Surfacing research proves the Sub-Saharan African traditions of Female Genital Mutilation and Female Genital Cutting (FGM/FGC) lead to long-term health consequences. Such health problems are found to impact the delivery and health of newborns.  Researchers and anthropologists from the Autonomus University of Barcelona collected data from 588 females in The Gambia.  Data were carefully gathered through questionnaires and physical examinations of the female patients, and analyzed with 95% confidence intervals. The results showed that 75.6% of the women had undergone FGM or FGC, and these women had a significantly higher prevalence of health problems including dysmenorrhea, vulvar or vaginal pain, fibrosis, keloid, synechia, and sexual dysfunction.  Furthermore, research showed these women were four times more likely to experience delivery complications such as perineal tear, obstructed labor, episiotomy, cesarean-necessitated delivery, and stillbirth.

The Foundation for Research on Women’s Health reported that seven of The Gambia’s nine ethnic groups practice FGM or FGC on girls between the ages of 10 and 15.  Female Genital Mutilation and Cutting occurs in four types.  Type I is a partial clitoridectomy, Type II is a full removal of the clitoris, Type III is a partial or full excision of the external genitalia, and Type IV is vaginal sealing.  While FGM and FGC are not common in many parts of the world, The Gambia sees these practices as rooted in customs and traditions dependent upon ethnic, religious, and cultural foundations.  Culturally, these practices are seen as “rites of passage” into womanhood, and guarantee a woman’s sexual purity, as pleasure is removed from the woman’s body.

Alternatively, FGM and FGC have been internationally recognized as violations of women’s rights and cruel discriminations against women.  Furthermore, since these practices are almost always carried out on minors, sometimes without parental consent, issues of children’s rights also come into play.  The World Health Organization characterized these practices as violating “a person’s rights to health, security, and physical integrity” as well as “the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” especially when these practices frequently lead to death or long-term health problems.

While it is difficult to impose regulations on cultural traditions so foreign to the Western world, it is important to document the surfacing research that points to the long-term hazards that accompany these practices.  The next steps should be educational outreaches informing the women of The Gambia of the dangers involved with FGM and FGC. This way, they may best make decisions to protect their reproductive health while preserving and respecting their cultural identity.

Sources: Dovepress, The UN Refugee Agency, and The World Health Organization

Geneticists, researchers, and patients joined in celebration over last week’s unanimous Supreme Court ruling involving the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, colloquially referred to as the “breast cancer genes.”  The Supreme Court ruled that Myriad Genetics could not patent the BRCA1 and BRCA2 sequence of genes, because patents cannot be placed on that which is created organically in nature.  This decision opens the door for researchers outside of Myriad Genetics to study these genes, providing more opportunities to discover early signs of breast cancer susceptibility.  Karuna Jaggar, Breast Cancer Action’s Executive Director reported that this ruling was, “a tremendous victory for women with a known or suspected inherited risk of breast cancer. Today, the Court righted a wrong and has put patients’ health before corporate profits.”

Prior to this ruling, bio-tech conglomerate, Myriad Genetics, held patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, monopolizing the research that can be done on these genes, which are strong indicators of susceptibility to breast cancer. Myriad had used their patents to come up with its BRACAnalysis test, which searches for specific mutations in these cancer predisposition genes.  Women who show these mutations have a three to seven times greater risk of developing breast cancer.  Myriad’s previously established patents on these genes gave them exclusive rights to use this genetic test on these genes.  Now that the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are open to outside researchers, scientists can use these genes to determine increased risks of patients who may develop breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and other cancers that these genes may help indicate.

Angelina Jolie recently made headlines for deciding to voluntarily undergo a double mastectomy after learning of her own BRCA genes' mutations.  Jolie had paid a high price for this test, since Myriad had a monopoly on the market, driving up the cost.  So what does this mean for the average, non-Angelina Jolie woman? Well, now this test will be widely available for more women at a more affordable price (we don’t all have as deep of pockets as Jolie).  This ruling will not only open the door for more opportunities for preventative screenings for breast cancer, but it will set a precedent for the scientific community to collaborate on research towards the common good.

For more information on this court ruling, please refer to this posts's sources found here and here.

Think men and women receive equal care after traumas? Think again.  A recent study found that women are less likely than men to receive trauma treatment after severe injuries.  Dr. Andrea Hill of the Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and the University of Toronto’s research on gender-based inequalities found that, across all age groups, 20-30% fewer women are cared for after traumas.  The study and analysis were conducted by observing 99,000 adult patients throughout Canada.  After controlling for demographic and socioeconomic factors, Hill and her colleagues were shocked at such disproportions between male and female patient care.  Hill affirms that “gender-based disparities in access to health care services in general have been recognized for some time,” and she calls for further research into the underlying factors involved in these gender gaps.

To read more about this issue, please view the original article here.

On Tuesday, December 18^th the Women’s Health Research Institute hosted speakers at the monthly lunch series to discuss women’s health, HIV and the vast advances made in HIV care the past 20 years. Although many aspects of HIV transmission, susceptibility, physicality and progress were examined, I was intrigued most by the research presented by Dr. Patricia Garcia on HIV transmission from mother to child.

Dr. Garcia thoughtfully described her vision of a generation without HIV. In that vision, she touched upon the methods through which rapid testing can detect whether a mother is HIV positive, and how that information can be used, along with new prevention methods to create a generation born without HIV.

The data Dr. Garcia presented was very powerful, showing how changes in HIV diagnosis vary greatly by race and gender. She highlighted that of all AIDS diagnoses from 1985-2010, the estimated percentage among adult and adolescent females increased from 7% in 1985 to 25% in 2010.

  Dr. Garcia further showed how the state of Illinois had progressed greatly over the last 15 year, making rapid HIV testing easily available in 2005, at which point the knowledge of HIV status among pregnant women increased significantly. This development influenced the considerable reduction in HIV+ births in the state of Illinois.

 The message is one of continued hope and the success of good health care research. With hard work, women’s health experts and community members saw an issue amongst women and children that could be improved with access, knowledge and prevention, giving new life to an entire generation of children.