Dr Camila Guindalini
Director of Mental Health Research, Gallipoli Medical Research
Women comprise nearly half the world’s population. Yet, across a wide range of health conditions, medical research has historically been based on data collected from men, which is then generalised to women and other gender diverse populations. We now know this has come at a real cost.
Growing evidence indicates that people of different genders can differ significantly in how diseases develop, how symptoms present, and how treatments work—including how effective they are and what side effects they cause.
These differences are not simple or biological alone; they are shaped by a mix of genetic, hormonal, environmental, social, economic, and behavioural factors. When differences across sex and gender are overlooked, quality of care suffers, resources are misallocated, and health systems become more costly and less effective for the people they are meant to serve.
We see the consequences of gender bias in research and health care clearly in our work with veterans who identify as women. Participants in one of our recent studies on chronic pain in female veterans traced the onset of their pain back to basic training. They described carrying heavy packs designed for male body dimensions, wearing men’s size boots during long marches, and being expected to push through injuries as part of military culture.
These experiences reflect a broader issue: the evidence used to design military equipment, training standards, and health services have largely been calibrated around male norms. This bias is often subtle, but its effects are significant. Service members whose bodies or experiences fall outside these norms experience higher rates of injury and are more likely to feel misunderstood or managed using approaches that do not reflect their needs or lived experiences.
This story is not unusual. Many people do not realise that much of what we know about veteran health comes from studies in which women—and gender-diverse veterans—were under-represented or excluded altogether. When research does not include these groups properly, health and support services struggle to meet their needs. This gap often shows up as delayed diagnoses, mislabelled symptoms, and frustration on both sides of the consultation room.
What matters most is that these inequities can be changed. By designing research that actively includes women and gender-diverse people, asks the right questions, and measures outcomes that matter to them, we can change what care looks like in the future. The impact of getting this right is significant. Women veterans are an increasingly visible part of the Defence community, and many will live with the long-term effects of service for decades. If we do not address gender bias now, we risk building another generation of services that unintentionally fail to meet their needs and expectations. On the other hand, the benefits of doing this well extend far beyond the veteran community. What we learn about health in military contexts can improve care for women and other under represented groups everywhere.
Addressing gender bias in health care is urgent if we want not only a more equitable, but more efficient, health care system for all. This means leading research that systematically incorporates sex and gender analysis, examines how health and illness can affect people differently, and challenges long-standing assumptions. When we follow the evidence, and use it to shape systems and care, it works better for everyone. If future veterans are understood sooner, treated appropriately, and supported in ways that reflect their real experiences, then this work will have achieved what research should always aim to do: make a real difference to people’s lives.
Read more about Gallipoli Medical Research’s veteran health research