
The Economic And Social Consequences Of The Women's Health Gap
Women's health has long been underfunded and under-researched. The disparity isn't just a healthcare issue: It's an economic and social crisis.
In 1977, the FDA recommended excluding women of childbearing age from Phase I and early Phase II drug trials—even if they weren't pregnant or trying to become pregnant. While this policy was intended to prevent adverse health outcomes after thalidomide, a morning sickness drug, caused severe birth defects, it resulted in a shortage of data on how medication affects all women. This policy dovetailed into the general exclusion of women from medical research, strengthening gender biases that viewed the white male body as the physiological 'norm.'
In the 1980s, activists protested the CDC's case definition of HIV/AIDS, which was too narrow to include many women with the condition. While the NIH began encouraging the inclusion of women and minorities in drug trials and medical research later that decade, it wasn't until 1993 that Congress codified it in federal law.
In 2025, women's care continues to be affected by lack of funding, delayed treatments and misdiagnoses. Women experiencing a heart attack are 50% more likely to be misdiagnosed because their symptoms often differ from men's. Only 4.5% of coronary artery disease research funding is allocated to women, despite cardiovascular disease being the leading cause of death for women. Women are diagnosed later than men for over 700 diseases, including several types of cancer. And while chronic pain is more common in women, they're less likely to receive painkillers and more likely to have physical symptoms dismissed as psychological.
The disparity in women's care goes deeper than health outcomes. The McKinsey Health Institutes reports that globally, the average woman will spend nine years of her life in poor health—25% longer than men. With nearly half of this health burden affecting women during their working years, the healthcare gap can have a profound impact on their ability to financially support themselves and their families. This productivity loss affects the healthcare industry, too, contributing to the global healthcare workforce shortage that, according to the World Health Organization, will see a shortfall of 11 million healthcare workers by 2030.
For any healthcare company concerned about employee retention or patient experience, the other side of the coin is investing in women's health—which is itself a high-potential market. According to McKinsey, investing in women's health shows a positive ROI, with approximately $3 in economic growth projected for every $1 invested.
Closing the women's health gap can benefit patients, industries and even the global economy, to the tune of $1 trillion annually by 2040, according to McKinsey. I believe this will require nothing less than a paradigm shift in medical research and healthcare delivery. But what does that entail?
From my perspective as a chief medical officer, I believe healthcare leaders need to lead the shift toward more personalized, proactive healthcare solutions—particularly in emergency medicine, where an overreliance on urgent cares and ERs has resulted in overcrowding, a rise in misdiagnoses, and stress and confusion caused by long waits and a lack of continuity between providers. Here are several ways you can get involved:
• Support better funding and research for women's health. In the United States, the National Institute of Health (NIH) only allocates 11% of its budget to women's-health-specific research. Private-sector stakeholders have an opportunity to channel funds into high-impact areas of research, enabling more investment and innovation that will reap more data about how women experience disease, react to medication and recover.
• Create financial incentives to close the gender gap. Developing new financial products and investment vehicles can attract capital to projects that directly address the women's health gap. For example, the fast-growing FemTech sector, already disrupting the healthcare market, funds consumer products, digital health applications, and medical products and technologies specifically designed for women's health needs.
• Improve the patient experience. Develop creative business models that provide a better experience for your urgent and emergent care patients, such as concierge medicine, which is currently undergoing explosive growth. This can help remove barriers for women seeking acute care and allow your organization to provide more personalized, accurate care and diagnoses.
If the medical, social and economic costs of treating women's health as a 'specialty' are obvious, the reasons for closing the women's health gap should be even more so. Achieving medical equity and inclusivity for women could not only improve their lives but also their families, their communities and the world in which we all live.
Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fast Company
14 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Over 67,000 cases of popular deodorant recalled nationwide
The products, Power Stick roll-on deodorants, are made by the Easton, Pennsylvania-based company A.P. Deauville. Per an enforcement notice, the recall includes three separate products: the Power Stick For Her Roll-On Antiperspirant Deodorant in the scent 'power fresh,' the Power Stick Invisible Protection Roll-On Antiperspirant Deodorant in the scent 'spring fresh,' and the Power Stick Original Nourishing Invisible Protection Roll-On Antiperspirant Deodorant. Over 20,000 cases of each product were recalled. The enforcement notice marked the reason for the recall as 'cGMP deviations', which stands for Current Good Manufacturing Practice. Per the FDA website, failure to meet CGMP regulations can lead to products being recalled. The FDA notes, 'Adherence to the CGMP regulations assures the identity, strength, quality, and purity of drug products by requiring that manufacturers of medications adequately control manufacturing operations. This includes establishing strong quality management systems, obtaining appropriate quality raw materials, establishing robust operating procedures, detecting and investigating product quality deviations, and maintaining reliable testing laboratories.' The recall was announced on July 10 and is ongoing. While the products did not meet FDA standards, an exact reason for the recall was not disclosed. No injuries have been reported. According to the enforcement report, the products were distributed nationwide. They are regularly sold at Dollar Tree, Amazon, and Walmart.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sarepta refuses to pull gene therapy despite FDA order
Sarepta Therapeutics is refusing to pull its gene therapy Elevidys (delandistrogene moxeparvovec), despite a request from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Speaking on 18 July, shortly after the FDA ordered the pull for Elevidys, Sarepta said it will continue to ship Elevidys to the ambulant population as studies show no signs of new or changed safety signals, adding it first heard of this potential request earlier in the day through media reports. A statement from the company reads: 'At Sarepta, patient safety and well-being are always our top priority. We are committed to upholding the highest safety standards for all of our therapies. "This guides every decision we make, as evidenced by our conservative decision to pause shipments of Elevidys for non-ambulant patients while we work with the FDA to update the label and evaluate the use of an enhanced immunosuppression regimen to mitigate the risk of acute liver failure (ALF).' Trial of LGMD therapy also put on hold The FDA has also put a hold on Sarepta's gene therapy SRP-9004 in limb girdle muscular dystrophy (LGMD) after a patient died in an early-stage study due to ALF. Speaking about the patient death in the Phase I trial of SRP-9004, the company's statement added: 'We recognise that the death of any patient is heartbreaking, including the recent death of a 51-year-old non-ambulant LGMD patient. "We also want to clarify that this tragic event occurred in a Phase I clinical trial for an investigational gene therapy called SRP-9004. SRP-9004 is a clinical-stage therapy that is intended to treat a different disease, is administered using a different dose, and is manufactured using a different process. The LGMD study participant who passed away was not treated with Elevidys, and the dosing for the SRP-9004 trial had concluded at the time of his death.' This patient's death, which was reported to the FDA on 3 July, is the third that has impacted Sarepta's gene therapy programme, with the first two deaths earlier this year in patients treated with Elevidys, both also due to ALF. Both Elevidys and SRP-9004 are adeno-associated virus (AAV) gene therapies that use the same AAVrh74 serotype. The FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) director Dr Vinay Prasad, said: 'Protecting patient safety is our highest priority, and the FDA will not allow products whose harms are greater than benefits. The FDA will halt any clinical trial of an investigational product if clinical trial participants would be exposed to an unreasonable and significant risk of illness or injury.' This comes just days after Sarepta said it has agreed to change the black box on the Elevidys label to include ALF and acute liver injury (ALI) warnings. In the same announcement, Sarepta said it would be cutting 500 jobs as part of company restructuring. Speaking after the third patient death was announced, GlobalData healthcare analyst Momna Ali said the recent setbacks for Sarepta put the cell and gene therapy (CGT) sector at a 'crossroads'. Ali said: 'Following Sarepta's announcement of a third patient death, a new label for Elevidys and them laying off 500 employees, or 36% of its workforce, shelving parts of its pipeline to save $420m, and shifting focus from gene therapy to siRNA programmes, this is going to put the CGT sector at a pivotal crossroad. 'While the scientific potential of CGT therapies remains extraordinary, this moment serves as a reminder of the complexity, cost, and responsibility involved. There is a lot of buzz around therapies 'beyond the pill'; however, for the landscape to keep evolving at the pace it has been in the last 3-5 years, there has to be greater transparency, patient safety, and sustainable innovation – otherwise, it'll be met with more setbacks.' The news of the LGMD death came to light on 17 July in media reports. After this was reported, Sarepta's stock has dropped 43.21%, from $22.54 at market open on 17 July to $12.80 at market open on 21 July. The FDA also said it has revoked the platform technology designation for Sarepta's AAVrh74 Platform Technology. "Sarepta refuses to pull gene therapy despite FDA order" was originally created and published by Pharmaceutical Technology, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
FDA names former pharmaceutical company executive to oversee US drug program
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Food and Drug Administration on Monday named a longtime pharmaceutical executive to run the agency's drug program, the latest in a string of leadership changes at the agency. FDA Commissioner Marty Makary announced that Dr. George Tidmarsh, a cancer and pediatric specialist, will direct the agency's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, which regulates the safety and effectiveness of all U.S. drugs. His appointment comes a month after the center's acting director, Dr. Jacqueline Corrigan-Curay, announced her retirement. As the agency's top drug regulator, Tidmarsh will be charged with following through on a number of commitments made by Makary and his boss, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., including reviewing the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone. The FDA is also scrutinizing certain uses of other long-established drugs, including antidepressants and hormone-replacement drugs for menopause. Tidmarsh founded and led several pharmaceutical companies, including Horizon Pharmaceuticals, maker of an anti-inflammatory medication for arthritis. He has also served as an adjunct professor at Stanford University. The FDA's drug center is the agency's largest unit, with nearly 6,000 staffers responsible for reviewing the safety and effectiveness of new drugs and monitoring the use and marketing of older drugs. About 2,000 FDA staffers have been laid off as part of widescale cuts to the federal health workforce overseen by Kennedy. More than 1,000 others have taken buyouts or early retirement, while many others are reportedly searching for new jobs. The departures have threatened basic FDA operations, including the timely review of new drugs. FDA's drug center hasn't had a permanent director since January, when Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni stepped down days before President Donald Trump took office. Nearly all of the FDA's senior leadership positions have turned over in recent months, either due to retirements, resignations or actions by administration officials placing them on administrative leave. FDA center directors typically hold their positions for years or even decades, serving across multiple administrations, whether Republican or Democrat. In May, Makary named Dr. Vinay Prasad, a prominent critic of the FDA's COVID response, to run the agency's vaccine center. He was also named to the post of FDA chief medical officer. Prasad joined the agency after his predecessor, longtime vaccine chief Dr. Peter Marks, was forced out in March. The head of FDA's tobacco center was also forced to step down in April. A permanent replacement has not yet been named. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.