~ archived since 2018 ~

Can someone find me stats on whether medical tests are now done on women as much as they are done on men?

TrainingGap2103

March 25, 2026

42 upvotes

/r/MensRights

/r/MensRights/comments/1s3mvi3/can_someone_find_me_stats_on_whether_medical/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Can someone find me stats on whether medical tests are now done on women as much as they are done on men?
Author	TrainingGap2103
Upvotes	42
Comments	34
Date	March 25, 2026 8:49 PM UTC (3 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1s3mvi3/can_someone_find_me_stats_on_whether_medical/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/can-someone-find-me-stats-on-whether-medical-tests.1576395 https://theredarchive.com/post/1576395

Comments

[–]_WutzInAName_ 33 points34 points35 points 3 months ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]Choosemyusername 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]beigewoodtable 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]_WutzInAName_ 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

What I said was 100% accurate. Your comment is guesswork that ignores the overwhelming body of evidence demonstrating that women’s health has been valued more than men’s health throughout the Western world for a long time.

That evidence (with sources) includes but is not limited to the following:

• ⁠"In 2020, the federal government set out its public health goals for 2030. They include 42 goals for children, 29 for women, and 18 for LGBTQ+ people. For men, there are four... There are 44 preventive health-care interventions (excluding vaccinations) that are fully covered under the Affordable Care Act, a major public health advance of the last decade. Of these, 20 apply to both sexes and 23 apply only to women (including 12 for those who are pregnant). There is only one for men."

Source: https://www.phillytrib.com/commentary/men-are-having-a-health-crisis-why-aren-t-we-paying-attention/article_0e306c78-b35d-5452-a92a-445c7242072e.html

• ⁠"In 1994, the NIH sponsored 95 male-only studies, and 219 female-only studies. By 1997, the disparity had widened to 244 all-male studies vs. 740 all-female studies... between 1995 and 2020, women comprised, on average, 57.9% of participants in NIH-funded clinical trials each year, whereas men comprised, on average, 40.3% of participants each year, and 1.9% of participants were listed as unknown."

Source: https://jameslnuzzo.substack.com/p/there-is-still-no-womens-health-crisis

• ⁠The U.S. National Library of Medicine has 63 journals dedicated to women's health, but only 6 journals dedicated to men's health.

• ⁠The U.S. federal government has 10 women's health offices and committees, but 0 for men's health.

• ⁠During the past 20 years, the NIH has spent about twice as much on women's health as men's health.

• ⁠UN and WHO databases consistently mention women's health more often than men's health in their health databases.

• ⁠Throughout the developed world, you’ll find far more offices, organizations, initiatives, and charities dedicated to women’s health than men’s health.

• ⁠Men more often get stuck with society’s most dangerous jobs and make up more than 90% of workplace fatalities, more than 90% of bystander interventions, and the vast majority of suicides.

• ⁠Women outlive men in every country on the planet.

Source (with links to many other sources): https://www.reddit.com/r/TheTinMen/s/mQ1anrDlha

[–]Time-Dot-6608 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Some of these sources (and the framing) in Nuzzo’s article also have bias and intentional framing (which is obviously going to occur when anyone looks to research to “capture” a perspective. Looking at research since 94 (when is around when women stopped being excluded from medical trials will obviously have a catch up factor). The suggestion of the disparity of medical journals (which I am sure is the case- as many of them also relate to pregnancy and breastfeeding) seems to be missing a number (that a quick google brought up)

Trends in urology and mens health -international journal of mens social and community health
journal of mens health ⁃ world journal of mens health ⁃ Annals of mens health and wellness ⁃ Psychology of men and masculinities ⁃ Men and masculinities ⁃ International journal for masculinity studie ⁃ The journal of mens studies ⁃ Prostate international ⁃ Prostate cancer and prostatic disease ⁃ International journal of prostate cancer

I don’t disagree that mens health (especially mental health) needs additional funding and research. Many studies within some of the above journals focus on how to get men through the door (whether it be mental health or health follow ups - for high blood pressure/ high cholesterol etc). I thinks discussions around the barriers on that would be helpful too.

Nuzzo also soeaks about the need for seperatist offices for “mens health” and “womens” health services/ and lists different “specialities” underneath them. I agree that there should be an office for mens health (government).

I did worry about his framing of “womens” health problems and mens “health” problems. Ie. He spoke about eating disorders - being the purvey of womens health - which frankly these days concerns all genders,(and with the rise of some influencers etc - is getting worse for young men). If we characterise some issues as “womens” and some as “mens” this can also add to the stigma of helpseeking.

There are obviously some differences where only people born with uteruses or people born with prostates may face.

[+]beigewoodtable -2 points-1 points0 points 3 months ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]_WutzInAName_ 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[+]beigewoodtable -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]_WutzInAName_ 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+]beigewoodtable -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]_WutzInAName_ 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+]beigewoodtable 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Future-Stretch-401 9 points10 points11 points 3 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Time-Dot-6608 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I am presuming they are referring to the general (fact) that there has been additional funding thrown into researching both female (reproductive style stuff- (children/ endo/menopause etc) and additionally testing/ researching things that were traditionally based on a male response. Ex. I believe that many women are turned away from ER when having heart attacks because their symptoms don’t “mirror” what a heart attack looks like- but the “standard” is based on how men present. Similar with neurodivergence, dsm uses /used male presentations as “norm” thus people are not being diagnosed. That being said- this is also an issue for diseases that impact different racial groups at higher rates/ or present differently in those groups/ or has different pain markers. All of these issues are worthy of research.

That being said- there are certainly a vast number of mens issues that should also be having research and funding thrown at them ( of course finding suitable mental health approaches) to combat suicidality, circumcision stopping, and many other male only conditions, or male dominated conditions.

[–]Future-Stretch-401 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

So experiments or studies, rather than tests as in getting your cholesterol checked, or a mammogram? I can probably answer the question but I’m not sure yet what we’re measuring.

In the most absolute sense the difference in life expectancy between men and women reached its low point in 2010 at 4.8 years, but in the last 15 years has increased back to 5.3 years. So if the “correct” balance of spending is the one that provides equal benefit to men and women then in that 15 years not enough money is being spent on men. But probably that is not a good measure since men dying from addiction, violence has a big impact but the solution is not very much to do with medicine. Also imagine if all deaths from male specific diseases could be prevented for $1, it would be stupid to refuse to do this just because we could not reduce female deaths by the same amount (or vice versa).

[–]Time-Dot-6608 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KarateInAPool 8 points9 points10 points 3 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]FeminismIsMyJam -2 points-1 points0 points 3 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That is to compensate for a long historical bias where medical research was based on treating male physiology as the default.

Women were largely excluded from clinical trials until the early 1990s, leading to a massive research gap.

If it seems like modern healthcare hates men but loves women, that’s due to the limited vantage point you have based on what point in time you were born…and if women’s health would ever be concerning enough to you to keep tabs on it.

What you are seeing played out is called “equity.”

I think a lot of you think equity and equality are synonyms, but they aren’t. They are quite different, but they do have interplay with one another.

Think of it as playing a board game with someone that refuses to allow you to have a turn to roll the dice or tap the spinner to see how many spaces you get to move forward.

You sit there getting pissed as you count turn after turn you are being denied, watching your opponent get closer and closer to winning the game.

Let’s say the ahole you are playing against finally decides to let you have your turn going forward, which is great except the ahole is already half way to winning the game while you are still at the starting point.

Have you reached a state of equality, because now you get to have your turn?

Of course not.

You aren’t equal until you get to take all those turns you didn’t get while the a**hole watches you get closer to being caught up with them.

All those turns in a row you are taking is a form of EQUITY to catch you up to where you should have been already had you not been denied your turn for so long. Once you have completed your EQUITY turns you were owed, THEN you both are equal.

But, seriously, healthcare is shit for everyone in the US, but there a couple of facts not being mentioned here but are relevant.

Women are more likely to and will seek out healthcare sooner than men will for the same ailment due to a toxic society that teaches boys/men to tough out pain and not to ask for help because not doing the former and/or doing the latter is viewed as a sign of weakness in men instead of just an intelligent choice based on good ol’ common sense.

BUT

When men and women do seek out healthcare with identical symptoms for the same ailment, it takes women twice as long as men to get a correct diagnosis, because we live in a toxic society that still views women as intelligently inferior to men, unreliable witnesses in their own lives and experiences, and too dramatic and/or emotional to be capable of being objective in their observations and perceptions.

Both of those contribute to the gender gap when it comes to healthcare.

Thank you for coming to my TEDtalk

[–]EmirikolWoker 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The Equity argument (that, as you've outlined, it's OK to entrench disparities in rights if one group feels like the other "deserves" it based on alleged crimes that any given person of the "deserving" group likely didn't commit) relies on the notion that women lack rights that men have. I presume you have a few you'd like to talk about. In the meantime, here are some rights men lack that women have:

Presumed custody of children in the case of divorce. This was exacerbated by the Tender Years Doctrine, spearheaded by first-wave feminist Caroline Norton, and perpetuated by modern feminists through lobbying groups' efforts against rebuttable presumed shared custody.
Seperation of consent to sex from consent to parenthood and the responsibilities thereof, even if the conception came about through statutory rape of the father. I go into greater detail here.
Bodily integrity (i.e., genital mutilation. For girls its a violation of international law; for men it's at best unusual but tolerable, and at worst actively campaigned for as an eroneous means of combating AIDS).
Immunity from accusations of rape. Rape requires the perpetrator to have a penis (and in the UK, only a cisgendered man can commit it), so when women engage in nonconsentual sex with men, he is more likely to be charged than she is. This is mainly the work of Feminist researcher Mary Koss, from whom feminists get the eroneous 1-in-4 statistic. And if a woman gets pregnant from raping a man (or boy), she can sue her rape victim for child support.

Obviously some of these would be best reformed by giving men rights (bodily integrity, for instance), while some would be better served by removing womens' privileges (immunity from accusations of rape). Equal treatment, that's all that's required.

If we want to go to Those Places Over There, the ones that feminists like to point to when they're on the ropes and don't mind implying that brown people are less moral than white people, we see the same things: they mutilate the genitals of girls Over There? They do it to boys too, and that's still legal, just like Over Here. A man can force sex on his wife Over There and it's not rape unless XYZ? A woman Over There can force sex on anyone and it's not considered rape at all, just like Over Here. And so on.

[–]beigewoodtable -2 points-1 points0 points 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aware_Ask_1679 5 points6 points7 points 3 months ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]beigewoodtable -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmirikolWoker 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]beigewoodtable 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmirikolWoker 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]beigewoodtable -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmirikolWoker 1 point2 points3 points 3 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]beigewoodtable -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]EmirikolWoker 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]beigewoodtable -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]tilldeathdoiparty 2 points3 points4 points 3 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]New-Distribution6033 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Time-Dot-6608 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]New-Distribution6033 0 points1 point2 points 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link