Title: Chronic Underfunding of Women’s Health Startups Prompts Calls for Funding Equality
In a striking revelation, it has been discovered that women’s health startups in the United States have been significantly underfunded, leading to calls for a more equitable distribution of funding in the industry. According to Rock Health, a venture fund, a mere 3% of digital health venture capital investments between 2011 and mid-2020 were allocated to women’s health ventures. This chronic underinvestment represents a significant disparity, considering that women make up over 80% of health care buying decisions.
Last year, women’s health startups managed to secure over $1 billion in funding. While this may appear substantial, it pales in comparison to the funding received by other sectors, particularly in Silicon Valley where vast sums are often invested. Despite the substantial market potential for women’s health solutions, these ventures have been met with limited financial support, hindering their ability to grow and make a significant impact.
One such startup, Elanza Wellness, is tackling the issue of endometriosis—a condition affecting 1 in 10 women. Co-founder and CEO Brittany Hawkins acknowledges the challenges faced by women with endometriosis, from their pain being dismissed to the lack of adequate specialist care. Elanza Wellness aims to address these issues by providing accessible virtual care and utilizing data-driven insights to tailor and personalize treatment plans.
To shed light on the underfunding of women’s health startups, Hawkins suggests that unraveling societal conditioning is crucial. Talking about women’s health has historically been uncomfortable and, in recent times, has become even more contentious due to politicization. Conversations surrounding reproductive health, including the use of contraceptive hormones to manage endometriosis symptoms, have evoked diverse opinions and made investors hesitant to enter the domain.
When seeking funding, one of the obstacles faced by women’s health startups is demonstrating the potential market size. Insufficient previous funding makes it challenging to gauge the market opportunities accurately. Additionally, factors such as gender disparity in funding and the limited understanding of complex women’s health issues contribute to an inaccurate perception of the market’s potential size.
While progress has been made, the funding landscape for women and women’s health startups still has room for improvement. Female investors, who are more risk-averse during uncertain times, may be less inclined to invest in women’s health ventures. Moreover, the lack of familiarity and the complexity of women’s health conditions pose hurdles for investors. To address these challenges, a concerted effort is needed to destigmatize women’s health issues and prove their market viability.
Rock Health describes women’s health as a wide open white space with various unmet needs and market opportunities. For instance, combating the maternal mortality crisis among Black women and offering inclusive care for queer and transgender communities are crucial areas that require attention and investment.
In conclusion, the chronic underfunding of women’s health startups is a glaring oversight, especially considering women’s significant influence in healthcare decision-making. It is imperative that a more balanced and equitable approach is taken to ensure funding equality in this vital sector. By investing in women’s health startups, we can address the unmet needs of millions and pave the way for a brighter, healthier future.
