Is Science Leaving Women Behind? | Exploring Sex Bias in Research

What happens when science is designed for men? Lisa explores the entrenched sex bias in biomedical research and its impact on women’s health in this solo FAMM Research Series episode.

Timestamps

00:00 – Why this episode is a continuation of the discussion with Dr. Sarah Hill
05:24 – How sex bias in animal studies influences human drug safety
12:15 – Hormone variability as an excuse to exclude women from trials
20:48 – The illusion of inclusion: when women are in studies but not studied properly
28:10 – Lisa critiques a PMDD study for poor timing of hormone sampling
35:02 – What true menstrual cycle–inclusive research design would require
43:15 – Practical implications for clinicians and patients
47:45 – Final thoughts and a call for research reform

Key Takeaways

The persistent sex bias in scientific research results in medications being studied primarily on male physiology, leading to increased adverse effects in women.
Even when women are included in research, menstrual cycle phases are often ignored—diminishing the relevance of findings for real-world female physiology.
Lisa critiques a PMDD study design that tested progesterone on only one day mid-luteal phase, failing to capture the hormonal dynamics that may drive symptoms.
Designing truly sex-aware studies would require incorporating the menstrual cycle, charting, and hormone fluctuations—not just including women nominally.
Understanding sex bias in research empowers practitioners to apply a critical lens when evaluating evidence and making clinical decisions.