123
Women suffer more pain than men across the whole body, major global study finds
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2026
123 points (91.8% liked)
Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related
4545 readers
186 users here now
Health: physical and mental, individual and public.
Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.
See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.
Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.
Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.
Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.
Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
paul wasn't saying they definitely feel less pain than they report; he was saying that this study can only measure their reported pain, not their actual pain. He does not need to give you the specific disproof you are looking for because he is not claiming the study's conclusion is definitely false, just that its methodology is not sufficient to prove its conclusion.
That’s true of the men in the study as well, so why is the data about their pain more trustworthy? You need to come up with an explanation for why women or men would nearly universally, cross-culturally engage in over or under reporting without even knowing it if you’re going to throw the baby out with the bathwater and claim it’s all unknowable.
I should really stop responding if you aren't going to read the thread. Tl;dr: Their data is not any more reliable and it's insane that you think that claim was being made at any point.
And "You need to come up with an explanation"-- no, we don't. The article's title is an illogical claim to make based on the study's methodology. Pointing that out does not require coming up with a reason why the two values (reported vs experienced pain) might differ, it only requires pointing out that they are not necessarily correlated. The authors of the study knew this, which is why they did not make the claim that the article is making.
i mean, you're arguing with someone who is repeatedly demonstrated they don't care about science. they care about pushing an ideological gender narrative that women are superior to men, that agrees with the sensationalized reporting in the article.
they are engaging in bias confirmation and fighting back against anyone whose comments don't agree with their own bias.
‘All pain study findings are fake because you can’t objectively measure it’ is an even worse response to the findings.
It's also a more correct response though. The idea is to point out a potential flaw in the conclusion drawn from the study, not to say that it should be entirely ignored. Recognizing what is and is not being measured to identify limitations is like science 101, it's taught in every science class in school, and yet the article fails to do it; so we are doing it instead.
It absolutely isn’t ’more correct’, and it’s absurd to act like it’s scientific to pretend these basic questions aren’t addressed in study design. Go dig up the specific quotes from the study that demonstrate the specific methodology you have a problem with, you are not a better scientist than someone published in fucking Nature with this incredibly basic complaint about pain studies.
You have to be trolling. Again, the study is fine. The article's title is the thing drawing an unsupported conclusion. I've said this before:
I will not respond further. Please read arguments before responding to them.