Facebook Pixel

Sexx Matters*--Editorial

Rate This

--Pre-1986: Women were not routinely included in clinical trials. There was an assumption that results of research on men could be extrapolated to women.
--1986: The NIH established a policy requiring the inclusion of women in clinical research.
--1990: A GAO audit identified that women were still not adequately represented in clinical trials. Why? The policy was vague, inconsistently applied and poorly communicated.
--1992: Another GAO audit found that while women were included in trials, they were underrepresented. (Oops..must have been another misinterpretation.)

--1993: The FDA issued new guidelines for requiring inclusion of women in clinical trials and required gender specific analysis of the data.
--2000: A GAO audit revealed that although women were included and adequately represented, studies were not adequately designed to permit analysis by sex.
--2001: A GAO audit of the FDA showed that 30 percent of studies failed to fulfill requirements for outcome data by sex. Clinical significance? Eight of 10 drugs withdrawn from the market caused more adverse effects in women.
--2001: The Institute of Medicine published Exploring the Biological Contribution to Human Health: Does Sex Matter?

Yes, Virginia...sex matters. But, it is 2010 and women are still under-represented and comprise only 39 percent of the participants in Phase 1 trials, the phase that assesses the safety, tolerability, and dosing of a drug.

Not outraged yet? What if you knew that:

--During the height of the H1N1 vaccine shortage, researchers identified that women could be immunized with a lower dose of the vaccine and get adequate protection since we have a more pronounced immune response. Great news, right? Regulators were informed, but said they were too busy to consider this information in the vaccination guidelines.
--Prominent researchers were recently discouraged from submitting any new grant proposals to the NIH for research on sex differences of mental health disorders.

Add a Comment1 Comments

EmpowHER Guest

Dr. Georgiou may know a lot about medicine, but she is worfully ignorant about the U. S. Constitution. Her statement that ERA is not needed "because women still need equal due process rights; the 14th Amendment takes care of that." She fails to understand that the ERA is needed to guarantee for women the right to equal protection of the law that men have received as a constitutional birthright ever since the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 including references to "male citizens" meant to deliberately exclude women. Without the prohibition against sex discrimination AGAINST WOMEN that would finally include women in full citizenship implied by that 14th Amendment guarantee, none of the specifics of equality cited by Dr. Georgiou, even if nominally addressed by statutes, can be effective. Dr. Georgiou needs to learn the facts and broaden her pespective beyong health issues before she presumes to inform others. --Twiss Butler www.equality4women.org

October 6, 2010 - 9:50pm
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you agree to EmpowHER's terms of service and privacy policy
Add a Comment

We value and respect our HERWriters' experiences, but everyone is different. Many of our writers are speaking from personal experience, and what's worked for them may not work for you. Their articles are not a substitute for medical advice, although we hope you can gain knowledge from their insight.

Political Issues

Get Email Updates

Health Newsletter

Receive the latest and greatest in women's health and wellness from EmpowHER - for free!