In Korea, where women's labor participation trails behind at 55 percent compared to 73 percent for men, women are facing a severe mental and physical health crisis. Although women generally outlive men on average, they spend about 25 percent more time in poor health, particularly during their prime working years, recent statistics showed. 

Last year, depression struck seven in 10 people in Korea, a figure that has surged dramatically, according to the latest National Center for Mental Health survey. Women bear the brunt of this, not just because they suffer more, but because they’re “more willing to confront their pain,” Dr. Michelle A. Williams, Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said during McKinsey & Company’s session on women’s health gap at the 2024 World Knowledge Forum held in Incheon on Monday.

The numbers are concerning, and not just for mental health. Korea now holds one of the highest rates of single-person households, which reached an all-time high of 42 percent of all households last year, according to the Ministry of Interior and Safety. “This growing social isolation, especially among women, is deeply concerning as birth rates continue to decline,” said Richard Lee, senior partner at McKinsey & Company in Seoul.

But depression doesn’t stand alone; it often exacerbates chronic conditions like hypertension and diabetes, creating a complex cycle of suffering that’s hard to escape. 

“Depression intensifies these conditions, placing an even greater burden on individuals and the system," Williams said. "The costs, both personal and societal, are immense, made worse by delayed or inadequate treatment."

Consider the impact if this trend were reversed: adding just seven extra days of healthy living per woman annually could pump $1 trillion into the global economy by 2040.

At the 2024 World Knowledge Forum, McKinsey & Company unveiled a compelling analysis highlighting that investing in women’s health isn’t just a moral imperative—it’s a massive economic opportunity.

For centuries, advances in health have fueled economic growth and productivity worldwide. Yet, when it comes to women’s health, this progress has stalled. “More time spent in poor health means fewer choices and diminished productivity,” Dr. Lucy Pérez, senior partner at McKinsey & Company in Boston and co-leader of the McKinsey Health Institute, said.

Women, often battling through illness and discomfort to keep their jobs, could reclaim an average of seven full workdays per year if this health gap were closed. This would mean more time to contribute fully and effectively in their roles.

But the implications stretch beyond the workplace. Women are typically the chief decision-makers for their families’ health and the primary caregivers—responsibilities that often pull them away from their jobs. When you add up these factors, the economic potential becomes clear, according to Pérez. It's a "trillion-dollar opportunity."

Consider endometriosis, a condition affecting one in 10 women, with a prevalence comparable to diabetes. The diagnosis often comes too late—seven to nine years on average—while treatment options are sparse. “With no cure and management focusing on symptom control or surgery, the market for better solutions is enormous,” said Pérez.

The success of Viagra, launched for erectile dysfunction and raking in $400 million in its first three months in 1998, and $2.1 billion by 2012, underscores the potential for similar breakthroughs in women's health. Conditions like endometriosis and menopause, with their significant unmet needs, offer similar opportunities for innovation, said Pérez. 

According to Williams, the market potential for endometriosis could reach between $120 billion and $200 billion. “If we invest more in research for endometriosis—especially in diagnostics and treatments—we’re talking about a field with market potential even larger than cardiovascular drugs,” Pérez added. “These are big opportunities for investors to consider.'"

Pérez said that for too long, the term “women’s health” has been shackled to a narrow definition: reproductive health. While crucial, it constitutes only about 5 percent of the global disease burden women face. In reality, over 50 percent of the global burden of disease affecting women comes from conditions like heart disease, which impact women differently or disproportionately compared to men.

The issue is compounded when it comes to pharmacotherapy; women are more likely to experience adverse effects from medications due to their underrepresentation in clinical trials. 

Even when included, gender-specific data often remains unanalyzed. As a result, drugs are 3.5 times more likely to be pulled from the market due to severe or fatal reactions experienced by women.

“This isn’t just about trivial health concerns,” Williams said. “It’s about everyday struggles that impact families and inflate research costs.”

Williams, whose career spans from her early days as a professor to her recent leadership at Harvard and Stanford, has witnessed these disparities first hand throughout her academic journey. “The infrastructure often creates barriers that hinder women’s professional advancement while they juggle family and community duties,” she said, noting that in academia – the field she knows best – “addressing this requires more than just recognizing the barriers; it demands concrete actions.”

One such action she advocates for is normalizing policies that foster work-life balance, like extending the tenure clock for family needs. “These policies must be more than just words on paper,” Williams said, emphasizing that they need to be genuinely adopted and not viewed as a sign of weakness. “Using these benefits should never be viewed as a professional misstep.”

The false dichotomy of “work-life balance” needs to be rejected, she added. “We need to acknowledge and demonstrate that it’s impossible to be perfect in both areas at all times.”

Leaders, Williams argued, must make it clear that taking leave to care for family—whether for children or elderly relatives—is not only acceptable but often necessary. "As societies age and caregiving responsibilities expand, creating a work environment that supports both personal and professional growth is essential."

She added that the notion that individuals must choose between career and caregiving is a misleading one. “We need environments, be they in academia or business, that acknowledge and accommodate these realities, providing support systems to help people thrive in both their personal and professional lives.”

This model, which facilitated collaboration between governments and the private sector to accelerate Covid-19 vaccine development, shows how public-private partnerships can drive rapid healthcare innovation. Williams argued that this policy approach should be leveraged to tackle long-standing health disparities.

“We often hear the mantra ‘people over profits,’ but it’s time to turn this rhetoric into reality,” she said.

Pérez added that addressing this issue demands a comprehensive ecosystem, although it’s "understandable that investors gravitate towards areas with a higher probability of success, particularly when resources are limited," when considering where to allocate R&D dollars.

Historically, investment has skewed towards understanding male biology, with a focus on reproductive organs and a neglect of the complexities of the second X chromosome. 

Once deemed the “silent X,” this chromosome is now known to play a crucial role in various health conditions. “This gap in research helps explain the higher prevalence of autoimmune diseases among women, a reminder of the need for a more inclusive approach to scientific research,” Pérez said.