“I am a nurse practitioner and see the repercussions of [the gender health gap] daily caring for my female patients.” —Abigale
“Fifty percent of the population suffers through menopause with no real guidance from their doctors because doctors aren’t trained properly.” —Lynn
The gender health gap isn’t just a series of statistics or talking points. For the 27,000 people who recently signed our petition calling for more federal funding for women’s health research, it’s personal. It’s our daily reality.
As partners representing public and consumer sector organizations, we envision a future where research reflects our bodies, and women get the differentiated support they need and deserve. Together with this nonpartisan coalition of petition-signers, we’re urging Congress to pass a federal appropriations bill that adequately funds research on women’s health, ahead of the December 20 budget deadline.
Women make up half of the population and give birth to the future. Yet in 2024, the majority of us still navigate the everyday realities of pervasive gender gaps in health care: from years-long diagnostic delays to barriers to obstetric care, to a profound and systemic lack of knowledge about how our bodies work. Nonetheless, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) allocates just 10.8% of its funding to studying women’s health.
Biology matters in research
These gaps are the driving force behind the Society for Women’s Health Research, a national nonprofit dedicating more than 30 years to advancing women’s health through science, policy, and education while promoting research on sex differences to optimize women’s health. The gender health gap also fuels our mission at Perelel. As an OB/GYN-founded women’s health company, our focus is providing targeted solutions for each unique stage of a woman’s hormonal journey, in a world that would sooner reduce us to “one-size-fits-all” solutions.
We know women’s bodies are not all the same—and that we’re not just “tiny men.” Women are disproportionately, differently, or uniquely impacted by a variety of health conditions including Alzheimer’s disease, autoimmune conditions, cardiovascular diseases, and gynecologic conditions like endometriosis or uterine fibroids. Yet national research funding is not appropriately weighted to support these disparities—and until very recently, the innate biological differences were not a required consideration in clinical research.
Just over three decades ago, clinical researchers were not required to include women and minorities—in fact, from 1977 to 1993 the Food and Drug Administration banned most women of “childbearing potential” from participating in clinical studies. This changed with the passage of the NIH Revitalization Act in 1993—a bipartisan effort led by female federal legislators, and supported by the advocacy community and some members of these federal agencies.
Still, it would take 23 years and several administrations for another crucial milestone in representation. In 2016, the NIH implemented Sex as a Biological Variable as policy—finally requiring researchers to consider differences in sexes when conducting clinical research.
History has forgotten women
While this progress to improve women’s representation in medical research is significant, it continues to be overshadowed. Because of existing disparities in medical research and access to quality health care, women are expected to spend 25% more of their lives in poor health, relative to men. In a 2024 analysis, 64% of common medical interventions were found to disadvantage women due to lower effectiveness, lower access, or both, compared to 10% of men.
And we see more particularly grim ripple effects in the state of maternal health care in this country: In a 2020 World Health Organization report, the United States ranked 55th for maternal mortality, among the highest of developed countries. And recent analyses categorize over 35% of counties in the U.S. as “maternity care deserts”—lacking access to obstetric or reproductive resources.
We are taking critical steps forward, but it will take leaps to make up for a history that has largely forgotten women. This is particularly apparent in the way that even now, national research funding still does not reflect disease burden between sexes. Women make up two-thirds of Alzheimer’s disease cases, yet only 12% of NIH funding for the disease and related dementias is aimed at women.
Cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death for women, yet only one-third of study participants for new treatments are female—and just 4.5% of the NIH’s budget for coronary artery disease supports women-focused research. Ninety-nine percent of studies around biological aging overlook menopause in some capacity, a condition impacting roughly half of the population. And common reproductive conditions like endometriosis and premenstrual dysphoric disorder can take upwards of 10 to 20 years to diagnose appropriately, as diagnostic science in these fields continues lagging.
There is progress, though
All of this certainly fuels the fire to advocate for change—but so too should our optimism for a future with more healthy, supported women. And there is much to be optimistic about. In the year since the announcement of the White House’s Initiative on Women’s Health Research in November 2023, nearly $1 billion in funding opportunities have been unlocked for women’s health across multiple stages—from postpartum support to menopause and midlife care.
In September, First Lady Jill Biden announced that the Department of Defense would commit $500 million of its annual budget to women’s health research, focusing on conditions like ovarian cancer and rheumatoid arthritis. And in October, she announced $110 million in awards from the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health to accelerate transformative research and development. Recipients are focused on research projects across cardiovascular health, endometriosis, obstetric care, and more.
The irony of the persistence and pervasiveness of these gaps is that closing them will benefit all of us. Research highlights just how much investing in women’s health can unlock economic potential: According to a 2024 analysis from the World Economic Forum and the McKinsey Health Institute, for every $1 invested in women’s health, $3 is projected in economic growth—because when women are healthier, they’re even more empowered and productive.
Against the backdrop of one of the most divisive political environments in our lifetimes, this issue is finally something we can—and must—all agree on.
Those who signed our nonpartisan petition to Congress represent diverse backgrounds, experiences, and views. But we’re united in the idea that it shouldn’t take a decade to receive a diagnosis for a debilitating condition that impacts 1 in 10 women, like endometriosis; that when we’re pregnant and postpartum, basic access to obstetric care should be a given; and that women shouldn’t be more prone to treatment side effects simply because medications were only ever trialed on white men.
As lawmakers continue to negotiate the federal budget, let’s join our voices and be clear: In 2025 and beyond, funding women’s health should no longer be up for debate.
Alex Taylor is cofounder and co-CEO of Perelel. Kathryn G. Schubert, MPP, CAE, is president and CEO of the Society for Women’s Health Research.
