Women’s health is under attack. Shifting political priorities in the United States have led to the dismissal of thousands of National Institutes of Health (NIH) staff and threats against billions in research grants and university funding. Women’s health research has borne the brunt of these changes. Staff at the agency – the world’s largest health-research funder – have been instructed to not approve funding applications that include “gender” and “women.”

It is astonishing that in 2025 anyone still has to justify why women’s health matters. But what’s happening to women’s health in the United States directly affects the health of women in Canada. As more countries adopt an “open science” approach, decisions about science policy in any one country will increasingly cause a ripple effect on global innovation and care for decades.

Funding for women’s health research is already precarious. It accounts for a mere five per cent of overall global health-research funding. In Alberta, the percentage was lower yet in 2022. An estimated 3.4 per cent of research funds were spent on women’s health. Yet, women represented 51 per cent of the population at the time.

Investing in women’s health research should be core to Canada’s innovation strategy. Such an investment will unlock new scientific insights, drive inclusive economic growth, and ensure a healthier future for all.

The ripple that undermines global progress

We all benefit when other countries have thriving health research programs.

The NIH funds international research consortiums, including in Canada, that bring together the most brilliant minds to tackle our most “wicked” problems.  Just one year ago, the Biden administration committed the equivalent of $16.7 billion as part of the White House Initiative for Women’s Health Research.

The creation of oral contraception in the United States, for example, has benefitted millions of people around the world.  Women directly benefit through effective pregnancy prevention (and therefore reduced pregnancy-related deaths), the regulation of menstrual cycles, increased labour-force participation, and agency over reproductive decisions. Men also benefit from improved family planning and reduced anxiety about potential pregnancies.

Canada’s chief medical officers put women’s leadership in spotlight

After USAID: Why Canada must lead on global health now

Proper funding for women’s health research could save lives during pandemic

In anticipation of gaps in collaborations with American colleagues, the Canadian Medical Association is already calling for more health research to be done in Canada.

Cutting research funds will likely contribute to brain drain in the United States and a potential “brain gain” in Canada. Some renowned American professors in other disciplines have already made the move to Canada and others will likely follow suit. Meanwhile, the globally recognized Canadian heart surgeon Marc Ruel made headlines in March when he opted to stay in Canada rather than pursue a career in the United States.

However, there are also concerns about the future of research given that program admission and training support in the U.S. have been revoked for many trainees and students. What advancements will be made in 20 or 30 years when there is no one to fill the spots of today’s scientists and researchers as they retire? Globalization means that defunding research in one country destabilizes global research training and partnerships. Progress is ultimately hindered everywhere.

Leaving questions unanswered…

The potential stagnation of women’s health research is alarming because there is so much we don’t know about women’s health.

Historically, biomedical research has primarily been conducted by male researchers on male subjects. In recent years, more research and education have been devoted to unpacking sex and gender-based health differences. Women’s heart health, for example, is the number-one cause of death in women worldwide. Yet physicians sometimes still mistake it as anxiety or panic attacks.

Social-science research is also in peril. This research is as important to understand some of the most pressing social challenges of our generation and how women experience them. This includes, for one, the impacts of unpaid caregiving, which in Canada is performed mostly by women. There is also the rise of gender-based violence (declared an epidemic by some experts). Investing in women’s health research can improve knowledge and care for all women.

A cautionary tale

The rapid devaluing of women’s health serves as a warning signal to Canadians on how quickly progress can be eroded.

Canada has reduced disparities in gender and health. For instance, the Institute of Gender and Health supports the advancement of sex and gender science in Canada through research, training and knowledge mobilization. The institute is one of 13 that make up Canada’s federal funding agency for health research, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the CIHR.

Progress has been made, but only six per cent of CIHR grants awarded between 2006 and 2020 were dedicated to women’s health research. Earlier this year, Canada introduced a national pharmacare framework that will cover the cost of contraceptives for nine million Canadians. It is expected that universal coverage of contraceptives will save taxpayers around $160 million a year when the cost of unintended pregnancies is factored in. Yet not all provinces have agreed to participate in the full program, creating geographic disparities in pharmaceutical coverage for women.

As Canadians, we cannot control decisions made by other nations, but decision makers can be vigilant and act in ways that reflect how we value women’s health in Canada. Canada has a window of opportunity to do what the United States will not: invest in women’s health and the talent behind it.

For example, the University Health Network has launched the Canada Leads 100 Challenge to attract 100 early-career scientists from the United States to Toronto, capitalizing on the shifting American research climate. The GROWW Program – Canada’s first pan-national training program on lifelong women’s health – is recruiting its fourth cohort of trainees. Elected officials, institutions, and other funders must continue investing in initiatives that support sex and gender-based research and care in Canada and create supportive training environments for the next generation of women’s health scholars and clinicians.

Now is not the time to take our foot off the pedal. When women’s health loses, we all lose.

The author is a trainee with the Women and Children’s Health Research Institute at the University of Alberta. She is also an alumna of the GROWW national training program and a member of its advisory committee.