Connect with us

Published

on

COVID-19 affects people differently, in terms of infection with the virus SARS-CoV-2 and mortality rates. In this Special Feature, we focus on some of the sex differences that characterize this pandemic. Share on Pinterest The data that are available so far indicate that there are significant differences between how the sexes respond to the new coronavirus.

All data and statistics are based on publicly available data at the time of publication. Some information may be out of date. Visit our coronavirus hub for the most recent information on the COVID-19 pandemic.Was this helpful?

There are many ways in which the pandemic itself affects peoples day-to-day lives, and gender understood as the ensemble of social expectations, norms, and roles we associate with being a man, woman, trans- or nonbinary person plays a massive part.

On a societal level, COVID-19 has affected cis- and transwomen, for example, differently to how it has cismen, transmen, and nonbinary people. Reproductive rights, decision making around the pandemic, and domestic violence are just some key areas where the pandemic has negatively impacted women.

However, sex differences understood as the biological characteristics we associate with the sex that one is assigned at birth also play an undeniable role in an epidemic or pandemic.

While sex and gender are, arguably, inextricably linked in healthcare, as in every other area of our lives, in this Special Feature, we will focus primarily on the infection rates of SARS-CoV-2 and the mortality rates that COVID-19 causes, broken down by sex.

In specialized literature, these effects fall under the umbrella term of primary effects of the pandemic, while the secondary impact of the pandemic has deeper social and political implications.

Throughout this feature, we use the binary terms man and woman to accurately reflect the studies and the data they use. Sex-disaggregated data lacking

Before delving deeper into the subject of sex differences in COVID-19, it is worth noting that the picture is bound to be incomplete, as not all countries have released their sex-disaggregated data.

A report appearing on the blog of the journal BMJ Global Health on March 24, 2020, reviewed data from 20 countries that had the highest number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 at the time.

Of these 20 countries, Belgium, Malaysia, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom, and the United States of America did not provide data that was disaggregated, or broken down, by sex.

At the time, the authors of the BMJ report appealed to these countries and others to provide sex specific data.

Anna Purdie, from the University College London, United Kingdom, and her colleagues, noted: We applaud the decision by the Italian government to publish data that are fully sex- and age-disaggregated. Other countries [] are still not publishing national data in this way. We understand but regret this oversight.
At a minimum, we urgently call on countries to publicly report the numbers of diagnosed infections and deaths by sex. Ideally, countries would also disaggregate their data on testing by sex.

Anna Purdie et al.

Since then, countries that include Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain have made their data available.

The U.K. have made only a part of the sex-disaggregated data available for England and Wales, without covering Scotland and Northern Ireland while Malaysia and the U.S. have not made their sex-disaggregated data available at all.

At the time of writing this article, the U.S. still have not released their sex-disaggregated data despite the country having the highest number of COVID-19 cases in the world.

For more research-backed information and resources for mens health, please visit our dedicated hub.Was this helpful? Men more than twice as likely to die

Global Health 5050, an organization that promotes gender equality in healthcare, has rounded up the total and partial data that is available from the countries with the highest numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases.

According to their data gathering, the highest ratio of male to female deaths, as a result of COVID-19, is in Denmark and Greece: 2.1 to 1.

In these countries, men are more than twice as likely to die from COVID-19 as women. In Denmark, 5.7% of the total number of cases confirmed among men have resulted in death, whereas 2.7% of women with confirmed COVID-19 have died.

In the Republic of Ireland, the male to female mortality ratio is 2 to 1, while Italy and Switzerland have a 1.9 to 1 ratio each.

The greatest parity between the genders from countries that have submitted a full set of data are Iran, with 1.1 to 1, and Norway, with 1.2 to 1.

In Iran, 5.4% of the women patients have died, compared with 5.9% of the men. In Norway, these numbers stand at 1.3% and 1.1%, respectively.

China has a ratio of 1.7, with 2.8% of women having died, compared with 4.7% of men.
Infection rates in womenand men

A side-by-side comparison of infection rates between the sexes does not explain the higher death rates in men, nor is there enough data available to draw a conclusion about infection rates broken down by sexes.

However, it is worth noting that in Denmark, where men are more than twice as likely to die of COVID-19 as women, the proportion of women who contracted the virus was 54%, while that of men was 46%.

By contrast, in Iran, where the ratio of deaths between men and women is less different (1.1 to 1), just 43% of cases are female compared with 57% cases in men.

Until we know the proportion of people from each sex that healthcare professionals are testing, it will be difficult to fully interpret these figures.

What we do know so far is that, overall, nine of the 18 countries that have provided complete sex-disaggregated data have more COVID-19 cases among women than they do among men. Six of the 18 countries have more cases among men than they do among women.

Norway, Sweden, and Germany have a 5050% case ratio.

Other countries where more women have developed COVID-19 include:
Switzerland (53% of women to 47% of men)Spain (51% to 49%)The Netherlands (53% to 47%)Belgium (55% to 45%)South Korea (60% to 40%)Portugal (57% to 43%)Canada (52% to 48%)Republic of Ireland (52% to 45%)

Greece, Italy, Peru, China, and Australia all have a higher number of confirmed cases among men than women.Why are men more likely to die?

Part of the explanation for why the new coronavirus seems to cause more severe illness in men is down to biological sex differences.

Womens innate immune response plays a role. Experts agree that there are sex differences, such as sex chromosomes and sex hormones, that influence how a persons immunity responds to a pathogen.

As a result, women are in general able to mount a more vigorous immune response to infections [and] vaccinations. With previous coronaviruses, specifically, some studies in mice have suggested that the hormone estrogen may have a protective role.

For instance, in the study above, the authors note that in male mice there was an exuberant but ineffective cytokine response. Cytokines are responsible for tissue damage within the lungs and leakage from pulmonary blood vessels.

Estrogens suppress the escalation phase of the immune response that leads to increased cytokine release. The authors showed that female mice treated with an estrogen receptor antagonist died at close to the same rate as the male mice.

As some researchers have noted, lifestyle factors, such as smoking and alcohol consumption, which tend to occur more among men, may also explain the overall higher mortality rates among men.

Science has long linked such behaviors with conditions that we now know are likely to negatively influence the outcome of patients with COVID-19 cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and chronic lung conditions. Why women might be more at risk

On the other hand, the fact that societies have traditionally placed women in the role of caregivers a role which they continue to fulfill predominantly and the fact that the vast majority of healthcare workers are women cold place them at a higher risk of contracting the virus and might explain the higher infection rates in some countries.

An analysis of 104 countries by the World Health Organization (WHO) found that Women represent around 70% of the health workforce. In China, women make up more than 90% of healthcare workers in Hubei province.

These data emphasize the gendered nature of the health workforce and the risk that predominantly female health workers incur, write the authors of a report on the gendered impacts of the pandemic that appears in The Lancet.

Although we cannot yet draw definitive conclusions because sex-disaggregated data is not yet available from all the countries affected, The Lancet report looks at previous epidemics for clues.

During the 201416 west African outbreak of Ebola virus disease, the authors write, gendered norms meant that women were more likely to be infected by the virus, given their predominant roles as caregivers within families and as frontline healthcare workers.

The authors also call out for governments and health institutions to offer and analyze data on sex and gender differences in the pandemic.
Why sex-disaggregated data are urgent

The report in The Lancet reads, Recognising the extent to which disease outbreaks affect women and men differently is a fundamental step to understanding the primary and secondary effects of a health emergency on different individuals and communities, and for creating effective, equitable policies and interventions.

For instance, identifying the key difference that makes women more resilient to the infection could help create drugs that also strengthen mens immune response to the virus.

Devising policies and intervention strategies that consider the needs of women who work as frontline healthcare workers could help prevent the higher infection rates that we see among women.

Finally, men and women tend to react differently to potential vaccines and treatments, so having access to sex-disaggregated data is crucial for conducting safe clinical trials.

As Anna Purdie who also works for Global Health 5050 and her colleagues summarize in their article, Sex-disaggregated data are essential for understanding the distributions of risk, infection, and disease in the population, and the extent to which sex and gender affect clinical outcomes.
Understanding sex and gender in relation to global health should not be seen as an optional add-on but as a core component of ensuring effective and equitable national and global health systems that work for everyone. National governments and global health organizations must urgently face up to this reality.

Anna Purdie et al

For live updates on the latest developments regarding the novel coronavirus and COVID-19, click here.

Continue Reading

Politics

Ex-Tory chairman Sir Jake Berry defects to Reform

Published

on

By

Ex-Tory chairman Sir Jake Berry defects to Reform

Ex-Tory chairman Sir Jake Berry has defected to Reform, in the latest blow to the Conservatives.

The former MP for Rossendale and Darwen, who served as Northern Powerhouse minister under Boris Johnson and lost his seat last year, said he had defected to Nigel Farage’s party because the Tories had “lost their way”.

Politics latest: Labour rebel defends calls for ‘wealth tax’

Reform UK confirmed the defection to Sky News, which was first broken by The Sun.

Speaking to the paper, Sir Jake said Mr Farage’s party was the “last chance to pull Britain back from terminal decline”.

“Our streets are completely lawless,” he said.

“Migration is out of control. Taxes are going through the roof.

More on Reform Uk

“And day after day, I hear from people in my community and beyond who say the same thing: ‘This isn’t the Britain I grew up in’.”

Sir Jake accused his former party of “abandoning the British people” but said he was not “giving up”.

“I’m staying. And I’m fighting.

“Fighting for the Britain I want my kids, and one day, my grandkids, to grow up in.”

Mr Farage welcomed what he said was “a very brave decision” by Sir Jake.

“His admission that the Conservative government he was part of broke the country is unprecedented and principled,” he added.

A Conservative Party spokesman said: “Reform support increasing the benefits bill by removing the two-child cap, and nationalising British industry. By contrast the Conservatives, under new leadership, will keep making the case for sound money, lower taxes and bringing the welfare bill under control.

“We wish Jake well in his new high spend, high tax party.”

Sir Jake’s defection to Reform comes just days after former Conservative cabinet minister David Jones joined Reform UK, which continues to lead in the polls.

European Research Group (ERG) chair Mark Francois (left), and deputy chair David Jones, speak to the media outside Portcullis House, Westminster
Image:
Former Welsh secretary David Jones (R) alongside Tory MP Mark Francois. Pic: PA

Mr Jones, who was MP for Clwyd West from 2005 until standing down in 2024, said he had quit the Tories after “more than 50 years of continuous membership”.

Sir Jake was the MP Rossendale and Darwen in Lancashire between 2010 and 2024, when he was defeated by Labour’s Andy MacNae.

He held several ministerial posts including in the Department for Housing, Communities and Local Government, Energy and Climate Change and the Cabinet Office.

Nigel Farage holds up six fingers to indicate the six votes his party's candidate won by in the Runcorn and Helsby by-election.
Pic: Reuters
Image:
Nigel Farage after winning the Runcorn and Helsby by-election.
Pic: Reuters

He was also chairman of the Conservative Party from September to October 2022, under Liz Truss.

Announcing his defection – which comes a year after the Tories suffered their worst ever election defeat – Sir Jake said “Britain was broken” and “the Conservative governments I was part of share the blame”.

“We now have a tax system that punishes hard work and ambition,” he said.

“Just this week, we saw record numbers of our brightest and best people leaving Britain because they can’t see a future here. At the same time, our benefits system is pulling in the world’s poor with no plan for integration and no control over who comes in.

“If you were deliberately trying to wreck the country, you’d be hard-pressed to do a better job than the last two decades of Labour and Tory rule.

“Millions of people, just like me, want a country they can be proud of again. The only way we get that is with Reform in government. That’s why I’ve resigned from the Conservative Party. I’m now backing Reform UK and working to make them the next party of government.”

Read more:
Starmer and Macron agree need for new small boats ‘deterrent’
Controversial welfare bill passes final Commons stage

He added: “And with Nigel Farage leading Reform, we’ve got someone the country can actually trust. He doesn’t change his views to fit the mood of the day. And people respect that. So do I. That’s why I believe he should be our next prime minister.”

A Labour Party spokesperson said: “Not content with taking advice from Liz Truss, Nigel Farage has now tempted her Tory Party chairman into his ranks.

“It’s clear Farage wants Liz Truss’s reckless economics, which crashed our economy and sent mortgages spiralling, to be Reform’s blueprint for Britain. It’s a recipe for disaster and working people would be left paying the price.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Starmer and Macron agree need for ‘new deterrent’ to stop small boat crossings

Published

on

By

Starmer and Macron agree need for 'new deterrent' to stop small boat crossings

Sir Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron have agreed the need for a “new deterrent” to deter small boats crossings in the Channel, Downing Street has said.

The prime minister met Mr Macron this afternoon as part of the French president’s state visit to the UK, which began on Tuesday.

High up the agenda for the two leaders is the need to tackle small boat crossings in the Channel, which Mr Macron said yesterday was a “burden” for both the UK and France.

Politics latest: Plans for Donald Trump UK visit in ‘coming weeks’

The small boats crisis is a pressing issue for the prime minister, given that more than 20,000 migrants crossed the English Channel to the UK in the first six months of this year – a rise of almost 50% on the number crossing in 2024.

Sir Keir is hoping he can reach a deal for a one-in one-out return treaty with France, ahead of the UK-France summit on Thursday, which will involve ministerial teams from both nations.

The deal would see those crossing the Channel illegally sent back to France in exchange for Britain taking in any asylum seeker with a family connection in the UK.

More on Emmanuel Macron

However, it is understood the deal is still in the balance, with some EU countries unhappy about France and the UK agreeing on a bilateral deal.

French newspaper Le Monde reports that up to 50 small boat migrants could be sent back to France each week, starting from August, as part of an agreement between Sir Keir and Mr Macron.

A statement from Downing Street said: “The prime minister met the French President Emmanuel Macron in Downing Street this afternoon.

“They reflected on the state visit of the president so far, agreeing that it had been an important representation of the deep ties between our two countries.

“Moving on to discuss joint working, they shared their desire to deepen our partnership further – from joint leadership in support of Ukraine to strengthening our defence collaboration and increasing bilateral trade and investment.”

It added: “The leaders agreed tackling the threat of irregular migration and small boat crossings is a shared priority that requires shared solutions.

“The prime minister spoke of his government’s toughening of the system in the past year to ensure rules are respected and enforced, including a massive surge in illegal working arrests to end the false promise of jobs that are used to sell spaces on boats.

Read more:
Can PM turn diplomatic work with Macron into action on migration?
UN criticises Starmer’s welfare reforms

“The two leaders agreed on the need to go further and make progress on new and innovative solutions, including a new deterrent to break the business model of these gangs.”

Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, seized on the statement to criticise Labour for scrapping the Conservatives’ Rwanda plan, which the Tories claim would have sent asylum seekers “entering the UK illegally” to Rwanda.

He said in an online post: “We had a deterrent ready to go, where every single illegal immigrant arriving over the Channel would be sent to Rwanda.

“But Starmer cancelled this before it had a chance to start.

“Now, a year later, he’s realised he made a massive mistake. That’s why numbers have surged and this year so far has been the worst in history for illegal channel crossings.

“Starmer is weak and incompetent and he’s lost control of our borders.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Controversial welfare bill passes final Commons stage – but only after another concession

Published

on

By

Controversial welfare bill passes final Commons stage - but only after another concession

Sir Keir Starmer’s watered down welfare bill has passed its final stage in the Commons, after another concession was made to MPs.

The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payments Bill passed by 336 votes to 242 on Wednesday night – a majority of 94.

Politics latest: Starmer and Macron agree on need for new small boat ‘deterrent’

In a bid to thwart further opposition to the bill following last week’s climbdown, the government said it would not try to introduce any more reforms to personal independence payments (PIP) until a review by work and pensions minister Sir Stephen Timms on the assessment process has concluded.

Sir Stephen said he wanted to finish his review by next autumn, but that the government would not agree to complete the review in 12 months as some MPs wanted.

Marie Tidball, the Labour MP who had called for the 12-month limit, later signalled she was happy with the government’s compromise.

Ministers also agreed to her calls to have a majority of the taskforce looking at PIP to be disabled or from disability organisations, and for the outcome of the review to come before any PIP changes. It will also be voted on by MPs.

More on Benefits

A total of 47 Labour MPs have rebelled against the government to vote against its welfare reforms.

Mother of the House Diane Abbott, former minister Dawn Butler, Andy McDonald, Stella Creasy and Jonathan Brash were among those in the “no” lobby.

Meanwhile, MPs rejected a separate amendment by Green MP Sian Berry, which called for the basic rate of universal credit to increase by 4.8% above inflation each year until 2030.

A total of 39 Labour MPs voted for scrapping the clauses that halved Universal Credit for new claimants – the only major cut left in the bill after the government made its concessions.

The passing of the bill will come as a relief to Sir Keir Starmer, who last week was forced into a humiliating climbdown over his flagship welfare package in the face of significant opposition from his own MPs.

Read more:
What is a wealth tax?
UN criticises Starmer’s welfare reforms

Prior to the vote last Tuesday, the government offered significant concessions including exempting existing personal independence payment claimants (PIP) from stricter new criteria and only freezing and cutting the universal credit health top-up for new applications.

As the vote last week unfolded, it offered further confessions amid concerns the bill could be voted down – notably, that changes in eligibility for PIP would not take place until a review he is carrying out into the benefit is published in autumn 2026.

They ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to Universal Credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.

A total of 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill – the largest rebellion in a prime minister’s first year in office since 47 MPs voted against Tony Blair’s Lone Parent benefit in 1997, according to Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary University.

Continue Reading

Trending