[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 60 (Tuesday, May 10, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4863-S4864]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WOMEN'S HEALTH OFFICE ACT
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, this is National Women's Health Week, and
it is certainly fitting to take stock of both our successes in
promoting women's health while looking at the challenges ahead.
Historically, women's health care needs have been poorly understood.
While the obvious differences between the sexes are indisputable, it
was assumed that those differences had limited implications, resulting
in women being systematically excluded from health research studies.
Too often, only men were studied and considered the health care
``norm'' for both genders.
Of course, for a few diseases such as ovarian or breast cancer, the
study of women was an absolute requirement. However, for so many
others, women were excluded. Sometimes we heard that it would cost more
to include women in trials because more participants would need to be
enrolled--since research results would need to be analyzed separately
for both men and women. That certainly sounds like a recognition that
men and women can differ quite substantially.
As researchers have looked, they have found so many times where a
single difference between the sexes has so many other ramifications for
health and disease. For example, because every child is genetically
unique and different from both parents, childbearing requires the
ability of a woman to have periods of lowered immunity in her
reproductive tract. This is also a major contributor to her
susceptibility to gynecologic infections, and it helps explain why
women are much more susceptible to sexually transmitted diseases. This
is critical knowledge when one is trying to protect women from HIV and
that knowledge simply must be reflected in strategies for protecting
women.
Remember that men and women differ genetically--that was obvious from
our earliest study of genetics . . . an entire chromosome is different.
As we learn more about the human genome, and how genes interact, we
doubtless will discover more differences which must be reflected in
health decisions. There can be no doubt that whenever we fail to see
women properly represented in health research, we risk causing major
harm. One recent example is so notable.
When one federally funded study examined the ability of aspirin to
prevent heart attacks in 20,000 medical doctors, all of whom were men,
physicians were left to assume that the protective effect may apply to
women as well. So for years physicians have been left to assume that
aspirin had the same effect in women but we simply didn't know. Yet we
do know that the pattern of heart disease in women is different than in
men. Heart disease develops a bit later about 10 years later. Despite
this, heart disease kills more women than men, more than either breast
or ovarian cancer! So in March of this year when we finally learned
that aspirin does not have the same effect in women as in men, we saw
more evidence that assuming there is no difference between men and
women is no substitute for conducting proper research.
[[Page S4864]]
Sex differences in health are so numerous. Osteoporosis is far more
common in women--as is depression. While women have the ability to
modulate our immunity to bear a child, it is ironic that we suffer far
more autoimmune disease than men. For example, 9 of 10 lupus sufferers
are women! Drugs and alcohol affect us differently from men as well
even a woman's response to anesthesia is different than a man's. So one
can see it is a critical problem when we fail to discover such
differences. It compromises the quality of health care for more than
half of all Americans!
Many of us have worked for years to achieve equal representation of
women in health research. Since 1990 when the Society for Women's
Health Research was founded, we have had a voice to help us in our
effort to promote the inclusion of women in health care research, and
to educate all of us about sex differences in health and disease. The
Society is to be commended for its tireless efforts to increase our
understanding of sex differences.
Today we know that equity does not yet exist in health care, and we
have a long way to go. Progress has been made--we have seen an Office
of Women's Health established at the NIH, and the research at the
Institutes has reflected that representation. In fact, we see that not
only women but also children and minorities are being better
represented in health research today.
I introduced the Women's Health Office Act to help address the sex-
based disparities in research and policy. This legislation provides
permanent authorization for offices of women's health in five Federal
agencies: the Department of Health and Human Services; the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention; the Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality; the Health Resources and Services Administration; and the Food
and Drug Administration. Currently, only two women's health offices in
the Federal Government have statutory authorization: the Office of
Research on Women's Health at the National Institutes of Health and the
Office for Women's Services within the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration.
With some offices established, but not authorized, the needs of women
could be compromised without the consent of Congress. We must create
statutory authority for these offices, to ensure that health policy
flows from fact, not assumption. Improving the health of American women
requires a far greater understanding of women's health needs and
conditions, and ongoing evaluation in the areas of research, education,
prevention, treatment and the delivery of services and passage of this
legislation will help ensure that.
I call on my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation,
which will ensure better health for our mothers, our sisters, our
daughters, here and abroad.
Thank you, Mr. President.
____________________