Tangela Q. Parker, Contributing Writer | Women’s Health Commentary
My mentor was 50 when she died from heart disease.
She was accomplished, disciplined, and deeply committed to the people around her. Nothing about her life suggested fragility. Yet her passing forced a difficult question into the open: how can a condition that claims more women’s lives than any other illness still exist in the background of public urgency?
Heart disease remains the leading cause of death for women in the United States, accounting for roughly one in five female deaths each year. It claims more lives than all forms of cancer combined, yet it rarely carries the same cultural visibility, philanthropic momentum, or sustained public conversation.¹
Part of the silence is structural. For decades, cardiovascular research relied heavily on male physiology as the clinical baseline. Clinical trials enrolled more men than women, and diagnostic expectations evolved around symptom patterns most commonly observed in male patients. The widely recognized image of a heart attack, intense chest pain radiating down the left arm, emerged from those data sets and still shapes public perception today.
Women often experience cardiac events differently. Symptoms such as shortness of breath, unusual fatigue, nausea, jaw discomfort, or back pain may not immediately fit traditional expectations. When presentation diverges from established patterns, the margin for delayed recognition grows. Research has shown that women are more likely to be misdiagnosed following cardiac events and may experience delays in receiving time-sensitive interventions during critical early stages of care.²
These clinical gaps do not exist in isolation. They intersect with long-standing social expectations that shape how women respond to their own health signals. Many women normalize exhaustion, postpone appointments, or deprioritize symptoms in order to meet professional and family obligations. When hesitation outside the hospital meets uncertainty inside it, valuable time is lost.
The issue extends beyond awareness into credibility. A woman experiencing subtle symptoms often must decide whether her discomfort justifies interrupting her responsibilities, then navigate whether those concerns will be taken seriously once she seeks care. That dual negotiation, internal and external, influences how quickly attention is sought and how assertively it is pursued.
Public health campaigns have increased visibility around women’s cardiovascular health, and corporate partnerships have helped expand recognition during annual observances such as Heart Month. Visibility, however, does not automatically recalibrate diagnostic frameworks or correct historical imbalances in research participation. Without sustained structural shifts in study design, clinical training, and frontline protocols, disparities can persist even as messaging improves.
The economic implications are equally significant. Cardiovascular disease contributes to substantial healthcare costs and lost productivity across industries. When women delay care or encounter gaps in recognition, the consequences extend beyond individual outcomes into families, workplaces, and communities.
There has been measurable progress over the past two decades. Survival rates have improved, and broader education efforts have expanded public understanding. Progress, however, does not necessarily translate to parity. In several cardiac conditions, women continue to experience higher complication rates and different recovery trajectories compared with men. The challenge is no longer whether the data exist. The question is whether institutions are prepared to respond to what the data reveal.
Heart disease is not a peripheral women’s issue. It sits at the center of public health, leadership longevity, and community stability. Until healthcare systems consistently recognize how cardiovascular disease presents across diverse populations of women, awareness campaigns will continue to outpace structural change. Science has moved forward. The systems surrounding it must do the same, not as an aspiration, but as an inevitable next standard of care.
inCity Magazine continues to explore the intersection of leadership, longevity, and structural health equity. Organizations interested in contributing to future Women’s Health features or institutional roundtables may direct editorial inquiries through Editorial Desk.
Sources
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Heart Disease Facts for Women.
- American Heart Association. Sex Differences in Cardiovascular Disease Diagnosis and Outcomes.
Tangela is a contributing writer whose work examines women’s health, leadership, and the structural factors influencing long-term wellbeing.
Editorial Note
This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Readers are encouraged to consult qualified healthcare professionals regarding personal medical concerns.
Leave a Reply