Addressing Gaps in Women’s Health Care: How Investments Create Space to Boost Economies

Updated: Oct 27

What does it mean to invest in Women’s Health Care? Why does it matter? Before such questions can be answered, it is vital to address what the term “Women’s Health Care” is referring to in this context. For the purposes of this article, Women’s Health Care involves all research, treatment, clinics, education, accessibility, and resources devoted to the health and productivity of women, women of color, and women in the LGBTQ community. Reproductive justice and maternal health care are important elements of Women’s Health Care, yet should not be mistaken for the totality of Women’s Health Care. Pharmaceutical research and clinical trials that prioritize female anatomy are other aspects of Women’s Health Care that are often overlooked.

By addressing some of the disparities within Women’s Health Care and illuminating the vital role that women play in the global and national economies, this article may serve as a launching point for both activism and investment.

“Closing the women’s health gap,” a recent case study by the McKinsey Health Institute, contains the following opening headline, “Investments addressing the women’s health gap could add years to life and life to years—and potentially boost the global economy by $1 trillion annually by 2040 [1]."

At first this headline may seem daunting, and maybe even unrealistic. Yet, prioritizing women’s health will lead to greater familial and individual productivity among women. Thus, because of the vital role that women play as consumers, as well as innovative additions to the workplace, a healthier population of women may positively correlate to an improved, and more productive state of the global economy.

Therefore, to accomplish such economic development — as referenced in the MckInsey case study — one must understand the disparities women face in healthcare, the source of such disparities, the role they play in America’s economy, and ultimately, what actions will diminish the inequalities faced. Furthermore, intersectional factors such as race, ethnicity, and socio-economic class also influence the women’s healthcare gap and must be understood in relation to the disparities that women face.

If investing in and addressing the disparities faced in Women’s Health Care may lead to this grand amount of economic growth, why has this problem stalled for as long as it has? One answer — among many — is the result of decades of research and development of health care solutions and diagnosis that excluded female bodies.

One detrimental result of the decades of historical research conducted around diseases, pharmaceutical products and anatomical features is the lack of sex- and gender-specific data available for the production of accurate pharmaceutical product dosages for women. This lack of data has led to misdiagnosis, incorrect prescription dosages, and has created a medical environment where side-effects of diseases are unknown for women’s bodies. As a result of this lack of knowledge and treatment fit for female anatomy, women’s concerns are often disregarded.

Though this disparity in research and development does not have its origins in 1977, a notable instance of the exclusion women face in research and development within health care occurred in 1977 when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned women of childbearing age from participating in their clinical drug trials due to concerns regarding childbearing complications and hormone fluctuations [2]. As a result, many pharmaceutical products were produced without any knowledge of the effects such products would have on women. The policy was not reversed until 1994 after more than two decades of pharmaceutical research excluding women.

As seen above, the withdrawal rate for women’s drugs since 1980 is more than triple that of men’s drug withdrawals [1]. The implications of this policy threaten the safety of women when consuming pharmaceutical products and have led to disparities in further medical research regarding differences in effects of certain conditions such as atypical heart attack symptoms that are less well-known than those of men [2].

Along similar lines, a New York Times opinion writer, Jessica Grose, published an article in 2023 entitled, “Women’s Health Care Is Underfunded. The Consequences Are Dire.” citing notable diseases in which research for the effects on the female body were not accounted for, leading to life-threatening consequences. Two notable diseases, hyperemesis gravidarum and postpartum psychosis, have been understudied, underfunded, and largely unacknowledged by research corporations, costing women their health and sometimes, their lives [3].

In accordance with Grose’s studies, Figure 2 reveals the effects of different diseases on different genders, further emphasizing the need for increased efforts to research and develop women-centric studies [2].

Another disparity that women face in medical settings involves the intersections of race and class. According to a 2019 Duke study, 1 out of every 5 women felt that their healthcare needs were neglected or dismissed. The dismissal of care results in late diagnosis and a lack of care at needed times, culminating in the overall decline of health that could have been avoided otherwise. Not to mention, in relation to maternal healthcare in America, “Native American and Black women are two to three times more likely to die from a pregnancy-related cause than White women [1]." Additionally, despite having minimal difference in incidence rates of breast cancer, “Black women have a 42% higher mortality rate than white women” [2].

The racial, gender, and class-based disparities exist due to implicit and explicit biases towards categories of difference. Such categories of difference can be seen as power structures within society, thus, due to their weight as institutions of power, they can cause discriminatory actions towards women, women of varying races and ethnicities, low-income women, and LGBTQ women, limiting their access to timely care, correct diagnosis, accommodating surgeries, and adequate remedies.

These disparities addressed are not the only disparities that women face in medical settings. To learn more about the disparities that women face in the medical sphere, a new book published by Elizabeth Comen, MD, entitled, “All in Her Head: The Truth and Lies Early Medicine Taught Us About Women’s Bodies and Why It Matters Today” details inequalities faced in Women’s Health Care in greater detail [4].

Furthermore, how does all of this relate to the national and global economies? To understand the role that women play in America’s economy is to understand the need to address such disparities and invest in the growth of women's healthcare.

According to a recent case study by Deloitte entitled, “The future of health is female: The impact of women + health on our society,” it is noted that “women drive 70-80% of all consumer purchasing decisions across industries [2]." Women make up 60% of the paid workforce in America and 65% of the unpaid workforce as mothers and familial guardians [2]. Thus, as women occupy this crucial role in the health of the country's economy, their health and wellbeing must be prioritized to optimize familial success and workplace productivity.

Keeping the role of women in the economy in mind, in returning to MckInsey’s analysis, the study further illuminates two incentives for investing in Women’s Health Care. The first reads, “Investing in women’s health shows positive return on investment (ROI): for every $1 invested, approximately $3 is projected in economic growth.” Another follows, “Addressing the gap could generate the equivalent impact of 137 million women accessing full-time positions by 2040.” Closing the gap in women’s healthcare would lead to healthier women, which would generate greater productivity, enabling a potential addition of 1.7% to GDP [1].

Solving the problem will take more than just investing, it will also take understanding. To more adequately work to close the healthcare gap that women, women of varying races and ethnicities, low-income women, and LGBTQ women face begins with a greater understanding of the root causes of the issue: racism and sexism, that lead to both implicit and explicit bias in the healthcare industry. Understanding these causes, alongside the historical exclusion of women from medical research and the need for more diverse management teams can help policies addressing the social needs of women’s health to be pushed through.

Once such understandings have been reached, investing can commence. Furthermore, investing in and generating funding for women’s healthcare for gender-specific research and clinical solutions can not only improve women’s health, but boost economic growth, given women’s role in the workforce and their role as consumers.

Addressing Gaps in Women’s Health Care: How Investments Create Space to Boost Economies

Recent Posts

Comments