During the coronavirus pandemic in Russia, a unique phenomenon was revealed: men are stronger

Situation in Russia Doctor of Economics, Professor, Head of the Department of Population, Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University. Irina Kalabikhina calls Lomonosov strange. Analytical data collected from around the world clearly shows that men are losing out. Male super-mortality everywhere has grown at a faster rate than overall super-mortality, and almost nowhere has COVID dissonanced the gender gap. After the introduction of mass vaccination in Europe, people over 65 began to die significantly less often, but everywhere men showed worse survival rates.

However, Rosstat data show that in Russia the trends are completely different – if in 2019-2021 the loss of life expectancy among men was 2.73 years, then among women it was 3.66 years. The difference of almost a year is enormous. Many hypotheses have already been put forward on this topic. That the income level of the population, migration, unemployment, climate, the share of pensioners in the region, the availability of doctors, self-isolation, employment and much more could have an impact, but no one has yet been able to establish a single reason.

Researchers from Moscow State University have tried to solve the mystery of women’s demographic loss in the pandemic years. They examined various factors (determinants) that could have influenced this situation. “Until now, there have been attempts to study the determinants of excess mortality not in relation to sex differences, but we decided to conduct studies of the causes by gender. We saw how life expectancy grew in the country during the decade on the eve of COVID, but the pandemic came and we lost saved lives And by gender, we had different reactions to the crisis, as a result of which a strange Russian phenomenon of women’s loss was formed,” says Irina Kalabikhina.

Men’s loss in the pandemic was chewed up in detail in a publication in The Lancet. There are several arguments: a genetic factor (the presence of a second X chromosome in women), hormonal (a higher survival rate for women is provided by the female hormone estrogen), an immune response (innate and adaptive immunity in women is stronger), an increased tendency for men to smoke, a more developed habit in women to daily personal hygiene, ignoring the doctor in case of illness and delaying the visit to him in men. According to all signs, men should have died out at a higher rate in our country, but this did not happen.

Russian scientists believe that sociological factors may also play a role in gender mortality. For example, a lack of resources makes paid medicine, good food, or a private car less affordable, which increases the risk of contact. In addition, we have feminized professions in the contact service sector, which also increases the risk of contacts among women. Or the low level of digitalization in the regions forces people to meet in person.

Scientists from Moscow State University also analyzed such factors as the gap in the level of employment by gender, as well as in the level of wages; the ratio of time spent by men and women on housekeeping; the number of doctors and nursing staff in the region during the pandemic, the percentage of men and women using public services via the Internet or making online purchases, etc.

“We found out that the prevalence of covid female mortality was recorded in the vast majority of regions, with rare exceptions, which are modernized Moscow and St. Petersburg, as well as some regions with not very reliable statistics, and we made models for male and female supermortality,” says Kalabikhina.

As a result, as the expert continues, the demographic story did not work: “We lost some of the fragile men in the pandemic, and suggested that the answer might be due to what ages? It turned out that women died from COVID more often in old age, while men – in the young and middle. While we reflect on these results. “

Studying the factor of gender inequality (in terms of employment and income), scientists came to the conclusion that women had fewer resources to cope with problems during the pandemic, but men had to experience greater workloads, which negatively affects survival. However, as the researchers noted, in In other countries, gender inequality has not led to female supermortality. Perhaps because the effect of gender inequality in other countries was offset by social support measures.

One more observation. In the first two waves of the pandemic, both men and women spent more time on housework, but still the main “blow” fell on women. Since men were more likely to be at home, they had fewer opportunities to get infected at work (unemployment also benefited them in this regard). Child care did not affect the mortality rate in any way. But a positive relationship was found between the concentration of doctors and female losses (for men there is no such relationship): scientists explain this by the fact that women are more likely to work in healthcare. But of all online services, including public services, only distance selling has affected the protection of the population from infection. And…in a negative way. Regions with a higher percentage of online shopping users have higher rates of morbidity and mortality among women. Perhaps the reason is that in such regions the level of offline mobility of the population is simply higher, scientists suggest.

Master’s student of the Faculty of Economics, Moscow State University. Lomonosov Mikhail Maksimov spoke about which hypotheses were not confirmed. The losses were not influenced in any way by the share of teachers in the region (it was assumed that since women are more likely to work in schools, this could be one of the reasons for their supermortality). And yet it is inaccurate. The transition of schools to distance learning was carried out at the municipal levels, and it is impossible to get an objective picture from these data. Health spending in a particular region also turned out to be insignificant. It was also assumed that in cities the risk of spreading the infection is higher, as well as in crowded households (extended families). However, these parameters did not fit into the scheme, as they led to data confusion. It was also not possible to include such factors as the self-isolation index and the level of vaccination in the model, so many questions remain open.

But here’s what is most curious – and also requiring a separate scientific explanation. In 2022, women have almost returned to pre-COVID levels of life expectancy, but men have not! “Although the pandemic hit women harder, they were able to quickly compensate for the fall. Questions arise – why is this so? Men suffered from the pandemic for a long time, which demonstrated the fragility of their bodies,” says Mikhail Maksimov.

Other experts note that some determinants that could have an impact on the situation are still outside the scope of the study. For example, it has not been studied what the influence of the marriage factor is. “Indirectly, we tried to assess the impact of household size, but it turned out to be difficult. If there are few family members, women go to the store more often, increasing the risk of contact; if there are grandchildren, they bring the virus, this works symmetrically. As with comparing life in a city or a village there were no differences: in the city, medical care is more accessible, but in the village there are fewer contacts and it is more difficult to get sick, so one compensates for the other,” the researchers note.

An exhaustive explanation for the Russian phenomenon has not yet been found, but research will continue.