This study, published in the peer-reviewed journal Social Science & Medicine, undertook a comprehensive content analysis of 46 high-engagement posts on Instagram and TikTok. These posts were characterized by significant reach, collectively influencing an audience of approximately 6.8 million followers and receiving more than 650,000 likes. This considerable exposure highlights the extent of testosterone marketing’s penetration, making it a notable vector for health misinformation that intersects with the online “manosphere.” This cybersphere includes communities that emphasize a constricted and hyper-masculine identity, associating manhood with dominance, physical prowess, and sexual capability.

A key finding of the research is the strategic framing of everyday experiences such as fatigue, stress, low libido, or signs of aging as clinical symptoms of “testosterone deficiency.” Influencers deploy this narrative to suggest that these common conditions necessitate medical intervention, thereby pushing hormone therapies as a quick fix. Such tactics exploit vulnerabilities in young men, emphasizing a crisis narrative around masculinity. Dr. Brooke Nickel, senior author and public health expert at the University of Sydney, explains that this approach strips complex physiological and psychological experiences down to an oversimplified hormone imbalance, fostering an environment ripe for overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

The manosphere, a crucial context for this phenomenon, functions as an echo chamber that amplifies narrow definitions of masculinity through social and digital media. Health misinformation within these communities often merges with product marketing, using emotionally charged, fear-based messaging to encourage testosterone testing and associated product sales. For instance, one TikTok sex coach with over 100,000 followers warned that not waking up with an erection signifies “low testosterone levels,” urging followers to seek testing despite the absence of scientific corroboration for such claims. Another influencer framed testosterone levels as a binary marker of masculinity, equating deviations with femininity—an unfounded and damaging conflation of biological metrics with gender identity.

None of the analyzed posts offered scientific citations or evidence-backed references, underscoring a profound lack of medical rigor in the content promoted to millions. The majority—85 percent—originated from individuals instead of reputable health organizations. Additionally, 67 percent included direct commercial links for purchasing tests or supplements, and 72 percent disclosed financial interests in the products or services promoted. This convergence of commercial intent and health advice is particularly alarming as it confuses medical guidance with marketing strategies and exploits the trust of young men seeking legitimate health information online.

Further dissecting the narratives revealed in the study, four dominant themes emerge in testosterone marketing. Firstly, low testosterone is constructed as an urgent crisis threatening male sexuality, prompting men to act swiftly. Secondly, there is a deliberate rebranding of low testosterone as a prevalent issue among young, fitness-focused men, tied to the cultural idealization of exaggerated muscular physiques. Thirdly, testosterone therapy is promoted within a broader discourse of self-optimization, emphasizing gym performance and physical enhancement as markers of success. Lastly, these messages perpetuate a narrow, often toxic form of masculinity that stigmatizes femininity and centers dominance as the pinnacle of manhood.

The research emphasizes that these themes are far from incidental; instead, they closely mirror discourses endemic to the manosphere. In this synthetic version of masculinity, hormone levels are weaponized as tangible proof of manhood, and testosterone becomes a symbolic tool for reclaiming power and status. This medicalization of gender identity simplifies complex sociocultural constructs into biological determinants, leading both to skewed self-perceptions among men and potentially harmful health behaviors. By framing hormone therapy as a gateway to confidence and success, social media content pushes narratives that can distort individual identity and wellbeing.

One particularly concerning aspect is the promotion of private clinics and direct-to-consumer testosterone products as superior alternatives to conventional healthcare. Social media influencers advocate rapid access to testing and treatment that bypasses traditional medical pathways, often neglecting thorough diagnostic evaluation or the long-term risks of hormone therapy. This approach not only sidesteps evidence-based medical practice but increases the likelihood of inappropriate treatment, engendering potential cardiovascular, reproductive, and mental health complications related to testosterone administration. Medical experts warn of the dangers inherent in treating physiological variations—often benign—with pharmaceutical solutions driven by marketing pressures rather than clinical need.

Historically understood as a condition predominantly affecting older men, low testosterone is now being rebranded as a widespread concern among younger males, especially those engaged in fitness culture. Social media posts leverage sexualized imagery, muscular transformations, and aspirational narratives that link testosterone levels directly to masculinity, strength, and sexual success. This creates a potent branding effect that merges personal identity with biochemical parameters, obscuring the reality that healthy men often exhibit significant natural variation in hormone levels without clinical implications. The normalization of routine testosterone testing and chronic hormone monitoring risks pathologizing normal bodily fluctuations.

The wider implications of this research point toward a troubling medicalization of masculinity. When normal variations in mood, energy, and libido are reinterpreted as evidence of hormonal deficiency, it diminishes the nuance required to address men’s health authentically. Mass screening for testosterone deficiency is not medically recommended without clear symptoms, yet the marketed messages ride on fear and shame to drive demand for testing and therapy. The potential adverse effects of testosterone therapy—ranging from increased cardiovascular risk, reduced fertility, changes in kidney function, to psychological impacts—underscore the critical need for cautious, evidence-based treatment protocols rather than emotionally charged social media endorsements.

Co-author Dr. Ray Moynihan, senior fellow at the University of Sydney’s School of Public Health, points out that the manosphere’s distorted presentations of masculinity degrade opportunities for meaningful interpersonal connections among men and boys. He labels these narratives as misleading and harmful, fostering fear, distrust in mainstream healthcare, and a fragile, hypermasculine identity. The convergence of medical misinformation with cultural crises around gender identity presents a complex challenge for public health practitioners who must navigate both clinical guidelines and the social context shaping men’s health choices today.

Dr. Nickel concludes with a crucial point regarding the intersection of social media influence and medical decision-making: marketing testosterone as a lifestyle enhancer rather than a strictly medical treatment risks doing more harm than good. When medical interventions are framed as shortcuts to confidence, success, and status, they undermine the importance of holistic health approaches and risk promoting unnecessary treatments. This study acts as a vital call to action to scrutinize the role of influencer content in shaping young men’s health behaviors and to promote evidence-based, ethical medical communication practices in the digital age.

Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Selling masculinity – A qualitative analysis of gender representations in social media content about “low T”
News Publication Date: 27-Jan-2026
Web References: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118903
References: Published in Social Science & Medicine
Keywords: Testosterone testing, hormone therapy, social media influencers, manosphere, masculinity, health misinformation, men’s health, medicalization, hormone deficiency, overdiagnosis, overtreatment, public health

Pancreatic cancer, despite being one of the most lethal malignancies, often lacks widespread public awareness. This gap in public understanding poses a major challenge, especially when misinformation proliferates on easily accessible platforms. The study addresses this challenge head-on by evaluating short-form videos, a dominant medium for health communication today, to determine how accurately and reliably they inform viewers about this deadly disease.

To quantify the trustworthiness and quality of the pancreatic cancer-related content, the researchers employed rigorous assessment tools, including the Global Quality Scale (GQS), modified DISCERN (mDISCERN), and the Medical Quality Video Evaluation Tool (MQ-VET). These tools provided a systematic framework to dissect and rate the videos’ credibility, accuracy, and overall educational value.

The analysis encompassed 300 videos from the year 2023, sourced from platforms popular in both China and the USA. The findings revealed a median quality that was moderate in nature but hampered by low reliability scores. Specifically, the median scores were modest across the GQS, mDISCERN, and MQ-VET scales, underscoring the risk of misinformation despite the appealing format of these short videos.

One of the critical distinctions highlighted by the study was the source of the videos. Content produced by medical practitioners consistently scored higher across all metrics — with GQS scores averaging 3 in contrast to 2 for non-medical creators. This trend emphasizes the superior quality and accuracy in videos crafted by healthcare professionals, reinforcing the need for expert-driven educational materials on these platforms.

The content type also influenced reliability. Videos focusing on treatment options, prevention strategies, and detailed disease education garnered better mDISCERN scores. Conversely, videos categorized under news reports or those containing invalid information scored poorly, revealing a worrying prevalence of less trustworthy content masquerading as informative material.

Platform-specific differences emerged, revealing that TikTok videos, especially those from medical professionals, had superior mDISCERN and MQ-VET scores compared to their counterparts on Bilibili and Kwai. This suggests that platform algorithms or content moderation policies might significantly impact the quality of health information available to users.

Despite these insights, the study found only a weak correlation between video quality and their popularity or ranking. This weak correlation underscores a critical concern: high-quality and reliable videos do not necessarily reach the widest audience, while less trustworthy content can become viral, potentially spreading misinformation at a faster rate.

The study also compared the dynamics over two consecutive years, noting a decline in video quality on Chinese platforms from 2023 to 2024. GQS scores decreased significantly, highlighting a troubling trend in the reliability of pancreatic cancer-related content on these platforms.

Further comparisons between Chinese and USA platforms in 2024 revealed that both medical and non-medical practitioners’ videos from Chinese platforms demonstrated lower quality and reliability than their American counterparts. This geographical disparity points to underlying differences in content regulation, cultural attitudes to health communication, or platform policies.

These findings send a clear signal about the urgent need for enhanced curation and algorithmic oversight of health content on video-sharing platforms. Given the growing reliance on these platforms for health education, establishing robust mechanisms to elevate credible, evidence-based videos is paramount.

Moreover, the study underscores the potent role health professionals can play in leveraging these digital mediums to disseminate accurate pancreatic cancer information. Their involvement not only boosts content reliability but also potentially mitigates the spread of misinformation.

The implications extend beyond pancreatic cancer, serving as a case study for health communication strategies in the digital era. As short videos continue to gain traction for educational purposes, fostering a trustworthy digital environment remains crucial for public health.

In sum, while the accessibility and popularity of short videos offer unprecedented opportunities for health education, they also present significant risks when quality and reliability are compromised. This research pushes the conversation forward about improving digital health literacy and ensuring that critical health information, especially about deadly diseases like pancreatic cancer, reaches and educates the public effectively.

The study is a call to action for digital platform stakeholders, healthcare professionals, and policymakers alike to collaborate in refining the quality filters and educational content algorithms. Only then can these platforms fulfill their promise as valuable tools for public health promotion.

As online video content continuously evolves, ongoing monitoring and research into content quality remain essential. The fight against cancer misinformation is a vital front in the broader campaign to improve global health outcomes through accurate, trustworthy information dissemination.

Subject of Research: Assessment of the reliability and quality of pancreatic cancer-related short videos on mainstream social media platforms.

Article Title: Assessment of the reliability and quality of pancreatic cancer related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study.

Article References:
Peng, J., Tu, M., Li, S. et al. Assessment of the reliability and quality of pancreatic cancer related short videos on mainstream platforms: cross-sectional study. BMC Cancer 25, 1428 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-14825-2

Image Credits: Scienmag.com

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-025-14825-2