As I say, in higher-income countries it’s probably a great project for an EA community member to take on with non-EA government funding (which is far more freely available if you are sufficiently trained in public health).
For sanitary product handout in low-income countries, I note this study https://​​pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​​36185073/​​ which puts a number at $2300/​​DALY for menstrual cups. That’s great (it’s about 10x the cost-effectiveness bar the government of a higher-income country might use for its citizens), but it’s nowhere close to the EA funding bar which is about $80/​​DALY at the moment I think—about 50x as much.
EA money has a very high cost-effectiveness bar. Something not reaching it doesn’t mean that thing is not a good thing, it just means that we haven’t (yet) worked out how to get it cost-effective enough that we can save more lives by reallocting our grant pots towards it. If you can think of a way to deliver menopause education (or sanitary product handout) in a way that’s many times more cost-effective than the standard method, it might be worth doing some additional investigation?
NOVAH (domenstic violence prevention), Lafiyah Nigeria (contraceptive access), and FEM (contraceptive awareness) are the women-specific EA charities I know. There are also very good arguments that the Against Malaria Foundation has substantial benefit to women, as every child’s life saved is a mother who does not have to grieve.
As I say, in higher-income countries it’s probably a great project for an EA community member to take on with non-EA government funding (which is far more freely available if you are sufficiently trained in public health).
For sanitary product handout in low-income countries, I note this study https://​​pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/​​36185073/​​ which puts a number at $2300/​​DALY for menstrual cups. That’s great (it’s about 10x the cost-effectiveness bar the government of a higher-income country might use for its citizens), but it’s nowhere close to the EA funding bar which is about $80/​​DALY at the moment I think—about 50x as much.
EA money has a very high cost-effectiveness bar. Something not reaching it doesn’t mean that thing is not a good thing, it just means that we haven’t (yet) worked out how to get it cost-effective enough that we can save more lives by reallocting our grant pots towards it. If you can think of a way to deliver menopause education (or sanitary product handout) in a way that’s many times more cost-effective than the standard method, it might be worth doing some additional investigation?
NOVAH (domenstic violence prevention), Lafiyah Nigeria (contraceptive access), and FEM (contraceptive awareness) are the women-specific EA charities I know. There are also very good arguments that the Against Malaria Foundation has substantial benefit to women, as every child’s life saved is a mother who does not have to grieve.