Did you know that it wasn’t until 1993 that women were properly included in medical clinical trials? Yes, you read that right. Before then, the medical community essentially treated us like mysterious, hormone-riddled enigmas that were just too complicated to study. So, they didn’t. And because of that, the world—especially the medical world—has been pretty much built for men. Let’s dive into this little-known fact and why it’s a big deal.
The World Before 1993: Where Women Were “Too Complex”
For most of the 20th century, medical research was focused almost exclusively on men. Why? Because women, with our pesky monthly cycles and hormonal fluctuations, were considered too “variable” to study. That’s right—researchers decided it was easier to just exclude us altogether rather than deal with the complexities of the female body. The result? We’ve got a healthcare system that was designed for men, by men, and based on men.
Now, I’m not saying that men don’t deserve good healthcare (they absolutely do), but when women make up 51% of the population, maybe—just maybe—we should be represented in the research that informs the medical treatments we all rely on. Instead, we’ve been stuck with drugs, therapies, and medical advice that may or may not work for us because they weren’t tested on us. If that doesn’t make you want to roll your eyes into the next century, I don’t know what will.
The NIH Revitalization Act of 1993: Better Late Than Never?
So, what changed in 1993? The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Revitalization Act was passed, mandating the inclusion of women in clinical research. This was a huge win—finally, we were going to be included! But hold your applause, because even though this was a step in the right direction, it’s not like everything was magically fixed overnight.
Even with this mandate, many studies continued to underrepresent women, and when we were included, the results weren’t always analyzed separately by gender. Dr. Bernadine Healy, the first woman to head the NIH and a vocal advocate for women’s health, fought tirelessly to highlight the importance of gender-specific research. She argued that understanding how diseases and treatments affect men and women differently is crucial for effective healthcare . Unfortunately, her work was only the beginning, and the road to equal representation has been slow and bumpy.
The Fallout: What We Don’t Know Could Hurt Us
Here’s where things get dicey. Since women were largely excluded from medical trials for so long, there’s a lot we still don’t know about how certain drugs and treatments affect us. For example, did you know that women are more likely than men to suffer adverse drug reactions? That’s because many medications were tested primarily on men, so the dosages and side effects we experience can be different—and sometimes more severe.
Let’s talk about heart disease, the leading cause of death for women in the U.S. For years, it was thought of as a “man’s disease,” and most of the research reflected that bias. Dr. Nanette Wenger, a pioneering cardiologist, has been vocal about how this male-centric approach has led to misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment of heart disease in women . We now know that women often present with different symptoms than men and that treatments developed for men don’t always work as well for us.
Then there’s the issue of pain management. Women are more likely to experience chronic pain, yet we’re less likely to receive adequate pain treatment. Why? Because the research on pain and pain relief has largely been conducted on men. Dr. Fiona Blyth, an epidemiologist and pain researcher, has emphasized that gender differences in pain perception and response to painkillers are real and need to be addressed in medical research.
The (Slow) Road to Change
So, what’s being done about this? There’s been a growing push to include more women in clinical trials and to analyze data separately by gender. The FDA and other regulatory bodies are finally recognizing that women aren’t just men with different parts—we have unique health needs that require tailored research.
However, progress is slow, and there’s still a lot we don’t know. We need more female scientists, researchers, and advocates like Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Nanette Wenger, and Dr. Fiona Blyth pushing for change. Because until we have a healthcare system that fully understands and addresses the needs of women, we’ll continue to be at a disadvantage.
The Takeaway: We Deserve Better
Here’s the bottom line, ladies: the medical world has been playing catch-up for decades, and we’re still not where we need to be. But that doesn’t mean we have to sit back and accept it. We need to advocate for ourselves, ask the tough questions, and demand better research that includes us—because our health is too important to be treated as an afterthought.
At RitmoFit XP, we’re all about empowering women to take control of their health and wellness. That’s why we incorporate the latest research on women’s health into our programs, ensuring that what we offer is designed specifically for you. Ready to join us on this journey? Sign up for our classes and programs, and let’s take charge of our health together—because we deserve nothing less.
Citations:
Dr. Bernadine Healy, "Gender-Specific Research and the NIH Revitalization Act," Journal of Women’s Health, 1994.
Dr. Nanette Wenger, "Cardiovascular Disease in Women: An Emerging Epidemic," Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2002.
Dr. Fiona Blyth, "Gender Differences in Pain Perception and Management," Pain Medicine Journal, 2010.
So next time you’re prescribed a new medication or hear about the latest health craze, remember to ask, “But what about the women?” Because it’s about time the medical world started giving us the attention we deserve.
Comments