intersting article on how health has ignored sex and the consequences of gender roles

[VelvetChairGirl]

I was looking for the 5 definers of sex that lord Winston talked about in his short interview on GBnews (as posted on here a few days ago).

I didnt find the answers about what the other 3 where he didnt get a chance to mention, but I stumbled upon this interesting article I felt needed to be shared, I am not sure if this is one of the things used in the book Invisible Women but it does contain some of the same data.

stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-sex-and-gender-which-are-not-the-same-thing-influence-our-health.html

It is an interesting article and shows why it is so misogynistic to conflate sex and gender. To make things about a poorly defined sense of gender when we have so much evidence that women's bodies are what causes them to loose out is to show a massive disregard for female bodied people.

You'd never know it because it's rare to see but there is a commitment to not conflate sex and gender when publishing clinical trials etc.

Heidari S, Babor T, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M. Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Research Integrity and Peer Review. 2016;1:2.

researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6

That is really interesting. The conflation of sex and gender really does nobody any good (except white middle class men - aka default humans)

Would be great if medical studies could consider a bit more complexity. I suspect that explicitly breaking these social factors out in the results (eg caring responsibilities, social support, social status, working status) would help us to better understand (and hence improve) outcomes for lots of other groups of people as well as women.

But why do the authors still tie these social factors to sex - despite pointing out that it's more complex than that?? Such a small step to see these social factors as independent of sex but still hugely important.