What Does Empower Even Mean in FemTech? Why Vague Words Create Real Risks

My LinkedIn feed is filled with femtech innovation, and I love it. But there is a bit of a problem with the messaging, aside from the AI generated posts from people who could actually offer some interesting insight. No, the problem is that words that once meant something useful and specific have slowly hollowed out into pleasant-sounding placeholders.

Words like “empower”, “support”, “balance”, and “personalized” are being over used to the point where they have lost their meaning and sound like marketing jargon. It’s part of what is called semantic bleaching, where a word's meaning loses its original intensity and becomes more general over time through overuse. It’s a bit like saying “literally” for things are not literal at all. I’m also guilty of over using “actually”. 

In ordinary marketing, this is mostly just boring. But in regulated health contexts, vague language is risky. Claims must be precise, interpretable, and evidenced. When words blur, users misinterpret mechanisms and regulators also might flag ambiguity.

Why semantic bleaching and vague wording matter

In femtech, language is operational. If you say a product “supports hormonal balance”, that implies a physiological mechanism. Regulators will want to see what you mean by “support,” which hormones, what measure of “balance,” and what evidence you have. Users will make up their own interpretations, which are often quite different from what the product actually does.

There are three main problems when it comes to this kind of vague, over-used wording: 

User misunderstanding

Vague words leave users guessing about what a product does or how it should be used. If a menstriual cycle-tracking app claims to “empower women to take control of their health”, what does that mean in practice? Does the user get actionable recommendations, symptom insights, or just data logging? 

A study found that unclear or ambiguous health information can lead to confusion, lower trust, and reduced intentions to follow recommended health behaviours. This highlights the risk of overused, semantically bleached terms in femtech, where precision is crucial.

Regulatory risk 

Regulators require clarity and evidence. The MHRA, ASA, and the FDA scrutinise claims to ensure they are precise and supported by data. Phrases like “balance hormones” or “empowers users” can trigger review or rejection if the intended effect isn’t defined or measurable.

In June 2024, the ASA ruled against a supplement claiming “comprehensive menopause support,” as it implied medical efficacy without evidence.

Internal misalignment Marketing, regulatory, product, and medical teams interpret vague language differently. “Support” may mean aspirational to marketing, but measurable to regulatory teams. Semantic bleaching increases the need for rewrites and slows product launches.

This is much more than just semantics. A vague claim may seem innocuous, but it can lead to users expecting clinical results that the product does not deliver, or regulators questioning the product’s compliance and efficacy. Over time, repeated vagueness erodes trust, not just in a product, but in the industry itself.

Examples of semantic bleaching in practice

Looking at specific terms reveals how semantic bleaching subtly undermines femtech communication. Overused phrases like “empowers women” or “supports hormonal health” sound meaningful but convey no measurable action. Each example below shows how vague, overused femtech phrases can be replaced with precise statements that define what the product does and how users interact with it.

Instead of	Use
“Empowers women to take control of their health”	“Helps users track and interpret hormonal fluctuations across their menstrual cycle.”
“Support hormonal health”	“Provides insight into oestrogen and progesterone trends to inform symptom management.”
“Support users through their cycle”	“Send phase-specific reminders based on tracked data”
“Balance mood and energy”	“Correlate symptom logs with hormonal shifts”
“Balance hormones”	“Map hormonal fluctuations across follicular and luteal phases”
“Provides personalised insights”	Generates daily symptom summaries based on user-reported data, aligned with menstrual cycle phase

Actions to prevent semantic bleaching

Preventing semantic bleaching requires intentional, consistent practices. The following steps help ensure your copy remains precise and actionable for both users and regulators, rather than drifting into vague, feel-good language.

• Define the mechanism or marker: Always clarify what physiological or behavioural effect your product addresses.

• Set clear expectations: Specify what the user will do, see, or experience, and over what timeframe.

• Align internal teams: Create a shared glossary of approved phrases for marketing, product, and regulatory teams.

• Include limitations: Transparently state what the product does not do, especially for non-medical products.

• Prioritise comprehension: Test copy with actual users: can they map the claim to an action or observable outcome?

• Audit content regularly: Periodically review marketing and product copy to catch creeping vagueness.

  
  

These might sound less marketing and investor friendly, but the wording is more credible, and credibility is what builds both user trust and regulatory tolerance.

Towards words that actually mean something

If femtech is to mature, its language has to grow up too. That means being precise about what’s being measured, balanced, changed, personalised, or supported even if the phrasing feels less glossy.

The irony is that femtech’s core mission is empowerment: giving people clearer understanding of their own bodies. But to achieve that, we have to stop flattening the very language that describes them.