The much-debated phenomenon of "man flu" may have some basis in fact, researchers have said.
A Canadian study was carried out to determine whether men really do experience worse symptoms than women or whether it is just a myth.
Dr Kyle Sue, a clinical assistant professor at Memorial University of Newfoundland, suggested men may not be exaggerating symptoms but have weaker immune responses to viral respiratory viruses.
In what is thought to be the first study of its kind, he analysed relevant research and found evidence that adult men have a higher risk of hospital admission and higher rates of influenza associated deaths compared with women, regardless of underlying disease.
Men are also more susceptible to complications and higher mortality from many acute respiratory diseases, while some evidence supported men suffering more from viral respiratory illness than women because they have a less robust immune system.
Writing in the BMJ, Dr Sue argued the concept of man flu, as commonly defined, is potentially unjust and further research is needed.
"Men may not be exaggerating symptoms but have weaker immune responses to viral respiratory viruses, leading to greater morbidity and mortality than seen in women," he writes.
He said there may actually be an evolutionary benefit to a less robust immune system, as it has allowed men to invest their energy in other biological processes, "such as growth, secondary sex characteristics, and reproduction".
No scientific study has ever been carried out before to determine whether the term man flu is appropriate or accurate.
Dr Sue added: "Lying on the couch, not getting out of bed, or receiving assistance with activities of daily living could also be evolutionary behaviours that protect against predators.
"Perhaps now is the time for male friendly spaces, equipped with enormous televisions and reclining chairs, to be set up where men can recover from the debilitating effects of man flu in safety and comfort."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here