Dr. Deanna Minich, PhD, MS, CNS, FMCP, FACN

Chief Science Officer, Symphony Natural Health

Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) does not appear to act only within the reproductive system. Apart from the fact FSH receptors are found in men, who don’t have follicles, they have also been identified in bone (osteoclasts), adipose tissue, vascular tissue, the liver, immune cells, and potentially the brain—tissue far outside the reproductive system the hormone was named for [1-7]. That discovery is prompting clinicians to ask whether follicle-stimulating hormone has been misnamed all along.

For decades, FSH occupied a narrow place in clinical thinking, tied almost entirely to fertility. Most clinicians learned that FSH is a pituitary hormone involved in ovarian follicle development, estradiol production, and reproductive function [8]. Rising FSH during the menopause transition became a familiar marker of declining ovarian reserve and endocrine aging.

But what if this understanding is incomplete?

As clinicians increasingly adopt a systems-based approach to aging and longevity, FSH may warrant consideration as a dynamic endocrine messenger that provides insight into the broader physiology of longevity such as declining ovarian and endocrine function, and menopause.

This article provides an overview of the developing science of FSH as a systemic endocrine messenger in menopause. Subsequent articles will explore FSH biology in greater depth, including its possible roles in bone remodeling, body composition, metabolism, cognition, vascular health, endocrine aging, and clinical strategies.

In This Series

This article provides an overview of the developing science of FSH as a systemic endocrine messenger in menopause. Subsequent articles will explore FSH biology in greater depth, including its possible roles in bone remodeling, body composition, metabolism, cognition, vascular health, endocrine aging, and clinical strategies.

"For decades we've viewed FSH through the narrow lens of reproduction. I believe it's time to recognize it as something much bigger: a window into the body's endocrine adaptation during midlife. Sometimes the most important scientific advances don't come from discovering a new biomarker, but from asking new questions about one we've had all along."

From Reproductive Hormone to Systemic Signal

Historically, FSH was named for its role in stimulating ovarian follicles [9,10]. That designation made sense when reproductive biology was the primary focus of investigation.

However, accumulating evidence suggests that FSH may be involved in physiological processes beyond the ovary. Studies have linked FSH signaling to bone remodeling [11], energy metabolism [12,13], body composition [3], lipid regulation and vascular health [14], neuroendocrine function [15-17], and potentially immune and stem cell regulation [18]. The identification of FSH receptors in multiple non-reproductive tissues supports the possibility that FSH is more accurately conceptualized as a pituitary-derived synchronizing signal that reflects the whole-body endocrine state.

This does not mean that FSH directly causes aging. Rather, it suggests that FSH may reflect and potentially participate in the broader endocrine adaptations and in some respects decline occurring during midlife and beyond

The Bigger Story: FSH Is Part of an Endocrine Network

One limitation of conventional hormone interpretation is the tendency to view hormones in a silo. In reality, hormones function less like solo performers and more like an orchestra that when in balance play in harmony. Each hormone has its own role, but its effects depend on how it interacts with the rest of the endocrine orchestra. Changes in one can influence the others, with the intent to create a beautiful harmonious symphony of health.

FSH is not simply a marker of ovarian function. It exists within the highly interconnected hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis [19,20], a neuroendocrine network that integrates signals from all over the body, including those from the brain, ovaries, adipose tissue, bone, immune system, and metabolic pathways [7,8,11,12,13,21].

As women go through perimenopause and menopause, declining ovarian responsiveness alters the feedback loops that help coordinate this endocrine symphony. Newer research suggests that increased FSH may precede some of the physiological shifts associated with menopause, making it one of the earliest measurable indicators of endocrine aging [22]. FSH may serve as an early signal that the neuroendocrine system is entering a new phase rather than simply reflecting changes that have already occurred.

This perspective reframes an important clinical question.

Rather than asking: "What is FSH doing?"

We may need to ask: "What is FSH telling us?"

FSH may serve as a measurable signal that the neuroendocrine changes are underway, giving insight into shifts occurring across the endocrine orchestra.

FSH Rises Before Estrogen Falls

Perhaps the most relevant aspect of FSH physiology is its timing. Longitudinal studies show that FSH begins to rise approximately six years before the final menstrual period, even while menstrual cycles remain regular and estradiol levels are still relatively stable or may fluctuate into elevated ranges [22-25].

This means endocrine aging may be underway before estradiol indicates changes. By the time estradiol begins its sustained decline, neuroendocrine adaptation has often already occurred. This observation may help explain why many women feel that something has changed despite being told their hormone levels are "normal."

FSH may provide an earlier insight into endocrine aging than estradiol alone.

"Menopause is not simply about declining estrogen or failing ovaries. It's a whole-body neuroendocrine transition. When we stop treating hormones as isolated actors and begin seeing them as part of an interconnected endocrine symphony, we open the door to earlier, more personalized, and more comprehensive care for women."

Menopause Begins in the Brain

Another emerging concept is that menopause should not be viewed solely as an ovarian event, but rather as a neuroendocrine transition involving both the brain and ovaries.

World-renowned neuroscientist Lisa Mosconi, PhD, whose research focuses on Alzheimer's disease (AD), women's brain health, and neuroimaging, has described menopause as a "neuroendocrine transition state," emphasizing that the menopausal transition reflects coordinated changes across the brain and endocrine system [26]. Consistent with this perspective, her research team identified FSH as a potential biomarker of brain aging in midlife women [27]. In a 2023 clinical study of 191 women aged 40–65 years at risk for late-onset AD, higher serum FSH concentrations were associated with greater cerebral amyloid-β (Aβ) burden and reduced gray matter volume in Alzheimer's disease–vulnerable brain regions, suggesting that FSH may serve as an early endocrine indicator of neurodegenerative risk during the menopausal transition [27].

Proposed mechanisms may include FSH-mediated effects on neuroinflammatory signaling, cerebral vascular function, and neuronal survival pathways, which could contribute to gray matter changes observed during the menopausal transition. However, current evidence is insufficient to determine whether FSH is a causal factor or a biomarker of the underlying neuroendocrine changes.

The menopausal transition reflects changes occurring throughout the neuroendocrine system, particularly within the hypothalamus and pituitary. The rise in FSH represents one aspect of this adaptation.

Recent research suggests that FSH may be associated with cognitive health [28-30], mood-related concerns, and neuroendocrine function in peri- and postmenopausal women [31]. Although many questions remain unanswered, these observations reinforce the concept that menopause is a brain-body transition rather than simply a decline in ovarian hormone production.

This systems-based perspective may help clinicians better understand the diversity of symptoms experienced during midlife as well as the array of interventions available to them.

Could FSH Be an Aging Hormone?

An intriguing question raised in the scientific literature is whether FSH should be considered an aging hormone [32]. While the term remains controversial, several observations support the possibility that it is better described as a Polyendocrine Synchronization Hormone.

FSH:

• rises substantially with age [22]
• increases years before menopause [22,24,25]
• tracks with changes in bone physiology [11]
• is associated with body composition changes [3]
• may influence metabolic pathways [12,13]
• may participate in vascular remodeling [14]
• may have neuroendocrine effects [31]

Collectively, this suggests that FSH may function as a biomarker of adaptation during aging rather than merely a marker of reproductive status. Whether FSH is a driver, mediator, or simply a messenger remains an active area of investigation.

Why FSH Patterns Matter More Than a Single Number

Within the conventional testing model, clinicians often focus on whether a laboratory value falls within or outside a reference range. Yet, endocrine aging is dynamic. A single FSH measurement offers only a snapshot of a continuously evolving physiological process. FSH levels fluctuate throughout the menstrual cycle and become increasingly variable during perimenopause [23,25].

Consistent with a functional testing approach, examining sequential changes over time may provide more context than a single result. The overall pattern of FSH change—and potentially the rate at which those changes occur—may reveal upstream endocrine shifts at the level of the pituitary gland even when values remain within conventional reference intervals.

The FSH trajectory, which describes the rate of change over time, may provide clinical insight. Longitudinal research suggests that women with a high FSH trajectory show greater declines in bone mineral density [33] and more severe hot flashes [34] than those with a low FSH trajectory.

This pattern-based approach stresses understanding the direction and pace of physiological change rather than relying only on static laboratory thresholds.

Testing: Looking Beyond the Snapshot

Traditional serum FSH testing remains a useful clinical tool, particularly when assessed in the context of the reproductive stage. However, because FSH fluctuates considerably throughout the menopausal transition, a single measurement might not sufficiently capture underlying endocrine dynamics [35].

Increasingly, clinicians are recognizing the value of longitudinal assessment. Serial testing can help identify patterns of endocrine adaptation, reveal early changes in reproductive aging, and provide greater context than isolated laboratory values. When combined with symptom tracking and menstrual history, FSH trends and trajectories may offer important insights into the pace and progression of neuroendocrine change.

Newer home-based testing methods make longitudinal monitoring more accessible. Urinary FSH assessment allows individuals and practitioners to evaluate trends over time, creating opportunities for increasingly personalized assessment of reproductive aging [36-38]. Future approaches may rely less on single laboratory snapshots and more on hormone patterns and trajectories, in addition to investigating gene variants in tissue FSH receptivity.

Bone Loss Begins Earlier Than Many Clinicians Realize

One of the strongest bodies of evidence surrounding FSH involves skeletal health and challenges the belief that menopause-related changes in bone mineral density are driven solely by declining estradiol levels.
Evidence suggests that accelerated bone loss may begin before a sustained decline in estradiol occurs and may even emerge while estradiol levels remain elevated prior to the final menstrual period [20,25,39]. Some researchers have proposed that FSH may contribute to bone remodeling and bone loss independent of estradiol [2,40].
A growing body of evidence supports this concept. Studies consistently report associations between elevated FSH levels and lower bone mineral density, particularly during perimenopause [40,41]. In several studies, FSH outperforms estradiol as a predictor of bone loss, especially at the lumbar spine [42-44].
The clinical implications are meaningful. Women may already be experiencing skeletal changes while menstrual cycles remain relatively regular and estradiol levels appear normal. By the time estradiol declines sufficiently to prompt clinical concern, meaningful skeletal changes may have already occurred.
This positions FSH as an early indicator of skeletal vulnerability during the late reproductive and early perimenopausal years, creating opportunities for identification of women at risk of accelerated skeletal changes and early intervention. For a deeper look at FSH thresholds, testing timing, and clinical assessment for skeletal risk, see “The Bone–FSH Connection.”

Body Composition, Metabolism, and Beyond

The influence of FSH may extend beyond bone.

Research points to possible relationships between FSH and adipose tissue biology [3,45,46], lean muscle mass [47,48], lipid metabolism [49,50], vascular function [51,52], insulin signaling [53], and cardiometabolic health [14,51,54]. While many findings remain preliminary and sometimes conflicting, they support the idea that FSH operates within a more extensive endocrine-metabolic network. For a closer look at the sometimes-contradictory human evidence on FSH, fat, and muscle, see “FSH and Body Composition.”

Importantly, these observations reinforce the need to view menopause as a whole-body transition rather than an isolated reproductive event.

Interpreting FSH Through a Functional Medicine Lens

FSH is best interpreted with a clinical context that provides an appreciation of the broader endocrine dynamics experienced by midlife women.

In addition to evaluating FSH, clinicians should consider:

• Body composition changes
• Bone density changes
• Estradiol levels
• Genetics or family history
• Lifestyle factors (e.g., environmental toxin exposure, smoking history, and physical activity)
• Menopause-related symptoms (e.g., hot flashes and mood or cognitive changes)
• Menstrual cycle changes
• Metabolic markers (e.g., insulin, LDL cholesterol)
• Sleep quality
• Stress physiology

This systems-oriented approach allows clinicians to understand not only reproductive aging but also the more extensive physiological adaptations occurring during midlife.

Interventions: Supporting Endocrine Resilience

If rising FSH levels reflect neuroendocrine adaptation rather than isolated ovarian decline, interventions should address the entire physiological ecosystem rather than targeting a single hormone.

Foundational strategies for overall endocrine resilience remain essential, including resistance training [55], protein optimization [56], circadian rhythm alignment [57], sleep restoration [58], stress management [59,60], and nutrient-dense dietary patterns [61]. These interventions influence metabolic health, musculoskeletal integrity, cognitive resilience, and overall endocrine function.

Targeted nutritional and botanical approaches may also play a role. Evidence suggests that compounds such as Maca-GO® [62-64], shatavari [65], fennel [66], evening primrose [66], and ashwagandha [67] may influence FSH dynamics and symptom expression in some women. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) may likewise modify FSH levels while supporting multiple physiological systems [68].

Future research will continue to clarify how interventions affect not only reproductive hormones but also the broader endocrine networks involved in aging.

A New Way of Thinking About FSH

For decades, clinicians have viewed FSH as a marker of ovarian decline. However, emerging science suggests a broader role for FSH as a multi-system regulator across the endocrine system. And although FSH remains a valuable biomarker for staging the menopausal transition, its value may extend further. Emerging evidence suggests FSH also offers insight into bone, brain, and cardiovascular health during this transition. Rather than reflecting ovarian aging alone, FSH appears to track adaptations across bone, brain, and cardiovascular physiology, positioning it as a potential marker of systems biology in midlife.

The evolution of menopause care may not be in identifying new biomarkers, but in examining a familiar one through a different lens. Understanding how FSH dynamics relate to adaptations in the brain, bone, metabolism, cardiovascular system, and reproductive system during the menopause transition may reshape how clinicians assess and support midlife women.

As the understanding of menopause biology evolves, FSH may prove to be one of the most informative early endocrine messengers of midlife physiology.

Dr. Deanna Minich, PhD, MS, CNS, FMCP, FACN

Chief Science Officer, Symphony Natural Health

Nutrition scientist, researcher, educator, and author with 25+ years across academia and the supplement industry, including most recently as a featured expert in nutrition and functional medicine in the PBS documentary The (M) Factor 2.

PhD in Medical Sciences; MS in Human Nutrition and Dietetics; Certified Nutrition Specialist. Recipient of the 2025 Linus and Ava Helen Pauling Award, the highest honor in Functional Medicine, with past winners including Dr. Mark Hyman, Dr. Dean Ornish, and Dr. Terry Wahls.

She spent ten years working with Dr. Jeffrey Bland on the research and development team at Metagenics, engaged in global strategy and education related to functional medicine and natural products, and helped establish his Personalized Lifestyle Medicine Institute (PLMI) in 2014. She is currently on the Board of Directors for PLMI. Past President, American College of Nutrition; fellow of the American College of Nutrition (FACN); Board of Directors for 7 years, American Nutrition Association; Nutrition Advisory Board, Institute for Functional Medicine; and has been an educator for the Institute for Functional Medicine and University of Western States for over a decade.

Author of seven consumer books including the Rainbow Diet, and 50+ scientific publications. Oversees and guides Symphony's Medical and Science Team focusing on researching the root cause of women's health and hormone imbalance conditions. She is the lead author on the most recent FSH paper and is dedicated to empowering women to understand their whole health and supporting endocrine health throughout life. Has trained thousands of healthcare professionals and educated consumers worldwide over the past 25 years through her presentations and courses.

References

1. Chrusciel M, Ponikwicka-Tyszko D, Wolczynski S, Huhtaniemi I, Rahman NA. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:32. Published 2019 Feb 4. doi:10.3389/fendo.2019.00032
2. Chin KY. Int J Med Sci. 2018;15(12):1373-1383. Published 2018 Sep 7. doi:10.7150/ijms.26571
3. Liu XM, Chan HC, Ding GL, et al. Aging Cell. 2015;14(3):409-420. doi:10.1111/acel.12331
4. Ghinea N, Liehn EA, Grommes J, Delattre DD, Olesen TK. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):10176. Published 2024 May 3. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-60962-2
5. Robinson LJ, Tourkova I, Wang Y, et al. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2010;394(1):12-17. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.02.112
6. Song Y, Wang ES, Xing LL, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(1):254-263. doi:10.1210/jc.2015-2724
7. Ryu V, Gumerova A, Korkmaz F, et al. Elife. 2022;11:e79612. Published 2022 Sep 2. doi:10.7554/eLife.79612
8. Orlowski M, Sarao MS. Physiology, Follicle Stimulating Hormone. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; May 1, 2023.
9. Fevold HL, Hisaw FL, Leonard SL. American Journal of Physiology-Legacy Content. 1931;97(2):291-301. doi:10.1152/ajplegacy.1931.97.2.291
10. Li CH, Simpson ME, Evans HM. Science. 1949;109(2835):445-446. doi:10.1126/science.109.2835.445
11. Li L, Pi YZ, Zhang H, et al. J Clin Lab Anal. 2023;37(9-10):e24899. doi:10.1002/jcla.24899
12. Lee SW, Hwang IS, Jung G, Kang HJ, Chung YH. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(18):e29216. Published 2022 May 6. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000029216
13. Gao L, Wu X, Zhu X, Jin Q, Ma Q, Sun A. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2018;34(12):1035-1038. doi:10.1080/09513590.2018.1482868
14. Wang Z, Yao H. Int J Womens Health. 2026;18:571490. Published 2026 Mar 13. doi:10.2147/IJWH.S571490
15. Short RA, Bowen RL, O'Brien PC, Graff-Radford NR. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76(9):906-909. doi:10.4065/76.9.906
16. Oh DJ, Baek KH, Kang DW, Hong YJ, Jeong C. J Korean Med Sci. 2025;40(10):e15. Published 2025 Mar 17. doi:10.3346/jkms.2025.40.e15
17. Valera H, Chen A, Grive KJ. Endocrinology. 2025;166(10):bqaf137. doi:10.1210/endocr/bqaf137
18. Kåss AS, Lea TE, Torjesen PA, Gulseth HC, Førre ØT. Scand J Rheumatol. 2010;39(2):109-117. doi:10.3109/03009740903270607
19. Buckler H. J Br Menopause Soc. 2005;11(2):61-65. doi:10.1258/136218005775544525
20. Burger HG. Eur J Endocrinol. 1994;130(1):38-42. doi:10.1530/eje.0.1300038
21. Kim SM, Sultana F, Sims S, et al. J Endocrinol. 2024;262(1):e230377. Published 2024 May 16. doi:10.1530/JOE-23-0377
22. Harlow SD, Gass M, Hall JE, et al. Menopause. 2012;19(4):387-395. doi:10.1097/gme.0b013e31824d8f40
23. Randolph JF Jr, Zheng H, Sowers MR, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(3):746-754. doi:10.1210/jc.2010-1746
24. Delamater L, Santoro N. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;61(3):419-432. doi:10.1097/GRF.0000000000000389
25. Tepper PG, Randolph JF Jr, McConnell DS, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97(8):2872-2880. doi:10.1210/jc.2012-1422
26. Washington Post Live. Transcript: Well+Being with Lisa Mosconi, Author, ‘The Menopause Brain’. March 11, 2024. Accessed August 18, 2026.
27. Nerattini M, Rubino F, Jett S, et al. Front Dement. 2023;2:1303256. doi:10.3389/frdem.2023.1303256
28. Ding C, Xu X, Xu B, Wu J. Ann Hum Genet. 2026;90(1):25-40. doi:10.1111/ahg.70004
29. Xue Y, Zuo S, Wang F, Qi X. Front Aging Neurosci. 2025;17:1578439. Published 2025 Jun 16. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1578439
30. Wang SM, Jeong C, Um YH, et al. Front Aging Neurosci. 2026;17:1697255. Published 2026 Jan 6. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1697255
31. Spicer J, Malaspina D, Blank SV, Goosens KA. Psychiatry Res. 2025;345:116239. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2024.116239
32. Lizneva D, Rahimova A, Kim SM, et al. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019;10:136. Published 2019 Mar 19. doi:10.3389/fendo.2019.00136
33. Puranda JL, Weber VMR, Doucet É, Adamo KB. Bone. 2026;205:117805. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2026.117805
34. Lima SM, Yue Y, Bea JW, et al. Menopause. 2026;33(1):3-11. Published 2026 Jan 1. doi:10.1097/GME.0000000000002631
35. Testing and interpreting measures of Ovarian Reserve: A committee opinion. American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Accessed July 20, 2026. https://www.asrm.org/practice-guidance/practice-committee-documents/testing-and-interpreting-measures-of-ovarian-reserve-a-committee-opinion-2020/.
36. Qiu Q, Kuo A, Todd H, et al. Fertil Steril. 1998;69(2):278-285. doi:10.1016/S0015-0282(97)00475-5
37. Li H, Chen J, Overstreet JW, Nakajima ST, Lasley BL. Fertil Steril. 2002;77(5):961-966. doi:10.1016/S0015-0282(02)02998-9
38. Hart RJ, D'Hooghe T, Dancet EAF, et al. Reprod Sci. 2022;29(11):3147-3160. doi:10.1007/s43032-021-00754-5
39. Crandall CJ, Tseng CH, Karlamangla AS, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(4):E654-E663. doi:10.1210/jc.2012-3651
40. Jugulytė N, Bartkevičienė D. Endocrines. 2025;6(4):54. https://doi.org/10.3390/endocrines6040054
41. Lu B, Han Q, Zhao S, Ding S, Bao G, Liu Y. J Bone Miner Metab. 2025;43(4):392-401. doi:10.1007/s00774-025-01595-x
42. Shieh A, Greendale GA, Cauley JA, Karvonen-Gutierrez C, Crandall CJ, Karlamangla AS. J Bone Miner Res. 2019;34(12):2246-2253. doi:10.1002/jbmr.3856
43. Ramírez Stieben LA, Brun LR, Pustilnik E, et al. Calcif Tissue Int. 2025;116(1):137. Published 2025 Dec 1. doi:10.1007/s00223-025-01450-1
44. Sowers MR, Zheng H, Jannausch ML, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(5):2155-2162. doi:10.1210/jc.2009-0659
45. Liu P, Ji Y, Yuen T, et al. Nature. 2017;546(7656):107-112. doi:10.1038/nature22342
46. Mattick LJ, Bea JW, Singh L, et al. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(8):e3455-e3462. doi:10.1210/clinem/dgac238
47. Mao L, Wang L, Bennett S, Xu J, Zou J. Front Physiol. 2022;13:1043237. Published 2022 Dec 5. doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.1043237
48. Park YM, Jankowski CM, Ozemek C, Hildreth KL, Kohrt WM, Moreau KL. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2020;128(5):1373-1380. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00315.2019
49. Wang X, Zhang H, Chen Y, Du Y, Jin X, Zhang Z. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020;46(8):1419-1424. doi:10.1111/jog.14297
50. Libby AE, Solt CM, Jackman MR, et al. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2024;326(5):E626-E639. doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00400.2023
51. El Khoudary SR, Santoro N, Chen HY, et al. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2016;23(7):694-703. doi:10.1177/2047487315607044
52. Yan X, Hui L, Wang L, Bai E, Li F, Yu X. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2026;17:1748598. Published 2026 Feb 25. doi:10.3389/fendo.2026.1748598
53. Huang WY, Chen DR, Kor CT, et al. Metabolites. 2020;10(10):420. Published 2020 Oct 19. doi:10.3390/metabo10100420
54. Bertone-Johnson ER, Virtanen JK, Nurmi T, et al. Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(1):16-26. doi:10.1093/aje/kwx174
55. Nilsson S, Henriksson M, Berin E, Engblom D, Holm AS, Hammar M. PLoS One. 2022;17(5):e0267613. Published 2022 May 26. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0267613
56. Li J, Jiang L, Saquib N, et al. Int J Obes (Lond). 2026;50(3):609-617. doi:10.1038/s41366-025-01978-0
57. Malhan D, Yalçin M, Liedtke S, et al. npj Womens Health. 2025;3:18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44294-025-00057-z
58. Maki PM, Panay N, Simon JA. Menopause. 2024;31(8):724-733. doi:10.1097/GME.0000000000002386
59. Stute P, Lozza-Fiacco S. Maturitas. 2022;166:1-13. doi:10.1016/j.maturitas.2022.07.015
60. Xu H, Liu J, Li P, Liang Y. Menopause. 2024;31(5):457-467. doi:10.1097/GME.0000000000002336
61. Erdélyi A, Pálfi E, Tűű L, et al. Nutrients. 2023;16(1):27. Published 2023 Dec 21. doi:10.3390/nu16010027
62. Meissner HO, Kapczynski W, Mscisz A, Lutomski J. Int J Biomed Sci. 2005;1(1):33-45.
63. Meissner HO, Mscisz A, Reich-Bilinska H, et al. Int J Biomed Sci. 2006;2(4):360-374.
64. Meissner HO, Mscisz A, Reich-Bilinska H, et al. Int J Biomed Sci. 2006;2(4):375-394.
65. Yadav P, Yadav S, Vedururu SS, Kumari G. J Am Nutr Assoc. 2025;44(8):754-764. doi:10.1080/27697061.2025.2510474
66. Ghavi F, Shakeri F, Farahnaz H, Abdolahian S. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2023;28(4):430-435. Published 2023 Jul 24. doi:10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_149_22
67. Vani I, Muralidhar G, Rao BS. Front Reprod Health. 2026;7:1647721. Published 2026 Jan 5. doi:10.3389/frph.2025.1647721
68. Lu DH, Zhou SY, Xu LZ. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2023;27(11):5264-5279. doi:10.26355/eurrev_202306_32646