No amount of handwashing or social distancing is going to change the fact that women will be more adversely impacted by the coronavirus pandemic than men.

And the reasons behind this phenomenon are more sociological than biological, experts say.

A recent article published in the medical journal The Lancet looked at the gendered impact of the COVID-19 outbreak.

It concluded that, based on research from previous epidemics, women will bear the lion’s share of the consequences.

During the 2014-16 outbreak of Ebola in west Africa, for example, gendered norms meant that women were more likely to be infected by the virus, because of their predominant roles in both paid and unpaid healthcare.

In the COVID-19 epicentre of Hubei, government data showed that more than 90 per cent of healthcare workers in the central China province were women, placing many more females than males directly in the virus’ path.

In the video below, the latest on possible school closures due to coronavirus

AMA President Tony Bartone says the decision on whether to close down schools is being assessed daily

In Australia, 79.9 per cent of those working in the healthcare and social assistance sectors are women.

That said, it appears women are also less likely than men to die from the virus.

Health experts are not sure why this is the case, although early research suggests gender-specific immunity is playing a role.

But it is not just that fact that more women than men are placing their health on the line in the age of coronavirus, says gender expert Amy Haddad.

Over-representation

Women are more vulnerable to COVID-19 due to their economic insecurity, their over-representation in certain sectors of the economy, their caring responsibilities, and the feminisation of the education and healthcare sectors, she says.

In short, women’s financial and well as physical health, is more on the line than men’s.

A woman wears a medical mask as a precaution against the coronavirus in Sarajevo, Bosnia. Credit: Anadolu Agency / Getty

“In all the anxiety we’re experiencing from COVID-19, governments and other policymakers are losing sight of what should be a basic health policy principle: That pandemics, and their resulting economic shocks, affect men and women differently,” she says.

“Hand-washing, social distancing and self-isolation will all contribute to containing the exponential rise in cases.

“But none of these measures address the gendered nature of pandemics and why the burden of the disease will largely be felt by women.”

Here’s why:

Employment

Women are over-represented in industries reliant on casual workers, where there is no access to paid sick leave.

Women are also more likely to work in industries expected to be hardest hit by the COVID-19- induced economic slump.

Data from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency shows women make up 57.7 per cent of all retail workers.

A nurse wears a face mask as a precaution against transmission of the coronavirus in Madrid, Spain. Credit: Pablo Cuadra / Getty

But break the retail sector down further and it gets even worse.

In fashion, 84.2 per cent of employees are women, in department stores 66.1 per cent of employees are women and in furnishings and homewares 71.3 per cent are women.

“These are all retail sectors already under strain,” says Haddad, who has written an article on the issue in the University of Canberra’s online publication BroadAgenda.

“The combination of insecure employment and exposure to economic shock will hit women harder.”

School closures

“Women will bear the impact of closing universities, schools and childcare centres, because women are the majority of workers in these settings,” says Haddad, citing data from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency.

Almost 58 per cent of all university workers (particularly in non-management, professional, clerical and community service roles) are women, 72 per cent of those working in schools are women and 95.6 per cent of childcare workers.

Medical staff at the San Camillo - Forlanini Hospital in Italy. Credit: Getty

Add into the mix the fact that more women than men work in front-line healthcare roles, says Haddad, and there will be increasing tension between the country’s essential need for a health workforce at peak capacity, and the expected scenario of more women than men taking time off to care for kids no longer in school.

The Lancet paper noted that the closure of schools in China, Hong Kong, Italy, South Korea and elsewhere to control the spread of COVID-19 are having a greater impact on women, because they still provide most of the informal care within families.

This, in turn, impacts women’s work and economic opportunities.

Stockpiling

More women than men live below the poverty line, accord to a 2018 report by the Australia Council of Social Service (ACOSS).

Haddad also pointed to data released by the Australia Bureau of Statistics last December, which found the majority of long-term recipients of Newstart, Youth Allowance, and parenting payments, were women.

Poor people do not have the financial resources to panic buy, or the ability to pay more for basic goods as demand cause prices to surge.

Empty toilet paper shelves in a Sydney supermarket on March 4. Credit: PAUL BRAVEN / AAP

“Commonsense tells us it takes more money to stockpile, and women are more likely to be poor,” she says.

“You can’t stockpile without flexibility in your budget.”

And when it comes to the highly prized item in every hoarder’s shopping trolley?

“Yes, women probably use more toilet paper than men too.”

Mental health

Chinese researchers working in the central Chinese city of Wuhan found that among healthcare workers, women were more likely to have depression, anxiety and insomnia than their male colleagues because women assumed most of the burden of caring for patients.

More on 7NEWS.com.au

According to the World Health Organisation, women are the majority of sufferers in the areas of depression, anxiety and somatic complaints.

WHO cited a raft of factors, including low income and income inequality, low or subordinate social status and unremitting responsibility for the care of others.

What can be done?

Not a great deal, at least on an individual level, Haddad concludes, apart from encouraging men to step up and share an equal burden of family care that will inevitably rise as the virus spreads.

“It really has to be at a policy-making level, and it’s the policymakers that need to get into the habit of thinking about the gender differences,” she says.