“I offer sacred Feminine energy treatments to reconnect with yourself, find your true sensual, powerful, wild and free nature… Treatments to relieve endometriosis and polycystic syndrome. »
“I guide you towards healing your wounded feminine (endometriosis, breast cancer, uterus cancer, gynecological disorders, etc.). »
Such proposals are flourishing on certain self-proclaimed therapist sites or even on Instagram accounts. At the heart of the speeches that are relayed, we often find the concept of the Sacred Feminine, which is located at the intersection between spirituality and personal development.
Defining the Sacred Feminine is not easy, because it is a plural movement, which refers neither to a homogeneous community nor to always well-defined practices or ideas. However, one aspect seems to be central: the notion that women possess a “power”, a particular inner power, to be explored and celebrated.
As the Interministerial Mission for Vigilance and the Fight against Sectarian Abuses (Miviludes) underlines in a report dating from 2022, the Sacred Feminine is often presented as a work of “reconnection” of the body and the mind, taught during courses and rituals or even with people who define themselves as “therapists”.
If the emancipation of women, sisterhood and the quest for meaning are at the heart of the theory of the Sacred Feminine, certain observers, including Miviludes, are nevertheless concerned about potential abuses. Among the criticisms that are raised: a tendency to essentialize women by reducing them to biological functions or reproductive faculties, or the fact that the Sacred Feminine is often similar to a business, based on an offer of courses and practices. unregulated and high costs.
In recent years, fears have also been raised regarding potential repercussions on the health of women, particularly those suffering from endometriosis. Canal Détox returns here more specifically to this issue.
Patients looking for solutions
Endometriosis is a gynecological disease that affects approximately one in ten women of childbearing age. Caused by the presence of tissue similar to the uterine lining outside the uterus, it can cause sometimes disabling pain, especially during menstruation. Other symptoms can be observed, which vary from one woman to another: digestive disorders, chronic fatigue, pain during sexual intercourse, when going to the toilet, etc. Finally, for women of childbearing age, the disease can in certain cases case be associated with infertility.
Recent years have been marked by a renewal of interest in endometriosis in the scientific and medical community, reinforced in 2022 by the launch of the national strategy to combat endometriosis.
No solution currently exists to cure endometriosis. Treatments to reduce symptoms are available, but they are not effective for all patients. If these medications fail, surgery may be offered to eliminate the lesions associated with the disease, which may lead to a disappearance of symptoms in the more or less long term.
However, this strategy is again not always effective, since there is a risk of recurrence. Studies have estimated that around half of patients presented recurrent symptoms within five years, regardless of the therapeutic approach used.
Furthermore, delays in diagnosis can also complicate treatment. There is currently no specific screening technique for the disease, whether for women at risk or in the general population. Patients who present with symptoms may be offered a clinical examination (gynecological examination) which can then guide the prescription of an endovaginal ultrasound or a pelvic MRI. Only these examinations coupled with a biopsy (when possible) are capable of providing reliable answers to patients.
This situation, associated with insufficient knowledge of endometriosis by health professionals, causes significant delays in diagnosis, and explains that at present, there is an average delay of 7 to 12 years, depending on studies, before the diagnosis is definitively made.
Faced with a wide range of symptoms which directly impact their quality of life, with treatments that are not always effective and with diagnostic delays which may partly be due to minimization, normalization or psychologization of symptoms by certain health professionals, a form of discouragement and distrust of patients towards medicine can set in.
Some patients may be led to turn away from “conventional” medical care to seek other solutions.
Useful non-drug approaches?
The first results from the ComPaRe Endometriosis cohort coordinated by researcher Marina Kvaskoff, Inserm Science and Society-Opecst 2023 Prize, highlighted that 80% of participants with endometriosis used at least once an alternative practice such as osteopathy, acupuncture, meditation or sophrology…
It should be noted that at present, most of these practices have not demonstrated their own effectiveness, superior to a placebo. If certain studies demonstrate effectiveness for certain practices, their methodology may have limitations. And conversely, other work has not demonstrated the effectiveness of these practices. No clear consensus is therefore able to emerge on this subject.
Nevertheless, it would seem that the perceived effectiveness of certain unconventional approaches would be mainly linked to the context of these consultations: the practitioners who offer these approaches generally take the time to receive patients, and have attentive and caring listening skills which can sometimes be lacking in conventional medicine consultations.
In this sense, the contextual effects, present in these approaches as in any therapeutic act, can help patients in the management of their symptoms. However, the use of these practices should in no case entirely replace medical treatments, and it is important to communicate this to the medical team following the patient.
“Guilt” of women
However, it is precisely this point that worries some caregivers. They fear that self-proclaimed “therapists” who offer non-drug approaches – particularly poorly researched approaches based on rhetoric specific to the Sacred Feminine – will lead some patients to abandon medical care and treatment entirely.
Let us qualify: we do not have solid data concerning the number of patients who use such approaches to “ care for their injured feminine » or who participate in womb blessing ceremonies – rituals based on a “ energetic technique seeking to harmonize the energies of women » – in the hope of easing their symptoms. It is nevertheless useful, while movements based on the Sacred Feminine are gaining momentum, to remember that all the “therapeutic” approaches which result from them are in no way based on solid scientific evidence, that they are often costly for patients and can lead to women feeling guilty.
On this last point, Miviludes warned in particular of the fact that certain women may be confronted with risky and guilt-inducing speech, which would make them feel responsible for their symptoms: “It is said that if a woman has painful periods, it is because she is not in accordance with her deep nature as a woman. In other words, she would be responsible for this suffering. »
Endometriosis is a disease that has long remained in the shadows, which explains the distress of patients and their desire to sometimes turn to non-drug solutions and alternatives to conventional medicine.
New knowledge about endometriosis, and more caring support for patients, is gradually emerging, paving the way for better identification and better care.
It is now necessary to continue research and communication efforts with patients and to learn to listen to them better.
Improving care pathways, particularly in terms of care relationships, is a path that must be pursued if we truly want to support patients and if we wish to avoid any drift and any renunciation of medical care.
It could also be interesting for caregivers themselves to be trained on the foundations of “therapies” or practices that do not have a solid scientific basis, as well as on their abuses, so that they can better inform patients in a more informed manner. transparent, and that they can make a fully informed choice about the complementary care they wish to use.
Text written with the support of Marina Kvaskoff, Inserm research director, epidemiologist at the Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP) in Villejuif and Hélèna Schoefs, doctoral student in sociology at the Social and Cognitive Psychology Laboratory (Lapsco), Clermont-Auvergne University – Adaptation, resilience and change research unit (ARCh), University of Liège (Belgium)
