Women never experience their health that way. Their lives do not fit neatly into funding categories, medical specialties or isolated episodes of care. Health is a continuum that shifts over time, and the market is finally beginning to recognize its size, scientific potential, and human importance.

A new W Group study, “The Road to the Era of Scale,” provides compelling evidence of that shift. Based on the organization’s tracking of more than 500 funding stories and approximately 164 disclosed equity rounds across 15 categories and more than 30 countries, the report found that women’s health companies raised a record $1.55 billion in disclosed equity in 2025, a 41% increase from 2024.

A Market Is Forming, Not Merely Making Headlines

Investment totals can be deceptive. One enormous financing round can make an entire sector appear stronger, deeper, and more expansive than it is in reality. The significance of the W Group findings is that the capital did not simply increase. It spread over the continuum of women’s health.

Eighty-five women’s health companies raised equity in 2025, the highest annual number in the report’s data. Ten rounds reached at least $50 million, twice as many as in 2024, and the average disclosed round grew 29%, from approximately $13.9 million to $18 million.

Capital also became less concentrated among a few celebrated companies. The three largest rounds represented 39% of disclosed funding in 2024, compared with 32% in 2025. Funding received by companies outside the top three grew by 56%, a potential signal that investors are beginning to support a broader range of clinical needs, technologies and business models.

This is what the development of an investment ecosystem looks like. Capital begins to flow beyond the familiar names and into diagnostics, therapeutics, clinical infrastructure and care models that address different stages of a woman’s life.

Oncology received the largest share of investment, with the report estimating more than $600 million across at least 12 rounds. Fertility and assisted reproductive technology attracted more than $230 million, while maternal health drew approximately $160 million. Menopause, sexual and reproductive health, hormone diagnostics and pelvic health also received new support.

Endometriosis offers a particularly important example. Long dismissed, misunderstood and frequently diagnosed only after years of pain, the condition attracted more than $56 million across five rounds in 2025. The investments spanned therapeutics, diagnostics, and imaging, suggesting that the market is beginning to view endometriosis as a complex clinical challenge requiring multiple forms of innovation.

The same shift can be seen in metabolic health. SheMed’s $50 million Series A helped establish women-specific GLP-1 care as an investable category, reflecting the growing recognition that medicines, monitoring and health interventions must account for biological differences rather than treating the male body as the universal clinical norm.

The Women’s Health Innovation Map Is Becoming Global

The United States remains the dominant destination for women’s health capital, but the sector is no longer exclusively an American story. The US ecosystem also benefits from Organon, one of the few global pharmaceutical companies built around women’s health, whose portfolio, partnerships and commercial reach can help promising science cross the difficult divide between startup innovation and patient access.

Beyond the United States, the report found a broader geographic footprint in 2025, with companies and investors across Europe, Israel, India, Canada and the Middle East contributing to the market’s development.

The UK was the most active non-US ecosystem by company count in the W Group data. British companies were represented across metabolic health, endometriosis, hormone diagnostics, menstrual health, maternal care and other categories.

That entrepreneurial activity is now being matched by policy attention. England published a renewed 10-year Women’s Health Strategy in April 2026, aligned with the country’s broader health plan and centered on giving women greater voice, choice and power in decisions about their care. The government has also outlined efforts to streamline gynecologic care, improve access for conditions such as endometriosis and fibroids and confront inadequate approaches to women’s pain.

This matters because innovation cannot succeed through capital alone. A company may develop a better diagnostic or care platform. Still, its impact will remain limited unless clinicians trust it, health systems can adopt it, reimbursement supports it and patients can reach it. That is the difference between invention and innovation.

France is building another part of that infrastructure. The Île-de-France region has created FemTech Île-de-France, an investment fund targeting €50 million for women’s health innovation, supported by the scientific expertise of Université Paris Cité. Regional plans also include a specialized incubator effort and an interdisciplinary institute that connects research, clinical education, and innovation.

The French initiative is notable because it does not treat funding as an isolated intervention. It attempts to link capital with scientific expertise, company development and a regional health innovation strategy. That combination can help promising startups move beyond an initial idea and toward evidence, regulatory progress and clinical adoption.

France’s women’s health momentum is also reflected in Lyon-based Ziwig Biotech, whose Endotest uses salivary RNA analysis and artificial intelligence to provide a noninvasive diagnostic test for endometriosis, demonstrating how French biotechnology can turn a condition long marked by diagnostic delay into a precision-medicine opportunity.

Israel contributes another important dimension. Its health innovation culture is built upon deep scientific expertise, sophisticated health data, globally connected medical centers and an instinct for solving difficult clinical problems. In 2025, Israel presented a delegation of women’s health innovators at Expo 2025 Osaka, bringing companies and health leaders together with counterparts from Japan, the United States and Mexico.

Israel’s strength in technology, however, coexists with a persistent capital and leadership gap for women. An Israel Innovation Authority report found that women remain approximately one-third of the country’s high-tech workforce, while holding only 17% of senior management positions and 10% of startup CEO roles. The number of women working in research and development has risen sharply, but their representation in entrepreneurship, leadership and investment remains disproportionately low.

That disparity should concern anyone interested in women’s health innovation. When women are missing from the rooms where companies are founded, clinical priorities are established and capital is allocated, unmet needs are more likely to remain unseen.

The opportunity in Israel has two paths to consider. The country can export women’s health technologies to global markets while also ensuring that more women participate as founders, scientific leaders, investors and decision-makers shaping those innovations.

The Most Dangerous Gap Sits in the Middle

The report’s most urgent finding is not the record amount invested. It is the continuing Series A bottleneck.

Approximately 35-40 women’s health companies raised seed or pre-seed capital in each of the two years studied. Only about 20 to 25 reached Series A, and many companies that appeared at the seed stage in 2024 did not return with a Series A round in 2025.

Seed funding can demonstrate that a concept is interesting. Series A funding is often the stage at which a company must demonstrate that the concept can become clinically credible, commercially sustainable, and capable of operating within a complex health system.

This stage requires companies to generate evidence, recruit specialized talent, navigate regulation, protect sensitive patient information and establish a credible path to payment. It is also where founders discover that a technically elegant solution may not fit naturally into clinical workflows or address the daily realities faced by patients and health professionals.

The loss of promising companies at this stage is not only a financial concern. A stalled financing round can mean that an earlier diagnostic never reaches a physician, a new treatment never enters a clinical trial or a more humane care model never reaches the people who need it.

Specialist funds can help bridge that gap, and the report identified at least 11 new investment vehicles launched in 2025 with a women’s health mandate. Pharmaceutical companies and major generalist venture firms are also beginning to participate, an important sign that the sector is moving beyond support from a small circle of committed specialists.

The transition remains incomplete. Women’s health will not achieve sustained growth until generalist investors consider it a standard component of health investing rather than a special theme to be visited only occasionally.

Capital Still Follows Visibility More Than Burden

The funding pattern also reveals an uncomfortable truth. Conditions receiving the most investment are not always those creating the greatest health burden.

The report estimates that women-specific cardiovascular innovation received only about $2 million in dedicated equity during 2025. Dedicated investment addressing the women-specific dimensions of autoimmune disease was effectively absent, even though women account for the great majority of people living with autoimmune conditions. Mental health and pelvic health also remained dramatically underfunded in relation to their effects on people’s lives.

This does not diminish the importance of investment in fertility, oncology, menopause or maternal health. It does show that markets often follow categories that are easier to describe, sell or recognize before addressing conditions that are scientifically complex, poorly diagnosed or fragmented across medical specialties.

Cardiovascular disease in women is not a niche concern. Autoimmune disease is not a specialty-market curiosity. These are major health challenges that demand gender-specific research, earlier diagnosis, appropriate clinical evidence and investors prepared to build a long-term thesis.

Five years ago, menopause appeared similarly overlooked. Greater visibility, advocacy and scientific attention helped change investor understanding. Cardiovascular, autoimmune, and mental health innovation now requires a comparable shift.

Scale Must Mean Better Health Access, Not Only Larger Rounds

Investment is essential, but capital is not the same as care. A successful financing announcement does not reduce the years a woman may wait for an endometriosis diagnosis, reduce the risk of maternal complications or ensure that a new technology reaches people regardless of income or geography.

The true value of capital lies in what it enables people to create. It can help researchers produce evidence, enable founders to recruit skilled R&D teams and give companies time to earn the confidence of regulators, health professionals, payers and patients.

Technology should simplify care rather than introduce another point of friction. Data should help clinicians understand women more fully rather than reproduce historical bias. Artificial intelligence, or its application, should enhance human judgment, not serve as an excuse for health professionals to distance themselves from the people they serve.

The women’s health sector no longer needs to prove that unmet need exists. The record of delayed diagnoses, inadequate research, and dismissed symptoms has been established many times over.

It also no longer needs to prove that successful companies can be created. The expansion of investment across more categories, countries and later-stage rounds shows that women’s health can produce significant scientific advances and scalable enterprises.

The question now is whether investors, policymakers and health systems will support those companies through the winding journey from possibility to practice. That will require patient capital, stronger evidence, workable reimbursement pathways, and a willingness to design care around women’s lives rather than forcing women to navigate systems not designed with them in mind.

The W Group Era of Scale analysis should not be measured only by how much capital enters women’s health. It should be measured by whether that investment leads to earlier diagnoses, better treatments, broader access and less suffering. The true measure of scale will not be dollars invested, but lives improved.

The post Women’s Health Has Entered the Era of Scale. Now Capital Must Catch Up With Care appeared first on Medika Life.

Despite living longer than men, women spend approximately 25 percent more of their lives in poor health, according to research from the World Economic Forum and the McKinsey Health Institute. Across reproduction, brain health, autoimmune conditions, cardiovascular disease, and mental health, the gaps in research, funding, and care are persistent.

That reality provided important context for the launch of The Shift, a new mini documentary series from BBC StoryWorks Commercial Productions, unveiled at HLTH Europe. The series explores issues ranging from reproductive health and cardiovascular disease to autoimmune disorders, menopause, mental health and healthy aging. Through storytelling, the documentary project elevates the experiences of women while highlighting the challenges that persist and the opportunities for progress.

The HLTH EU panel discussion was timed for the opening of The Shift and featured Shahnoor Abbas, Senior Series Developer and Research Development Lead for The Shift at BBC StoryWorks Commercial Productions; Elena Bonfiglioli, General Manager, Global Health & Life Sciences at Microsoft, and Priya Agrawal, MD, Vice President, Global Health Equity and Partnerships at MSD. Their conversation, moderated by Jody Tropeano Greene, Head of Content for HLTH, explored why women’s health remains one of the most significant opportunities for innovation, investment and system improvement.

A Conversation Decades in the Making

The panelists approached the topic from different perspectives, yet a common theme emerged. Women’s health has received increasing attention for more than a decade, but many of the barriers women encounter remain rooted in the design of health systems.

For BBC StoryWorks, The Shift represents an effort to sustain attention on issues that too often receive episodic interest. The series combines personal stories with broader insights into the realities women face across different countries, cultures and stages of life.

The BBC initiative and the HLTH EU mainstage conversation arrive at a time when women’s health is attracting growing attention from investors, entrepreneurs, policymakers and health industry leaders. New companies are emerging. New technologies are being developed. More organizations are recognizing both the societal and economic importance of addressing longstanding gaps in care.

The timing of The Shift is notable. Women’s health innovation is receiving growing attention from investors, entrepreneurs, policymakers and health leaders. Industry analysts estimate that approximately $2 billion was invested in venture-backed women’s health companies across the United States and Europe in 2025, reflecting increased interest in addressing challenges that extend beyond reproductive health to include cardiovascular disease, menopause, mental health, oncology and healthy aging.

The trend signals growing recognition that improving women’s health is a societal imperative and a significant economic opportunity. Yet as the discussion at HLTH Europe made clear, investment and innovation alone will not be enough if women continue to face fragmented systems that are difficult to navigate.

When Access Exists but Navigation Fails

Dr. Agrawal, an obstetrician-gynecologist by training, whose work has included clinical practice in the UK NHS, global pharma brand stewardship in emerging middle-income nations, maternal health awareness initiatives, and the creation of sustainable health markets, described a reality familiar to many women. Access to care may exist on paper; however, reaching that care, understanding available options and navigating fragmented systems remains a challenge.

“We’ve built systems like mazes with different entry points, different providers and different messages,” said Dr. Agrawal. “Women are often left navigating all of this themselves at the moments where they are most vulnerable.”

Her observation echoed the comments by fellow panelists, which touched on an issue that extends beyond women’s health. Across many countries, patients frequently encounter disconnected providers, inconsistent communication and care journeys that require them to coordinate appointments, referrals and information on their own. The burden of connecting those pieces often falls on the individual seeking care rather than the system intended to support them.

For women, that complexity can be especially challenging. Responsibilities related to caregiving, work, family and personal health often intersect at the very moment care is needed. Understanding what symptoms are normal, knowing when to seek help, determining where to go and finding trusted sources of information become added obstacles.

That reality led to one of the discussion’s compelling observations. “This is not an access problem. It’s a design problem.”

The distinction matters. Discussions about women’s health often focus on whether services exist. Design asks a different question: can people realistically find, understand and benefit from those services when they need them most?

The Power of Stories to Sustain Change

The panel also explored the role technology may play in addressing those challenges. Rather than adding new layers of complexity, emerging digital tools and artificial intelligence applications are increasingly being developed to simplify navigation, improve continuity and support people between clinical encounters.

“What excites me is that technology is finally starting to reduce friction instead of adding layers of complexity,” Dr. Agrawal observed.

That perspective aligned with comments from Bonfiglioli, whose work at Microsoft focuses on helping health systems leverage data, cloud technologies and artificial intelligence to improve outcomes. Technology, however, was not presented as a solution on its own. The discussion repeatedly returned to the importance of human connection.

Those themes are central to the documentary series itself. BBC StoryWorks has built a reputation for transforming complex issues into compelling narratives that audiences can understand and relate to. Through The Shift, the goal is not merely to document challenges but to foster greater understanding of the experiences women face and the opportunities that exist to improve care.

Abbas emphasized the power of storytelling to connect data and lived experience. Statistics can identify a problem. Research can explain it. Stories help people understand why it matters and why action is necessary.

That may be the enduring value of The Shift. The series does not introduce a new conversation. Instead, it brings fresh perspectives to longstanding challenges. Through stories from around the world, the films remind viewers that behind every statistic is a person navigating the complexities of health and care. By fostering greater understanding and empathy, the series encourages health leaders, innovators and policymakers to view women’s health not as a periodic topic of interest, but as an ongoing priority deserving sustained attention and action.

The women featured throughout the series deserve more. The discussion at HLTH Europe reinforces that improving women’s health is more than developing new technologies and expanding services. It is also about creating systems that are easier to navigate, more responsive to people’s medical priorities and ultimately more human in their design.

The post At HLTH Europe, BBC StoryWorks Shines a Light on Women’s Health and the Challenge of Navigating Care appeared first on Medika Life.

The FemTech Foundation—and Fault Lines

In 2015, fewer than 300 ventures focused on women’s health existed. That number has tripled to 942, according to the Galen Growth HealthTech Alpha™ platform. These ventures now span the female health continuum—gynecology, menopause, oncology, cardiovascular disease, mental health and beyond.

Yet the investment tide has not fully turned in FemTech’s favor. While partnerships have risen 15.3-fold during the past decade, capital deployment has grown only 1.4 times. Compare that to the 2.6x expansion of digital health investments. In 2024, FemTech secured $2.2 billion in funding, a sliver of the $26 billion digital-health pie.

This disparity isn’t due to a lack of innovation—quite the opposite. The problem is systemic: funding gaps, policy voids, and clinical blind spots that overlook the $360 billion “ghost market” of women’s health. That phrase— “ghost market”—is the report’s haunting term for the opportunities left untouched by current investors and providers alike.

From Fertility to Full Spectrum

One of the report’s most critical takeaways is how much the FemTech category is maturing. Fertility tracking and pregnancy apps put the field on the map. But FemTech today is far more.  It recognizes the vast need for medicine to engage with women’s unique health needs, long unaddressed.

The Galen Growth data shows that while gynecology and oncology account for more than half of all FemTech ventures, menopause, chronic pain, autoimmune conditions, cardiovascular disease and mental health are surging into the investment and innovation spotlight. These are not “niche” categories—they represent common, often underdiagnosed or misdiagnosed conditions that disproportionately affect women and impair their quality of life.

This expansion reflects a growing recognition that women’s health is not a subset—it’s a central pillar of public health. As de Salaberry writes in a soon-to-appear Health Tech World byline: “To be transformative, FemTech must address the entirety of the women’s health continuum, including those therapeutic areas that are not traditionally branded as female-specific but affect women in distinct ways.”

Twice the Clinical Evidence—But Still Under Scrutiny

Perhaps the report’s most sobering—and telling—data point is that FemTech ventures generate nearly twice the volume of clinical trials, peer-reviewed research, and regulatory filings as their digital health peers. Twice. That’s not due to past scientific rigor; these companies are held to a higher standard. Founders and advocates must go the extra mile to validate the clinical value of their solutions.

Despite this, systemic barriers remain. The report shows 71 percent of early-stage FemTech ventures struggle to raise a Series A round. Funding the “middle”—those post-seed but pre-scaleup companies—is an urgent priority. Without it, too many promising solutions will stall before reaching the women who need them.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t just about meeting investor milestones. It’s about delivering equity in care. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among women, yet it remains underrepresented in FemTech portfolios. Alzheimer’s and autoimmune conditions disproportionately affect women, yet receive comparatively little innovation focus.

Those are not oversight gaps. They are deep, systemic failures – disparities in our health innovation system.

From Direct-to-Consumer to Deep Health Integration

Another significant signal of maturity is the shift away from pure direct-to-consumer (DTC) models. In 2024, 42 percent of FemTech partnerships involved health systems, up from just 10 percent in 2020. That’s a tectonic shift from point solutions to systemic integration.

As de Salaberry puts it, “DTC strategies alone cannot reach underserved populations or secure the reimbursement pathways necessary for scale.” Systemic integration—through payers, providers, and public institutions—is essential for sustainability and access. FemTech must live where care happens, not just on consumers’ cell phones.

Regionally, the picture is just as telling, with Europe leading in clinical rigor, with 50 percent of FemTech ventures demonstrating proven clinical strength. North America leads in funding ($1.3B), while Asia-Pacific remains a hub of AI-driven diagnostics, even amid a dip in capital investment. These trends point to what’s next: a future driven by localization, clinical excellence and technology convergence.

Forces Shaping the Future of FemTech

The report outlines five key factors shaping the FemTech evolution during the next five years. They’re worth noting for anyone investing, innovating or advocating for equitable care with an eye toward return on investment:

• Redefining the Scope: FemTech must look beyond reproductive health to address chronic diseases, aging, and behavioral health.
• Breaking the DTC Mold: Success will be defined by integrated partnerships with employers, insurers, and health systems.
• Balancing Rigor and Agility: Regulatory requirements must support innovation without stifling it.
• Funding the Growth Gap: Series A and B support is critical to help early innovators scale.
• Smart Consolidation: M&A isn’t just about exits—it’s about building category leaders with breadth and credibility.

Infrastructure, Not Hype

The key here is infrastructure. FemTech is not a trend—it’s the scaffolding of women’s health innovation. Investors need to hear that message and invest to make this population health category viable.

With nearly half the global workforce made up of women, the ROI on women’s health is not just moral—it’s macroeconomic. The health ecosystem can no longer afford to treat women’s health as an edge case. It is, in fact, the core of population health.

FemTech’s next chapter will be shaped by evidence, equity and integration. It must also be underpinned by trust from payers, providers, and patients. That trust is earned through data, outcomes and the bold assertion that women’s health is health, full stop. This Galen Growth Report goes a long way to demonstrating the positive outcomes when innovation and investment converge.

As Julien de Salaberry wisely states: “The next generation of Femtech isn’t about visibility—it’s about value, integration, and health systems impact.” That’s not just a forecast—it’s a framework for what’s next.

[Editor’s Note: For a deeper dive into the Galen Growth FemTech 2025 report, visit galengrowth.com. The full report and press release, are available now.]

The post Galen Growth FemTech 2.0 Report: Elevating Women’s Health from Niche to Necessity appeared first on Medika Life.

Usually, detecting cancer is done through a combination of physical exams, imaging tests, blood tests, and biopsies. A biopsy, where a tissue sample is taken and examined under a microscope. This process is time-consuming and often relies on parts of the health system working together quickly, which does not always happen. Some cancers, like brain, pancreatic, and ovarian cancers, are difficult to detect, which can slow diagnosis even further.

By contrast, liquid biopsies can detect cancer more quickly. This type of testing looks at bodily fluids (typically blood) for evidence of cancer cells by finding biomarkers that are shed by cancer cells into the bloodstream. Liquid biopsy technology is advancing fast and with new technologies emerging, such as using light to detect these signals. This is a similar approach to that used when small swabs are passed over luggage and analysed at airport security.

By combining this spectral analysis with artificial intelligence (AI), it is possible to speed up cancer detection at a significantly lower cost. At the forefront of this revolution in cancer detection is Dr. Holly J. Butler. Dr Butler is the co-founder and CTO of Dxcover, the company behind the award-winning multiomic spectral analysis platform. Grounded in biophotonics and driven by an unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes, Dr Butler is striving to bring about a new era of non-invasive diagnostics; one where a couple of drops of blood and a beam of light might one day save millions of lives.

Dr Butler, alongside an award-winning leadership and research team, has been developing methods to analyse blood samples using infrared spectroscopy. What they discovered was a way of ‘reading’ the biochemical fingerprint of disease in a standard blood test. This research became the foundation of an award-winning proprietary platform that leverages a unique combination of AI and spectral analysis to detect patterns in small blood amounts, allowing clinicians to find cancer earlier, more accurately, and far more affordably than many existing techniques.

The potential is enormous. Unlike conventional liquid biopsies, which rely on picking up fragments of tumour DNA, this platform is more wide-ranging in its approach. It uses a multiomic strategy – looking at proteins, lipids, metabolites, and more – through a process known multiomic spectral analysis. It translates to even tiny tumours, sized at just 0.2 cm, being capable of leaving a detectable trace. And it’s all done with just nine microlitres of blood.

Dr Butler’s drive to transform scientific ideas into reality started early. After her Ph.D., she took on a Scottish Enterprise-funded project to translate laboratory-based research into clinical diagnostics. Her entrepreneurial endeavours were making waves as early as 2017 – she was ‘Young Entrepreneur of the Year’ at the Scottish Women’s Awards and received the Women in Innovation award at the Global Game Changers Awards. She has continued to be a vocal advocate for women in STEM and an active mentor to early-career scientists and entrepreneurs via the Strathclyde Inspire network in the intervening period.

“I’ve always been drawn to problems where science can make a real, tangible difference in people’s lives,” she says. “To me, early detection for the most difficult to detect cancers is one of the biggest, most urgent problems we face – and one we hope to solve.”

Dr. Butler’s role in bringing this innovation along is as much practical as it is strategic. She is part of a team that spans lab operations, data, software, quality and regulatory affairs, pushing the science to clear the bars for real-world medical use. “You can’t just invent a technology,” she says. “You need to prove that it works, scale it with safety, meet stringent quality specifications, and prove how it fits into clinical pathways. That is the challenge.”

For Dr Butler, it is about the impact on lives. “Cancer still kills nearly 10 million people a year,” she says. “The difference between early or late detection can be life and death. We want to make early detection routine – not something that’s just for some individuals or comes too late.”

Now pursuing an Executive MBA, Dr. Butler is expanding her leadership credentials. “Science gave me the means to innovate,” she says. “But the MBA is teaching me to lead, to strategise, to build something that can last.”

That ecosystem, she hopes, will be one where innovation and inclusion go hand-in-hand. She’s particularly passionate about ensuring that diagnostic breakthroughs become accessible across communities. “We’re aiming for a future where your GP can run a test like this early—long before you’re even referred to a specialist,” she explains.

Dr. Butler’s work remains patient-centred and personal. “Every time we detect a cancer that would have been missed – that’s the goal,” she says. “And every time we improve the technology is a step closer to a world where fewer people have to hear the words, ‘if only we’d caught it sooner.'”

The post Shining a Light on Early Cancer Detection appeared first on Medika Life.

What’s more, exercise is just not for your muscles and your strength. I’ve written on why muscles are involved in mood and you can go to this article to refresh your memory or read it if you haven’t already.

What recent research benefits those over 70? Undoubtedly, we have a great deal more in terms of input in our muscle maintenance than anyone thought when they considered people over 70. The newest research refutes that myth, providing new insights and amazing changes for this group.

But there are specific periods in our lives when certain changes will begin, and with each phase, there will be almost undiscernible changes. However, there are indications that those above 70, who are at greatest risk for instability, balance, problems, muscle weakness, and even bone fractures, require our attention. Previously, adequate work was not directed at the potential maintenance and retrieval of muscle strength in this group, and that is where new, exciting research is coming to the fore.

What Are the Groups?

Sarcopenia is the medical term for muscle loss, and it is a normal aging process that affects all humans, although the rate of onset and the severity of the condition is different among individuals. This slowdown in muscle mass, strength, and function has implications for the quality of life and dependence of the elderly. Muscle loss occurs at different ages and we need to pay attention to enable people to prevent or at least remediate this to some extent.

20s-30s Age Group

In the young adulthood (20s to 30s) age group, muscle mass is at its peak. This age group is likely to have the best muscle strength and function as most people. The body is well equipped to build up and preserve muscle tissue as long as the muscle is used and fed properly. However, even at this young stage, people with sedentary jobs may already experience some muscle atrophy that does not manifest itself clinically. It sets the stage for future deterioration, so appropriate physical activity and diet during these years are a sound investment into future muscle health.

40s Group

Beginning in the 40s, the person begins to show some changes as mentioned above. The literature reviews indicate that muscle mass starts to decline at about 0.5–1% every year after age 30 and the rate increases a little in the 40s. It is also the time when strength reduction is first noticed especially in muscle fibers which control power and speed.

The quadriceps, hamstrings, and calf muscles may start to weaken, especially in people with low levels of physical activity. Most people in this age bracket feel the fatigue and reduced physical endurance when engaging in physical activities.

50s Group

More specific features of muscle atrophy can be observed in the 50s. The rate of loss is higher, currently ranging between 1–2% every year. At this time, the hormonal changes worsen the muscle regeneration. To women menopause reduces the level of estrogen that accelerates muscle loss. Men also have low levels of testosterone that also worsen the muscle tissue.

The abdominal muscles and the lower back muscles, which are the stabilizers, also weaken a lot. Upper body strength, especially in the chest, shoulders, and arms, decreases at a higher rate than before.

60 Group

In the 60s, the loss of muscle is higher and the following rates are observed: 2–3% per year. The consequences of the changes are seen in the everyday life and the person needs help in performing certain actions. The muscles of the lower limb that include the quadriceps, hamstrings and gluteal muscles also weaken greatly.

Many people in this age group will report having problems with stairs, getting up from a chair, or walking for long distances. The hand grip strength is reduced which in turn affects the fine motor skills and the ability to handle objects. The sense of balance is also affected because muscle weakness and neurological changes in proprioception occur.

Over 70 Group

Muscle loss is at its highest in adults over 70, with annual losses of 3–5% if no schedule for slowing or reversing this loss is introduced. This accelerated decline has a major effect on the quality of life and independence. This age group has distinct muscle weakness with well-defined patterns of muscle involvement that have important functional implications

The quadriceps, hamstrings and gluteal muscles are the extremity muscles that are affected in a greater degree. This weakness is manifested as:

1. Difficulty in rising from sitting position
2. Slow walking
3. High chances of falling,
4. Difficulty in climbing stairs. The ankles are also liable to weaken, and this causes the client to have difficulty with walking and increased chances of falling.

Strengthen these muscle groups by including functional exercises that may involve using body weight, resistance bands, or light weights. Of course, any exercise routine in any age group should always be planned with a certified trainer or someone in a rehabilitation facility specifically to address these needs.

Some of the exercises that can be of great help include; standing from a chair, slow walks, sitting leg raises, and ankle exercises to build strength. Exercises in water are an excellent way to work on these muscles with minimum impact on the joints.

Balance is trained very effectively by standing exercises that reduce the base of support step by step. The tandem stance is particularly effective — this is when one stands with one foot in front of the other, heel to toe, to begin with, leaning on a sturdy chair or counter. In the event that stability improves, the support can be reduced to fingertip touch, then to no support at all.

The single leg stance is another basic exercise; start by holding a chair and lift one foot slightly off the floor for 10–15 seconds and then switch to the other side. This exercise directly strengthens the stabilizing muscles around the hips and ankles that are crucial for the prevention of falls.

Weight shifting exercises are used to develop the dynamic balance. The weight shift is to stand with feet hip width apart and then slowly shift weight from one foot to the other without moving the feet. Clock reaches expand on this by visualizing standing at the centre of a clock face and reaching one foot towards different ‘hours’ whilst remaining balanced. These movements enhance proprioception, which is the sense of where the different parts of the body are in space, and this sense is often reduced as one gets older.

The good news is that even though you have lost muscle strength, there is still the ability to help your muscles, pull back some of that strength and renew your ability to move and continue an active lifestyle. As has been noted by several of the articles, water exercises seems to be one of the best, especially for anyone with arthritic conditions. And, don’t forget that exercise is intimately associated with mood.

The post Strength Beyond Years: How Exercise Redefines Aging appeared first on Medika Life.

No overuse in the gym.

No trauma.

Just age.

As I transition into my 60s, I occasionally notice small unpleasant elements.

You may relate: It seems that injuries happen more frequently.

I do not have my historical muscle strength.

A new study provides some insights, revealing what may be behind my physical decline.

The 40s

In my mid-40s, I noticed aging signs.

It wasn’t gradual; I suddenly realized I was in my 40s.

It seemed that I had rapidly aged.

As I transition into my 60s, I am noticing the same phenomenon.

Or was it just my imagination?

Stanford researchers recently provided some answers.

Molecular and Microorganism Changes at 44 and 60

Was I wrong in my perception that I had experienced a moment of rapid aging?

A new Stanford University (USA) study tracked thousands of molecule types in adults aged 25 to 75.

The researchers analyzed blood (and other biological samples) from 108 subjects.

Here is the main takeaway message:

People tend to have two dramatic aging leaps — the first at around 44 and the second at approximately 60.

Aging appears to happen in bursts.

These changes appeared no matter what type of molecules the researchers analyzed.

Chasing Squirrels: Punctuated Equilibrium

My nurse sometimes protects me from getting distracted from the task at hand.

Chasing squirrels, Melissa likes to opine.

Well, I am about to chase a squirrel.

What comes to mind is punctuated equilibrium.

This evolutionary biology theory describes evolution as a series of short, rapid times of change interrupted by prolonged periods of stability.

My Harvard professor, the late Stephen Jay Gould, joined Niles Eldridge to develop this theory of how new species emerge and diversify.

They based their view on fossil record patterns developed by paleontologists.

Changes in the 40s

For those in their 40s, the Stanford researchers discovered significant changes in molecules related to:

• alcohol
• caffeine
• cardiovascular disease
• lipid metabolism
• muscle
• skin

Can’t resist sharing this:

“Aging is an extraordinary process whereby you become the person you always should have been.” — David Bowie.

Could Menopause Be Playing A Role?

My first thought?

The mid-40s aging acceleration among women might be secondary to perimenopausal (the transitional period before menopause) changes.

The researchers thought menopause might be playing a role until the scientists realized that men in their 40s had similar molecular alterations.

Changes in the 60s

For individuals in their 60s, molecular alterations appeared related to:

• caffeine metabolism
• carbohydrate metabolism
• cardiovascular disease
• kidney function
• immune regulation
• muscle
• skin

The Researchers Speculate

The scientists wonder if lifestyle influences the alterations in the 40s and 60s.

For example, folks might consume more alcohol in their 40s, a time of higher stress for many.

Anecdotally, I don’t find alcohol consumption to be higher among my patients in the 40 to 50 age group.

Summary

In conclusion, the rapid changes in our bodies during our 40s and 60s are associated with molecular alterations, affecting various aspects of our health and well-being.

Understanding these changes may help you focus on optimizing your lifestyle, including factors like sleep, diet, physical activity, and relationships.

Actionable Takeaways

The bursts of aging in the 40s and 60s remind this 61-year-old to stay focused on optimizing lifestyle.

I pay attention to:

• Sleep
• Diet
• Physical activity
• Relationships
• Minimizing alcohol
• Not smoking
• Sex

My perception of a sudden onset of age-related disorders (including more muscle achiness after working out) seems grounded in reality: We may experience a sudden onset of age-related changes in our bodies.

We don’t understand the full consequences of these molecular changes, but I now better understand my challenges in gaining lots of muscle.

Could it be that the origin of many diseases — that emerge later in life — is related to molecular changes in our 40s?

What has been your experience?

The post Your Body Ages in Leaps: Stanford’s Surprising Findings at Ages 44 and 60 appeared first on Medika Life.

Even in the age of advanced diagnostics, proton beam and nanotechnology treatments, and more walkathons than we can count, cancer still kills roughly one-third of those in the U.S. diagnosed with it. The numbers for low-income countries are far more shocking.

The causes of many cancers aren’t some hidden mystery. In the U.S., we can prevent two of the most dangerous forms of skin cancer by 40-50 percent by wearing sunscreen, but it’s an expensive option, and only 13 percent say they protect themselves most of the time with SPF-rated lotions. People are 15-30 times more likely to get lung cancer if they smoke; nevertheless, 1 in 10 Americans still smoke cigarettes.

You Have Cancer – or Not

We continue to lose many of the battles we should win against cancer. Billions of dollars have been spent over the years to educate the public on how they can prevent cancer; billions more have gone into treating patients. And then there’s the emotional toll that comes from hearing those three words.

There is a massive bright spot in this story, however. While the chances of preventing many forms of cancer with known interventions are frequently below 50 percent, we have a way of preventing six forms of cancer with a 90 percent effectiveness rate. It doesn’t come from adhering to daily rituals or resisting tempting vices. These cancers can be prevented by going to a doctor’s office or a pharmacy* and getting vaccinated against Human Papilloma Virus (HPV).

The catch is that the greatest chance of preventing HPV-related cancers later in life comes from vaccinating kids between 9-14. That requires parents seeing the importance of preventing HPV and many don’t, especially in southern states, where the number of pre-teens and adolescents who are fully vaccinated against HPV frequently falls below 50 percent.

Anxiety Versus Information

Many parents cite the vaccine’s safety as a leading concern, which is not based on fact. In the 17 years since the HPV vaccine has been available, more than 160 studies in multiple countries have shown no major adverse events associated with the vaccine. Instead, safety concerns have been fueled by misinformation on the Internet and skepticism among key audiences, including some healthcare professionals (HCPs).

More strikingly, however, the roots of hesitancy to vaccinate against HPV may go back to how it has been presented to patients: as a vaccine for sexually transmitted infections (STIs), not cancer. This is a major reason many parents discount the importance of getting their 10-year-old child vaccinated. In the face of such resistance, many HCPs in chronically under-vaccinated communities do not proactively recommend HPV vaccination during annual well visits.

Need to Reinform the Link Between HPV and Cancer

Reorienting this trend requires a concerted effort to flip the script on HPV vaccination discussions from STI prevention to cancer prevention. In the past year, only 22 percent of online conversations linked HPV with cancer. And in research conducted last month, FINN Partners found that only 46 percent of HCPs surveyed discuss HPV as cancer prevention.

This presents an important opportunity to close one of our generation’s most important health gaps. Healthcare professionals rank among the most trusted people in the U.S. When doctors make a vaccine recommendation with authority; most parents follow that counsel.

Flipping the script on HPV conversations tackles several significant barriers for patients: many may have omission bias, which means they believe vaccinating puts their kids in greater danger than the disease it’s supposed to prevent. And since they can’t picture their children getting an STI, they discount HPV vaccination further as a priority. But presenting that same vaccine as cancer prevention could change the nature of the conversation. Most parents understand cancer and see it as a threat. And cancer doesn’t carry the same stigma among many patient communities as sexually transmitted diseases.

The Cancer Prevention Message is Long Neglected

It’s time to make cancer prevention the dominant message in HPV vaccination decisions. More than 135 million doses of the HPV vaccine have been administered in the U.S., and we have seen a dramatic correlation in the drop in HPV cases: the prevalence of four HPV strains has declined by 88 percent among women aged 14-19. If HCPs are provided with better resources and more people are educated on HPV vaccination as cancer prevention, we have a shot at addressing misinformation about vaccine safety and continuing the upward trend of HPV vaccination.

The stakes are high for us to get this right. Because the only thing possibly worse than being told “You have cancer” is hearing that your son or daughter has HPV-related cancer later in life when it could have been prevented by a simple, safe decision to vaccinate them against HPV as an adolescent.

*HPV vaccines can be administered to adolescents at pharmacies in 22 states. Most states allow pharmacists to administer HPV to older patients.

The post Flipping the Script on Cancer Prevention appeared first on Medika Life.

We often hear that women’s rights are human’s rights: this most definitely also applies to healthcare.

Improving women’s health depends on improving their rights and vice versa. This calls for widespread commitment on both fronts, involving health professionals, institutions, politicians, and NGOs. The aim is to remove the economic, ideological, and socio-cultural obstacles to implementing actions that can change women’s lives. “The health of women and girls is of particular concern because, in many societies, they are disadvantaged by discrimination rooted in sociocultural factors.” said the World Health Organization (WHO).

Among said factors are unequal power dynamics between men and women, inequality towards education and employment opportunities, an exclusive focus on women’s reproductive roles and increased vulnerability to physical, sexual, or emotional violence. Women also face increased vulnerability in less privileged parts of the world.

Regarding health-related inequalities, in sub-Saharan Africa, women, for example, represent a significant majority of HIV/AIDS victims (63% of new infections in 2021). Every two minutes, a young woman between 15 and 24 gets infected by HIV. These women (aged 15-24) are three times more likely to contract HIV than young men of the same age.

We need urgent and long-term care for women around the globe. Prioritizing women’s health to make a difference everywhere and around the world is our mission at FIGO.

Founded in 1954, FIGO brings together 135 learned societies of gynecology and obstetrics on every continent whose aim is to improve the status of women, girls, and families to enable them to reach their full educational, sexual, and reproductive potential in harmony with their professional fulfillment and personal well-being.

In its fight for women, FIGO is also partnering with Professor Denis Mukwege, a Congolese gynecologist and winner of the 2018 Nobel Peace Prize, to support the “Red Line Initiative,” which bans the practice of rape as a weapon of war and leads on global programme activities, with a particular focus on sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. We strive to promote women’s health and rights through four fundamental pillars: education, training, research, and advocacy.

To that end, health professionals and experts from all over the globe will come together at FIGO’s upcoming congress in Paris from October 9 to 12 to share their knowledge and learn about new progress that has been made for women’s health, and the goals that we all have yet to achieve.

One excellent example is the elimination of cervical cancer.

This aim, which will considerably impact women’s lives, is one of FIGO’s priorities. Today, a woman dies of cervical cancer every two minutes worldwide, even though it can be prevented. Prevention is based on vaccinating boys and girls, ideally, before they begin sexual activity, and on screening. Cervical cancer is caused by papillomaviruses, or HPV, a family of sexually transmitted viruses. Eighty percent of the sexually active population will encounter HPV at least once, but in 90% of cases, the human body will naturally fight it and eliminate it within two years. If not, the persistent virus can lead to precancerous lesions and invasive cancer. Vaccination can prevent 90% of HPV infections that cause cancers other than cervical cancer (ENT, vulva, anus, penis).

Recommended by all learned societies and the World Health Organization, implementation varies from country to country. Australia, for example, is a good role model with a rate of 90% of vaccinated young girls, and cervical cancer is expected to be eliminated by 2035. In the US, 63,8% of young girls and 59,8% of young boys are fully vaccinated.  Rwanda became the first African country with an HPV vaccination implementation strategy and now realizes that vaccination coverage reached 99% of those born in 2002.

After an initial catch-up campaign that targeted school grades and included older girls, the programme transitioned to an age-based approach, with routine vaccination of only girls aged 12 from 2015 onwards. More than 1.15 million girls in Rwanda received their first dose of the HPV vaccine in 2011–2018 as part of this programme. Population-level HPV vaccination coverage increased from 6% for girls born in 1993 to 99% for those born in 2002.

Other countries need to catch up for several reasons. In addition to some reluctance toward vaccination, smear screening progresses slowly, often due to a need for more awareness and information. Smear screening is essential to eradicating cervical cancer: the WHO recommends screening 70% of women in all countries.

Improving prevention and women’s health understandably requires deploying resources on a par with the expected ambitions and progress. Political commitment is imperative to remove the cultural and economic obstacles to improving women’s health.

Healthy women are the cornerstone of healthy societies.

Women often provide for their families, communities, and the people around them. If women are healthier, it impacts everyone around them and eventually leads to healthier newborns, children, families, households, and communities. Leaders who prioritize women’s health can overcome gender inequality and improve the overall population’s health.

To register for the FIGO Congress, Paris, 9-12 October 2023: https://figo2023.org/registration/

[Medika Life is honored to feature this exclusive Q&A feature authored by Jeanne Conry, MD, president, The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics]

The post Why Improving Women’s Health Around the World is Urgent appeared first on Medika Life.

This is an emotive topic for many, and it is necessary to add context early into the piece before we examine the history of the age of consent and discuss its current impact on today’s societies and politics.

Gary Glitter has just been released from prison after serving just half of a 16-year prison term for engaging in non-consensual acts of sex with two underage girls, aged 12 and 13. Had he lived over 100 years ago, there would have been no legal basis for prosecuting him for engaging in sex with these children, consensual or otherwise.

In the author’s opinion, individuals like Glitter are the fundamental drivers of the development of age of consent and rape laws. To be clear, if you are older than 25 and express an interest in girls under the age of 16, you should consider seeking professional counsel. If you’re over 40, then you certainly have nothing in common with a girl this young and no frame of reference for forming a relationship with her. Your motives are purely sexual or ego, often coupled with a desire to dominate and shape the object of your attention into a warped version of your hidden desires. To suggest consent is to condone psychological manipulation.

In America states such as Tennessee and Wyoming are waging political battles to preserve the right to marry at younger ages. The Wyoming Republican Party contests legislation proposing raising the state’s legal marriage age to 16, arguing that arbitrary limits on child marriage interfere with parental rights and religious liberty. What then of the psychological health of a parent who condones marriage at 14?

This suggested law—which passed the Republican-controlled Wyoming House of Representatives on a 36-25 vote late last month—proposes banning state residents from marrying anyone under the age of 16, while requiring anyone under the age of 18 seeking to get married to receive written consent from their parents under the eye of a competent witness.

Last year, a 32-year-old man married a 16-year-old girl in Wyoming, Guy Beaudoin, the deputy state registrar of vital statistics, said during a hearing on the bill. There have also been several instances of 14-year-olds being married in that state.

Minnesota, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware are the only states where 18 is the legal age to get married. For other states, the legal age varies. The legal age is 17 in 10 states, while 21 others set the standard at 16. In Maryland, Hawaii and Kansas, it’s 15.

None of this is healthy or normal and more importantly, there is little that can be done to redeem or reprogram these individuals or even state legislatures that permit these practices. They will revert to type given the opportunity and we know from experience they are not deterred by age of consent laws. It is the author’s opinion that severe penalties are required to act as a deterrent. In short, our laws to punish individuals like Gary Glitter are woefully inadequate and society frequently fails the victims. The education of state and Federal representatives may need to be considered too.

Today, most countries set the age of consent at anywhere from 13 to 18 years of age, the logic being that the woman is emotionally mature enough to understand the full ramifications of her choices and that she has also, in most countries, attained the age of contractual adulthood. What motivated society to step in to protect young women? How we have arrived at this point may surprise you.

A History of Consent – Married and Pregnant at 12

The first age of consent statute appeared in secular law in 1275 in England as part of the rape law. The statute called Westminster 1 made it a misdemeanor to “ravish” a “maiden within age,” with or without her consent. The term “within age” was interpreted by jurist Sir Edward Coke as meaning the age of marriage, which at the time was 12 years of age.

In 1576, a law was issued making it a felony to “unlawfully and carnally know and abuse any woman child under the age of 10 years”. The law was generally interpreted as creating more severe punishments when girls were under 10 and imposing less severe punishment for acts with 10 and 11 year-old girls. Most of England’s North American colonies adopted the younger age. In the 16th century, a group of Italian and German states introduced an age of consent set at 12 years.

The laws made it easier to prosecute a man who engaged in sex with younger girls, with or without their consent. The law also made it impossible for an underage female to consent to sexual activity. There was however one exception: married women were not subject to the law.

The Age of Enlightenment

At the end of the 18th century, other European nations began to enact age of consent laws, prompted by the emergence of an Enlightenment concept of childhood focused on development and growth. Children were seen as more distinct in nature from adults than previously imagined, and were considered vulnerable to harm in the years around puberty. The French Napoleonic code provided legal context in 1791 when it established an age of consent of 11 years. This age of consent, which applied to boys as well as girls, was increased to 13 years in 1863.

Following France’s example, many other countries increased the age of consent to 13 in the 19th century. The likes of Portugal, Spain, Denmark and the Swiss cantons, that mirrored the Napoleonic code, initially set the age of consent at 10-12 years and then raised it to between 13 and 16 years in the second half of the 19th century. In 1875, England raised their age of consent to 13 years; an act of sexual intercourse with a girl younger than 13 was now considered a crime. In the U.S. each state determined its own criminal law and the age of consent ranged from 10 to 12 years of age.

U.S. laws did not change in the wake of England’s shift and Anglo-American law did not apply to boys.

Why the different ages? Well, although scientists and physicians had established that menstruation and puberty occurred on average around age 14, in Europe at that period in history, different individuals experienced puberty at different ages. The law struggled to find a happy medium or decide on an arbitrary age to incorporate into law.

Child prostitution enters the picture

At the end of 19th century child prostitution was brought into the debate by moral reformers. Revelations at the time of child prostitution were central to their platform. Child prostitution, reformers argued, resulted in men taking advantage of the innocence of girls just older than the age of consent. “The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon,” a series published by W. T. Stead, in the Pall Mall Gazette in 1885 which was the most sensational and influential of the exposés circulating at the time.

Outrage followed on the heels of the articles, pushing British legislators to raise the age of consent to 16 years. The effects spilt over into the US and encouraged reformers in the U.S, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, the British Empire, and Europe to push for similar legislation. By 1920, Anglo-American legislators had responded by increasing the age of consent to 16 years, and in some instances, it was set at 18 years.

Despite these ages being far above the normal age of menstruation which had been seen as a sign of adulthood, proponents justified them on scientific grounds suggesting psychological maturity came later than physiological maturity. They also argued that the age of consent should be aligned with other benchmarks of development, such as the age at which girls could enter into contracts and hold property rights, typically 21 years. Opponents remained focused on physiological maturity, however, and argued that girls in their teens were sufficiently developed not to need legal protection.

Moreover, they argued, by late adolescence girls possessed sufficient understanding about how to use the law to blackmail unwary men.

Historians argue that increasing the age of consent also gave the law a more pronounced regulatory dimension. In practice, these laws were often used to control the behavior of working-class girls. Reformers at the time, however, saw no distinction between protection and regulation. By making it a crime for girls to decide to have sexual intercourse outside marriage, the law protected them from themselves and from the immature understanding that led them to behaviors reformers considered immoral.

By the 1930s, support for setting the age of consent at 16 years or older had begun to weaken. Growing economic, social, and cultural independence for women saw girls in their teens assuming a role in western societies quite distinct from that of younger children. New concepts of adolescence and specifically of girlhood normalized sexual activity during the teenage years, at least within peer groups, as “sex play” necessary to achieve adult heterosexuality.

Emboldened and influenced by such ideas, girls more often talked of being “in love” with the men charged with having sex with them, and expressed sexual desire. Prosecutors and juries increasingly refused to treat such cases as rape. Legislators, however, did not change the legal age of consent.

In the 1930’s, the American term “jailbait,” showed cultural recognition of teenage girls as sexually attractive, even sexually active, but legally unavailable. American legislators did amend laws to take account of the offender’s age during the 1940s and 1950s as teen culture expanded and female adolescents exercised their sexual autonomy. During and after World War II, if both the male and female were underage (or between two and six years above the age of consent), the punishment was reduced.

Modern Day America

By the 1970s, feminist rape law reform campaigns had helped to expand age of consent laws. Aiming to challenge stereotypes of female passivity and growing concern about male victimization, they made it clearer that the laws concerned all youth—male and female—and that the laws protected them from exploitation rather than ensuring their virginity. European nations in general did not follow suit. Only Britain, in 2003, revised its legislation, making an act committed by an individual under 18 with one under 16 a separate, lesser offense.

Feminist rape law reform also saw the early application of gender-neutral language: instead of referring to “females” the law referred to any “person.” The nature of the act addressed, however, remained the same and age of consent laws applied only to heterosexual intercourse. The new language criminalized acts between underage boys and women, but not those between boys and men. Promoted as a means of formalizing equality between men and women, gender-neutral language won support as a means of protecting boys.

The treatment of such cases, however, was not gender neutral and drew upon gender stereotypes. In practice, boys were imagined as sexual agents, not victims, and as sexual agents, the prevailing assumption was that they would not be harmed by sexual acts with adult women.

In the U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutional to apply the age of consent only to girls, justifying it with a new, “modern” basis for the law, the consequences of pregnancy for females. Despite this ruling, gender-neutral laws were still enacted around the country.

In the 1990s a new link was established between the law and teenage pregnancies. Conservatives seeking to control adolescent sexuality joined with welfare reform activists, promoting claims that the enforcement of the age of consent could prevent teenage motherhood (and rising welfare costs) that resulted from girls’ exploitation by adult men.

At the end of the 20th century, outside the U.S., age of consent laws were expanded to include same-sex couples, as a result of growing acknowledgment of gender rights and desire to reach those at risk of AIDS.

Puberty and its impact on health

Before looking at the social impacts of the current age of consent laws, it is perhaps fitting to address the issue of puberty and its impact on female and public health.

Over the past three decades, studies from Europe and the United States have shown a tendency towards earlier puberty onset in girls, with a greater change in the age of breast development compared to the first menstruation. Many point to obesity and exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals as the culprits.

According to an article published in Tidsskriftet that examines research carried out in Sweden and Norway looking at the onset of puberty;

Many complex factors affect the onset of puberty. Genetics are thought to explain 50–75 % of the variation, while the rest is attributed to lifestyle factors such as nutrition, general health, psychosocial stress, perinatal factors, body composition and environmental factors such as endocrine disruptors. The trend towards earlier puberty is often seen in connection with the parallel obesity epidemic among adolescents. Early studies on endocrine disruptors as a cause of earlier puberty onset initially shed light on the period immediately before puberty. More recent studies have demonstrated that exposure to such chemicals in the fetal and neonatal period are also relevant to puberty timing. The effect of various stressors depends on the period of occurrence and exposure. For example, prepubertal malnutrition or overnutrition (increased fat mass) in girls can lead to late or early puberty respectively, while intrauterine growth retardation is associated with early puberty.

In the same way, psychosocial stress preceding or during puberty can lead to delayed menarche, while accelerated puberty has been described in girls who experience such stress in early postnatal life or as an infant.

What impact does the earlier onset of puberty have on the health of women? Early puberty, particularly in girls, has been associated with adverse effects on adult health. At the population level, observations indicate that early menarche is associated with increased mortality as well as a higher risk of breast cancer , cardiovascular disease  and mental illness. In addition, early puberty has been shown to be associated with more frequent and prolonged adolescent-related risky behavior.

Freedom and the Modern Day Woman

More than 800 years after the first recorded age of consent laws, the one constant is the lack of consistency. Laws around the world define the socially appropriate age of consent anywhere from 13 to 18 years of age. Americans, in particular, have difficulty agreeing on what represents an adult female. It appears that society still has an issue regarding maturity when we achieve it and the woman’s right to freely consent to the act of sex outside the bonds of marriage.

Concerning the U.S., in Mississippi, for instance, where with parental consent, males can marry at 17 and females at 15. Boys below 17 and girls below 15 can marry with judicial approval and parental consent, while in Delaware, a minor (under the age of 18) may not marry until achieving the age of 18 (also the age of consent). Religion and societal tradition also play massive roles in determining what we see fit for setting these guidelines.

There can be little argument that most women (I use the term in this instance to refer to females that have reached puberty) enter the world of adulthood and sex far sooner than their counterparts of two or three generations ago. They are exposed at all levels and through every medium to the adult world of sex. Ten years old have the internet placed at their disposal, music videos and films normalize sexual behavior, and platforms like TikTok are inundated with young women and girls, some as young as 8, dressed provocatively and dancing suggestively. We condone this behavior, and yet we frown on the byproduct.

Some girls are sexually active by the time they reach their 13th birthday, some even sooner, driven, some would argue, by nature, while others would suggest it is the fault of the promiscuous societies they are raised in. The earlier onset of puberty may also impact early sexual activity. However, no research currently exists to support this.

As to current law affecting the age of consent, it has drawbacks. Feelings of guilt and fear affect mental health, while the threat of legal consequence can and does prevent girls from seeking advice, medical help, contraception and counselling. It can endanger their health and, in dangerous and deadly instances, the consequences of backstreet abortions gone wrong. Criminalizing – regardless of legal response – underage acts can have dire consequences for the young women who step over this legal line in the sand.

Can a 14 or 15-year-old girl be considered emotionally mature enough to consent to sex? Does current law infringe on their rights as young adults to make this choice? Is the age of consent law archaic, and should we not, instead, be focused on tightening rape laws that punish predatory individuals like Gary Glitter who choose to exploit young, underage people?

Scientists at Newcastle University in the U.K. have discovered that girls tend to optimize brain connections earlier than boys. The researchers conclude that this may explain why females generally mature faster in certain cognitive and emotional areas than males during childhood and adolescence, pointing to another factor that favors the right of choice for young females. Do not use that type of research to justify exploitation.

Our societies are riddled with mixed messages, encouraging the overt popularization and normalization of sex to underage children while criminalizing their pursuit of it. Perhaps a more sane approach would rely on investing heavily in school-based sex education and supportive parenting information rather than criminalization. Parents should be taught that a policy to guide, not hide, produces thoughtful, communicative, and well-grounded children who can function safely in an adult environment.

Age of consent laws will not prevent teenage pregnancies and most certainly do not prevent teenagers from engaging in sex. Instead, they teach children to hide their interests and actions from people who can guide them. All they are left with in the absence of our help are glamorous, material versions of sex in a “material world.”

The constant bombardment of suggestive clothing ads, provocative music lyrics, and the sexually illustrative and overt normalization through the medium of video of the sexual act between a man and woman impacts young minds. The lines between sex and love have blurred, and children are challenged to distinguish one from the other. Society, and parents owe it to the younger generation to highlight the emotional and physical dangers of engaging in an intimate act we can never walk back.

The post Puberty and the Age of Consent. When Should “Yes” Be No! appeared first on Medika Life.

What does concierge or direct primary care do for you? It gives you outstanding care at a reasonable cost. Your doctor cares for only about 500–800 patients instead of the typical 2500–3000 individuals. Instead of seeing 24+ patients per day for an average of 10–12 minutes of “face time,” you get same-day or next-day appointments for as long as necessary. You get intensive wellness advice through preventive medicine direction, immediate care of those episodic problems that arise every so often, and complete attention to complex chronic diseases (heart failure, diabetes with complications, etc.) with much less need to refer to specialists.

But when it is necessary for specialists to participate, the PCP plans and coordinates the care process. And most important, the PCP gets to know you as a person, part of a family and a community, developing a caring and trusting relationship. You will have fewer tests, X-rays, and specialist visits, fewer ER visits, and fewer hospitalizations. Some practices offer generic medications at cost and deeply discounted prices through arrangements for imaging and lab tests.

Here are four direct primary care practices to illustrate typical fees. For example, AtlasMD’s (Kansas City, MO) annual fee is $600 for a young adult and about $1200 for someone over age 65; Dr. Neuhofel’s (Lawrence, Kansas) is $708 (adult under age 70) to $948 (70 and older) annually for an individual and $1668 for a family of four.

Drs. Izbicki (Erie, PA) charge $1380 per year per individual 30 and above and $2340 for a family with any number of children under age 19. In Columbia, Maryland, Dr. Sarah Zahaar recently left a Johns Hopkins group practice and began a DPC practice called Oak Tree Primary Care. She charges $99 per month with a 15% discount for those who pay annually, just over $1000 per year. In addition, she has discounts for families and children. From her website, here is a link to a short video on DPC.

As Jon Izbicki told me, “Our monthly fee is less than what it costs to rent a parking space downtown for the month.” Even the more expensive retainer or concierge practices are still within reason for many. $2000 is about $5.50 per day. How many people spend that much per day at Starbucks? Or, consider the monthly/annual cost of internet, mobile phone, cable TV, and streaming.

As of 2021, the average expenditure per month (different organizations reach somewhat different conclusions, but the following is a good average) for internet, cable, and streaming services is $156 per month or $1768 per year. Add to that mobile phone service, and the total is well above $200 per month or $2400 per year. So, perhaps $1500 or $2000 — undoubtedly real money — is not such an onerous expense for comprehensive primary care when prioritizing healthcare expenses relative to other expenses.

Suppose you have a high deductible health insurance plan from your employer or from the exchanges with a health savings account (HSA). In that case, you can pay for the membership/retainer with tax-advantaged dollars and save considerably. And since the PCP will help you avoid digging into the deductible by preventing the need for expensive trips to the specialist, the emergency room, or the hospital, and for excessive laboratory or imaging tests, you will also save those dollars.

I predict that (absent a significant change in insurer behavior) direct primary care will likely be the future of primary care payment. It means that the patient will obtain genuine assistance to first prevent chronic illnesses from occurring; second, episodic care for those issues that pop up during the year; third, careful care of complex chronic diseases, and fourth, thorough coordination of the care of chronic illnesses, all at a reasonable cost which will be transparent.

Importantly, you have a PCP who has the time to listen — to listen deeply, resulting in a return to relationship medicine with mutual trust and respect.

Those who already have typically limited deductible insurance — commercial or Medicare — might argue that these various direct primary care models represent an added expense, not a savings. Yes and No. It is an added expense, but the potential savings can be substantial. For example, each of the three practices referred to above makes generic medications available at wholesale prices — considerable savings for many individuals.

Those with no insurance — for whatever reason — will find that they can obtain good quality primary care at a reasonable price from one of the direct pay or membership practices. It will cost much less than going to an urgent care center or an ER.

Perhaps Medicare and Medicaid will decide that it makes eminently good sense to pay the retainer for their enrollees and thus ensure their members get superior primary care at a reasonable cost. Meanwhile, save Medicare and Medicaid enormous total dollars. (In an earlier article, I reviewed what one company, AbsoluteCare, has done to reduce expenses while dramatically improving care for some of Medicaid’s most expensive patients.)

Some companies such as Erickson Senior Living that sponsor Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) plans have learned that by using DPC, although it costs more upfront for primary care, the total costs of care come way down, making the DPC investment a “no-brainer.” The image at the top suggests that older people can receive excellent care from a DPC/concierge physician resulting in better health and a longer life.

This concept could apply equally to commercial insurers, but they have largely avoided DPC, retainer, and concierge practices.

What about employers? The average cost per family, per the Kaiser Family Foundation, was about $22,463 in 2022, with the employee contributing $6106. Although KFF notes that the general annual deductible is $1763, many companies have very high deductibles, sometimes as high as $10,000 per family per year. For a family with members that have chronic illnesses, the costs of healthcare are thus substantial, indeed a level that makes one a medical pauper if you or a family member gets sick. In addition, employees will arguably feel their employer has walked away from them and saddled them with costs they cannot bear.

The company can partially offset the inherent anger this generates among its employees by paying the fee for direct primary care practice. It is especially valuable for individuals with multiple chronic illnesses since quality primary care can mean much better health, fewer tests, prescriptions, specialist referrals, and hospitalizations. In addition, since businesses are essentially self-insured using the “insurance company” as the administrator, their costs will decrease with this approach.

The bottom line, the company pays for the DPC doctor but reaps the benefit of lower total costs and a healthier employee who is more content and misses many fewer workdays due to sickness. More details are in my previous article, “Company paid concierge style primary care.”

Once companies recognize this advantage with its increased employee health yet reduced costs, employers will be the major reason for direct primary care membership/retainer-based practice growth in the coming years as they will essentially demand that level of service for their employees — and in so doing they will be reducing their company health care costs as a result of high-quality primary care.

The exact number of physicians in DPC practices is unclear, but an estimate by Concierge Medicine Today (CMT) in 2022 pegs the known number at about 10–25,000. CMT also notes that many combine insurance with membership fees, e.g., MDVIP; not exactly DPC anymore, but still an ability to limit the number of patients per doctor and give more attention to each.

More doctors will convert once the general population understands the advantages and begins to ask for them and demand them. There are many good reasons for an individual to connect with a direct primary care physician — better quality care, a return to relationship medicine, and often a significant cost saving despite the fee. Consider the copay and deductible savings if you spend less time in a specialist’s office and avoid visits to urgent care centers, the ER, and the hospital, including the copays for specialty testing, lab work, and imaging. Most importantly, you will have better health. That is priceless.

This is the 17th in a series on America’s dysfunctional healthcare delivery system. Here are links to the first and a recent article.

The post Are Direct Primary Care and Concierge Medicine Practices Too Expensive? appeared first on Medika Life.