August 13, 2002
Mystery explained ... Let's take five with Moira Gunn. This is "Five Minutes".
For many years, medical studies only included men. Whether for heart disease or diabetes, it was thought that doctors could make a simple leap of logic and apply the findings to women.
Many reasons were given to this approach, including the complication of having to consider the rise and fall of female hormones throughout the month. Excluding women made it easier, and with science, the more complicated the subject base, the more difficult it is to eke out the kernels of scientific truth.
And there were ethical questions, as well. How could we knowingly give untested drugs to women who mid-study might unexpectedly become pregnant?
With feminism and a rising tide of scientific evidence, it became clear that women were different from men. From the course of illnesses, to the symptoms they experience, to drug reactions, the applicability of male-only research and safety testing had to be re-considered.
--
In 1993, the United States passed the National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act, and with it, a new federal policy came into being requiring women and minorities to be included in all NIH-supported biomedical and behavioral research projects. And today, the FDA officially requires the inclusion of women at every stage in drug testing. These policies remain under continual review, and the result has uniformly been better science.
So I was fascinated when I came across a recent behavioral study performed at Emory University in Atlanta. Using brain-imaging techniques, researchers examined the reward response centers of people paired up with a partner in the long-tested psychological game: Prisoner's Dilemma.
Each subject was paid cash money depending on how they played it. They made the most money if they consistently set up their partner and betrayed them, and a lesser amount if they worked to mutual benefit. It turns out the brain's reward centers were most stimulated when the person cooperated with their partner, and - money or no money - cooperation was the clear choice of the subjects in the study.
--
The researchers were gratified to see that cooperation is the prevalent behavior among humans and to find that we are literally wired for it, although they did express surprise at this outcome.
Then it was time for me to be surprised: it turns out that the study's subjects were all women.
The researchers didn't say "women." They instead referred to "humans" and "human behavior," leading one to believe women and men.
So have we come full circle here? We can't take men and make leaps of logic for women, but now we can take women and make leaps of logic for men?
Still, that did not prepare me for the real corker. This study was funded in part by the National Institute for Mental Health, which is a part of NIH. Excuse me, but what happened to the law?
Looking more closely, I see that the first names of the researchers are James, Gregory, Clint, David, Thorsten and Giuseppe. Unless we've got a bona fide case of "A Boy Named Sue," these investigators are all men. And I'd like to address their surprise.
How do we women get the kids cared for, the house in line and the food on the table, at the same time we might also be eight months pregnant? Sisters, mothers, neighbors, friends. You see, we women know all about cooperating -- many hands make light work.
I'm Moira Gunn. This is Five Minutes.
