.png)
Today, I stumbled upon a mind-boggling fact. In 2017, a team of scientists led by Professor Richard Melloni at Northeastern University in the United States embarked on a series of experiments. Their target? Hamster aggression. Yes, you read that right.
This 'study' was primarily fixated on the effects of anabolic steroids and drugs like cocaine on aggressive behaviour in hamsters, with the audacious aim of drawing parallels to human adolescent behaviour. The experiments involved injecting these substances into hamsters and observing their interactions with other animals in controlled conditions to measure aggression levels.
The mind-blowing part? This research, funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), spanned a whopping 20 years and received over $3 MILLION in funding during that time.
Let that sink in: $3 million to study drugged hamsters' aggression.
It's beyond belief!
This revelation feels like a slap in the face when considering the glaring gaps in research funding for women's health, particularly menopause. Menopause affects 49% of the human population, and the health risks associated with it—such as bone health issues, cognitive decline, and cardiovascular problems—are significant and demand far greater attention. Despite this, the funds that could be used to better understand and address these issues were allocated to watching rodents fight.
It's not only absurd but reflects an ongoing problem: women's health is too often sidelined.
For menopause alone, the need for more comprehensive research is dire, particularly in areas like hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and its long-term effects. There are still so many unanswered questions that could significantly enhance the quality of life for millions of women. Yet, here we are, learning that millions of dollars went into observing aggression in animals under the influence of cocaine and steroids.
It's not just maddening; it's a tragic misallocation of resources that could have been used to address pressing health issues.
And this isn't just about menopause or hamster experiments; it ties into a broader, systemic issue. I recently discovered that for decades, clinical trials for medications were conducted predominantly on men, largely excluding women from the research process. This gender disparity persisted until legislative changes and persistent advocacy finally led to a shift in the 1990s when including both genders in clinical trials became standard practice.
But think about the implications of that long-standing imbalance: entire generations of medications were developed and tested without accounting for gender-specific differences, leaving women's health needs woefully underrepresented. Even now, while strides have been made, there's still work to do to ensure equitable representation in research and clinical trials.
What's even more frustrating is that for the studies we do have on women's health, there often needs to be more follow-up, such as comprehensive meta-analyses that synthesise findings across studies to provide clearer insights. Without this synthesis, we're left with scattered, inconclusive data that doesn't help women, doctors, or policymakers make informed decisions. It's a disheartening reality that underscores the urgent need for more thorough research.
So, while we're still fighting for the research we desperately need, millions of dollars went toward monitoring how drugged animals behave. It's infuriating and emblematic of how skewed research priorities can be. If funding like this doesn't make you question how health research is prioritized, I don't know what will.
Any thoughts on how we can push for better research priorities? It's clear that women's health deserves so much more than what it's currently getting.
Michela Sborchia
© 2024 Michela Sborchia. All rights reserved
Comments