logo
The Women's Health Initiative Is the Latest DOGE Victim—What This Means for Midlife Women's Health

The Women's Health Initiative Is the Latest DOGE Victim—What This Means for Midlife Women's Health

Yahoo24-04-2025

In a country where women were essentially left out of major health research and clinical trials until the 1990s, we can't afford to widen the women's health research gap any further. However this week, the Trump administration's 'Department of Government Efficiency' majorly slashed research budgets for the National Institutes of Health-funded Women's Health Initiative (WHI), which is the largest and longest running project of its kind devoted to women's health, from researching menopause treatments and mental health to more.
Ongoing research with the WHI has supported more than 42,000 female study participants, ranging from ages 78 to 108; some people have even been involved in the large-scale study since the early 1990s, during which over 160,000 women participated. The initiative has been responsible for diagnosing 38,000 cancer cases and documenting 38,000 cardiovascular events, according to the WHI.
More from Flow Space
I Tried an Under-$25 Skincare Line Created Especially for Menopausal Skin
The irony is that cutting funding for decades worth of research in progress isn't by any means efficient, as the DOGE claims.
'When you think about cutting waste and fraud, it's actually creating more waste if you're not allowing people to finish the projects that they started,' says Dr. Judith Joseph, chair of the Women in Medicine Initiative at Columbia University, assistant clinical professor at NYU Langone Medical Center, psychiatrist, researcher, and author of the book High Functioning. Joseph, who has worked on both her own clinical research in a New York City-based lab that she leads and NIH-funded research throughout her career, emphasizes that cutting research short does not allow researchers to reach the essential conclusions they need to about health conditions.
What else do you need to know about the implications of these research budget cuts, and is there anything that can be done about it? The answer is yes, but it needs to be an all-hands-on-deck situation.
The landmark WHI study has been so monumental for understanding risk factors for certain outcomes, including heart disease in women, dementia in women, osteoporosis in women, fibroids, postpartum depression and mental health conditions related to perimenopause and menopause, says Joseph. And the point it to use this data for preventative healthcare—not just being reactive to a dementia diagnosis or a heart attack once it happens.
Because women were not studied in major research trials until the early 1990s, there's still a gap in understanding everything we need to know about these conditions. So much funding is allocated to treat certain conditions, but more needs to continue to be allocated toward research to better understand the preventative side of medicine and relieve so much strain on the healthcare system.
'Half the population is understudied, and we're missing opportunities to cut waste to the healthcare system,' adds Joseph.
It's crucial for research to be done, specifically in women as opposed to just in men and the data estimated or adapted for women, as it had been for decades. Certain health conditions, especially as women age, have different symptoms and effects in women than in men.
'We know that women experience more frailty than men, have more cognitive loss, present with cardiovascular disease differently than men and make up more of nursing home populations,' says Dr. Mindy Goldman, a San Francisco-based OB-GYN and chief clinical officer at Midi Health. 'Cutting off funding for critical women's health research means less understanding of cardiovascular disease in women, osteoporosis in women and cognitive loss in women.'
These cuts to 30 years worth of key data are not only harmful to women's health but also diminish women's role in society, Goldman adds. But there are a few things we can do to potentially make a difference.
Contact Your State Legislators
'It's true that the NIH is the largest funder of medical research in the country—but that doesn't mean that there aren't other avenues to pursue,' explains Jennifer Weiss-Wolf, an attorney, author, executive director of the Birnbaum Women's Leadership Center at NYU School of Law and Flow Space Advisory Council member. 'States are really a ripe place for these opportunities and changes, too.'
It's never a waste of time to make your voice heard by your state senators and representatives.
There are already 21 bills about women's midlife and menopausal health that have been introduced in 13 states, Weiss-Wolf says. The bills involve access to menopause care, the affordability of menopause care coverage and menopause education for clinical professionals and menopause awareness for the general public.
Another huge goal is funding more research through state governments and state university systems so that they can still continue research outside of the NIH, shares Weiss-Wolf. Along with Let's Talk Menopause and Dr. Mary Claire Haver, Weiss-Wolf created a Citizen's Guide to Menopause Advocacy that you can follow with links to to write to or call your senators, representatives and governor about how this research and healthcare impacts your life and is necessary to your well-being.
Get Involved in Research and Health Organizations on a Grassroots Basis
Patients are crucial to research initiatives, especially when it comes to clinical trials, which act as treatments for diseases like cancer, for example, emphasizes Joseph.
'If we didn't have clinical research, people would not be surviving cancer,' she says. That said, patients play an important role and have a voice in the research landscape. You can go to clinicaltrials.gov to get involved in a study pertinent to your condition, and you can even get involved in research at local universities, suggests Joseph.
So many organizations advocate for women's health too, from the American Heart Association to the Menopause Society, Joseph points out. You can get involved with any one of these organizations on a grassroots level and make sure your or your loved one's story is heard.
'Your condition matters, and there are human stories behind these conditions,' Joseph says.
Talk to Your Own Healthcare Providers
For anyone who receives healthcare through a university hospital system, your provider could be involved in key research. Joseph recommends asking your clinician how their work, if they also do research, may be impacted and what changes might affect patients.
It's important to know whether or not you'll still be able to see this practitioner who already has been working with you. Some details about the research budget cuts remain unknown, so it's important to do some digging about how this can impact you on a local level.
Know That Individual Companies Can Still Fund Private Research
Along with university systems, individual pharmaceutical and supplement companies need to continue crucial women's health research, says Dr. Alyssa Dweck, chief medical officer of Bonafide Health and Menopause Society-certified practitioner. Her company, Bonafide, runs privately-funded research in conjunction with academic institutions about the safety and efficacy of women's health and menopausal wellness products.
Because the academic institutions and state and federal governments are not funding the research, it can still continue, according to Dweck. 'It opens up a huge opportunity to fill what might turn out to be a void in the study of hormonal health.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

HHS brings back hundreds of staff following force reduction in latest rehiring move
HHS brings back hundreds of staff following force reduction in latest rehiring move

Yahoo

time37 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

HHS brings back hundreds of staff following force reduction in latest rehiring move

FIRST ON FOX: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is rehiring more than 450 previously fired employees belonging to multiple divisions within the agency's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), according to an HHS official familiar with the matter. The rehired workers come from four different operational divisions within the CDC: the National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and Tuberculosis Prevention (NCHHSTP); the National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH); the Immediate Office of the Director (IOD), and the Global Health Center (GHC). The move to bring these employees back follows the Trump administration's sweeping efforts to reorganize HHS and its sub-agencies during its first few months, which reports said included as many as 10,000 layoffs at various health agencies. It also follows multiple actions by the Trump administration following those layoffs to rehire some of the HHS staffers who were initially let go, such as those within the CDC's World Trade Center Health Program (WTCHP), the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the National Institutes of Health. Hhs Says It Will Cut Workforce By 10K, Saving $1.8B Annually "Personnel that should not have been cut, were cut," HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. told CBS News in April. "We're reinstating them. And that was always the plan. Part of the – at DOGE, we talked about this from the beginning, is we're going to do 80% cuts, but 20% of those are going to have to be reinstated, because we'll make mistakes." NCHHSTP will see the greatest number of its workers rehired out of the four divisions, with 214 returning. This HHS division consists of several smaller groups, including the Division of HIV Prevention, which media reports said was cut in half by the Trump administration. Read On The Fox News App NCEH will see the next greatest number of returned employees, with 158 coming back. NCEH consists of multiple groups, including one titled the Division of Environmental Health Science and Practice, which the Trump administration initially eliminated altogether as part of its reforms. How A Doge Review Can Actually Improve The Programs That Fight Hiv/aids IOD will see the third most returning with 71 and CDC's Global Health Center will see the fewest employees return out of the four divisions with 24 rehired workers. HHS is just one of several agencies that have rehired employees following reductions in force spurred by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The Internal Revenue Service, the Food and Drug Administration, the State Department, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development have all taken actions to rehire employees who were initially fired as a result of the reduction in force, per the Washington Post. "Under Secretary Kennedy's leadership, the nation's critical public health functions remain intact and effective. The Trump administration is committed to protecting essential services – whether it's supporting coal miners and firefighters through NIOSH, safeguarding public health through lead prevention, or researching and tracking the most prevalent communicable diseases," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said. "HHS is streamlining operations without compromising mission-critical work. Enhancing the health and well-being of all Americans remains our top priority."Original article source: HHS brings back hundreds of staff following force reduction in latest rehiring move

Lawmakers urge Trump administration to clamp down on illicit GLP-1 sales
Lawmakers urge Trump administration to clamp down on illicit GLP-1 sales

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Lawmakers urge Trump administration to clamp down on illicit GLP-1 sales

A bipartisan group of congressional lawmakers is calling on the Trump administration to address the continued sale of illicit, compounded GLP-1 products, warning that consumers may be accessing these drugs without knowing the product could be fraudulent. North Carolina Reps. Brad Knott (R) and Deborah Ross (D) wrote to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Marty Makary, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Attorney General Pam Bondi, imploring them to end the sale of 'counterfeit, research-grade and illegal copycats' of popular GLP-1 medications. When the commercial, branded versions of tirzepatide and semaglutide were declared to no longer be in shortage, compounding pharmacies were disallowed from continuing to sell compounded versions of those drugs. While telehealth companies have transitioned away from compounded versions, state officials have warned that 'copycat' drugs have proliferated in the months since the shortages ended. Earlier this year, the National Association of Attorneys General sent a letter to the FDA to warn that 'counterfeit GLP-1 drugs have infiltrated the U.S. supply chain from China, Turkey, India, and other foreign sources.' According to the attorneys general, online retailers sell the active ingredient for the GLP-1s under the claim that they're 'for research purposes only' or 'not for human consumption' while still marketing them to consumers on social media. The FDA issued a warning in April, telling consumers to not take counterfeit Ozempic. The drug's manufacturer, Novo Nordisk, had alerted the agency that several hundred units of counterfeit product had entered the U.S. supply chain. At the time, the FDA said it was aware of six adverse events associated with the counterfeit products. Though the FBI issued a public service warning soon after the letter from the attorneys general was sent, Knott and Ross said raising public awareness wasn't enough. 'FDA has received hundreds of reports of adverse events, even some resulting in the hospitalization and death of patients who used illicit GLP-1s,' they wrote. 'This is likely a significant underreporting of adverse events experienced by patients because federal law does not require state-licensed pharmacies that are not outsourcing facilities to submit adverse events to FDA.' The lawmakers asked that the Trump Cabinet members fully use 'the legal tools at your discretion' to further detect illicit and enforce U.S. drug standards. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) sent his own letter to Cabinet members, calling for enhanced collaboration among agencies like FDA, U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Justice Department in order to stop the counterfeit products from reaching the supply chain in the first place. The Hill has reached out to the agencies named in the letter for comment. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Most oppose GOP policy bill: Survey
Most oppose GOP policy bill: Survey

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Most oppose GOP policy bill: Survey

More than half of voters oppose the domestic policy bill that President Trump has pushed Republicans in Congress to pass by July 4, according to a poll released Wednesday. Quinnipiac University's national survey found less than a third of registered voters surveyed support Trump's agenda-setting One Big Beautiful Bill Act, while 53 percent oppose the legislation. Twenty percent have no opinion on the megabill. The bill was overwhelmingly opposed by Democrats (89 percent) and independents (57 percent), while two-thirds of Republicans said they support the bill. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes major cost-cutting reforms to Medicaid that experts say will lead to millions of people losing coverage by 2034. It would force states to implement new work requirements for Medicaid recipients, but supporters of the bill say that will mostly affect people who entered the U.S. illegally and 'able-bodied' adults who should be working. The Quinnipiac poll found overwhelming support for Medicaid, though, as 87 percent of respondents said they oppose cuts to the health care program. Just 10 percent said federal Medicaid spending should be cut, while 47 percent said funding should be increased and 40 percent said it should stay the same. 'With Medicaid's future as a health care safety net for millions suddenly uncertain, voters make it clear they want the 60-year-old program for those in need to be handled with care,' Quinnipiac polling analyst Tim Malloy said. Twenty-one percent of Republicans surveyed said they think federal funding for Medicaid should increase, 56 percent said it should stay about the same, and 18 percent said it should be cut. Nearly 70 percent of Democrats and 47 percent of independents surveyed think federal funding for Medicaid should increase, while 2 percent of Democrats and 11 percent of independents think it should decrease. The Big Beautiful Bill ACT narrowly passed the House last month and is under review in the Senate, where some Republicans have argued that it doesn't cut federal spending enough. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store