Waddell, of Carleton University’s School of Journalism, said Meta is increasingly wary of its position in the news industry.

“I don’t think we’ve lost any advertisers,” he says. “I don’t know if their decisions really made a difference.” [to the company].

“Meta would do that.” I like to get a break from news from other places. It’s hard to imagine that the company really wants to get dragged into the controversy surrounding the impending US election, with AI-generated fake information being posted on Facebook. It’s a real minefield for them. If they’re right, they only make 3% to 4% of their revenue from news, so I can understand why they would bail out of it. ”

News Corp. CEO Robert Thomson told reporters on Monday that Meta’s 3% claim was “obviously a fabrication and an absurd number.”

“So how much discussion is there about the news? If there is a core news, then the latest factual information on Facebook is 100% news. And these are the things Facebook focuses on. We should also focus on our responsibilities to all Australians.”

Most large publications are finding new ways to redirect users to their sites. But Facebook’s refusal to allow links to be shared on its platform has a huge impact on small publishers.

Eden Fineday, publisher of Indige News, an Indigenous-led online journalism outlet, said traffic on the site has fallen by 43% since the ban.

“Facebook is a very indigenous platform,” Fineday told the Toronto Star. “This is a place where a lot of Indigenous communities connect with each other. So it hurts us. Indigenous people are the least considered demographic, especially by corporate America. They’re not just forgotten, they’re also more vulnerable to these changes. It’s sad that companies don’t consider who is being harmed.”

New Brunswick Media Cooperative Announces loss of 5,000 Facebook followers Prior to being banned from the meta.

Twenty independent media outlets, including the New Brunswick Media Cooperative, have banded together to try to make up for the loss of traffic. not equipped. The purpose is both to strengthen bargaining positions and to share news more effectively with readers.

Waddell said smaller publishers must do the most to win back readers in order to survive.

“Ironically, those that have been most affected are small start-up publications and publications that have been around for some time that have used Facebook as a promotional tool to reach a wider audience.” he said.

Roy said he is concerned about what the disappearance of news from Meta’s platform would mean for Canadian democracy.

“The latest Reuters Journalism Institute Digital News Report found that 45 per cent of Canadians cite social media as a source of news, and the same percentage is true in Australia. “I’m worried” news doesn’t exist anymore. ”

Source: www.theguardian.com