Page 1 of 1 pages
We really should see more of what we are trying to save. A topless walk for saving breasts would be a wonderful way to raise money, consciousness and, um, you know. . .
Posted by wolf on Dec 15, 2006 at 9:16 AM
Does Lucinda Marshall know what doesn’t cause cancer?! Grilled chicken has carcenogens also…so do we go back to fried chicken and clog our arteries? How about eating chicken RAW! Then we can get sick more quickly and Marshall can speak the evils of chicken farming!!!
The point of buying those beautiful pink packages are numerous:
1) It’s a variation of a product you already had in mind
2) it doesn’t cost more to do something good for cancer research
3) it feels good to give to socially consious products
4) PINK is a visual reminder that it is time to check your breasts for lumps if you haven’t already been doing it and to remind your friends and family
I don’t personally care if Lucinda Marshall gets a mammogram or not. It is an individual choice. I do appreciate the medical community for doing all that they can to help women prevent and detect breast cancer and also to treat it. Nobody likes chemotherapy or radiation…but until science comes up with something better, whatareyagoin’do?
I don’t think this “femisist” really cares about women and health issues as much as she is trying to write a controversial piece and get her name out there. Congrats, Lucy, you are in print. Bottomline for you, isn’t it?!
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 15, 2006 at 5:39 PM
Lucinda has made some really interesting points. One of the problems is that organizations that need money seem to think that they have to “sell” something to get people to give. Frankly I’d rather just give them the same amount of money so that all of it goes to work rather than buy something that I’d probably not buy anyway…such as pink M&Ms;.... and what is actually happening is that we’ve allowed corporate interests to promote their products rather than to make sizable donations to a cause that’s important to women.
And I agree with Lucinda’s information as to the causes of breast cancer, which again relates to corporations whose manufacture of chemicals and other products contribute massively to all kinds of disease in humans…
Posted by babe on Dec 19, 2006 at 8:37 AM
First of all, what is this quote by Jaynse Ashley? Penis trinkets?! Livestrong uses yellow wrist bands to promote testicular cancer awareness. No one has breasts trinkets for breast cancer awareness. Quote is nonsensical. Secondly, corporations are “giving” back and doing something for the good of the people. Hazards exist in industry…one cannot get around it. How many people who complain about the ills of industry only ride their bicycles to work, only use produce brought to retailers on a horse and carriage, only heat and cool their homes with what nature provides? I would be buying pink m&M’s because of the BCA program and the fact I buy the candy any way. I did go out of my way to purchase a pink Dyson as my old vacuum needed replaced. I did buy a whole bunch of BCA pink KitchenAid appliances and utensils for my daughter as her favorite color is pink, and I bought all of my daughters the pink Better Homes and Gardens cookbooks. We have a dear friend who had a double mascestomy 10 years ago due to breast cancer. She has two daughters that are genetically predisposed to breast cancer also. The genetic predispositions dramatically affects the how the environmental causes will impact the individual.
As a journalist, will Lucinda only submit and write for firms using only 100% recycled paper? Will she hand deliver each article? Will she rely on the “evil” transportation industry to get newspapers and magazines delivered? Will she only use the internet thus utilizing the services of the “evil” power industry? What kind of car does she drive? What kind of car do YOU drive?
Hypocrisy runs rampant, once again!
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 19, 2006 at 1:34 PM
Before stating that anyone is a hypocrit on this issue or stating how corporations are “giving back” you’ll need to do your homework. It’s corporations that have gotten us into the war in Iraq and most all other wars. It’s corporations such as the World Bank and the IMF that have destroyed the economy in other countries.
It’s corporations that make products that pollute, poison, kill us, etc…all for a profit. All corporations are not suspect but most of them are. Do your home work…. sure Bill Gates gives back but he still has a monopoly on computer software and is one of the world’s richest men. I don’t begrudge him his wealth or even his desire to own all the software that runs all the computers in the world. I do believe that developing software probably doesn’t pollute, I’m sure there is not source code dumped into any rivers or burned to put into the air.
Yes, genetic predisposition will dramatically affect how the environmental causes will impact the individual…that doesn’t excuse us for creating these environmental clauses.
Buy whatever color you like of anything you like. My point was that I believe corporations are more interested in the bottom line than in our health and that when I give to the cancer foundation I give to the cancer foundation because ALL the money goes to help find a cure, not just a portion of something I buy.
Posted by babe on Dec 19, 2006 at 1:58 PM
Babe,
Economics 101: Business, corporations exist to make money. The fact that they chose to participate in not for profit organizations and share the wealth of their products is commendable as well as making good business sense. They offer products that will be purchased any way but contribute a specified percentage to go to these not for profit organizations. Their product might be more readily chosen because of this benefit. They enjoy tax write offs for these “donations”. I contribute to several charities and organizations as well as volunteering my time as well. Yea, me…
Why doesn’t Lucinda Marshall write a follow up article about seeing red for buying red, the multi-corporate effort to target donations to AIDS research and the rampant empidemic of AIDS in third world countries?
Also, I found her article suspect in regards to the year intervals between mammograms. My sister, a liberal femisinist doctor in the San Francisco area does not have concerns about a conspiracy in the health industry and recommendations for mammograms for women over the age of 40. She has a medical degree, unlike Miss Marshall. Environmental factors may differ from country to country. In America, this is our current protocol. Fortunately, insurances don’t consider what is going on in other countries in determining the benefits paid for mammograms or decide after the third negative result that they won’t pay for more mammograms unless they are medically indicated. In my daughter’s case, she is only 20 and has had three mammograms this year because she has cysts. Our insurance covers every mammogram despite what is done in Australia.
If I were to seek advice, I would go to my doctor, consult the web, and ask my sister. After reading Miss Marshall’s article, I find her “expertise” on this matter questionable. Her motives? Clearly not in the best interest of her fellow women.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 19, 2006 at 2:46 PM
BTW, corporations got us into the Iraq war and most other wars? Hmm, me thinks you need to do some homework on your own unless you are saying that corporations lobbied the congress and both parties , democratic and republican, voted to go to war in Iraq because ofc corporations. . Despite the “conspiracy theories regarding WMD, Saddam Hussein himself boasted of having them and refused continually to let the UN inspectors in to his country. The democrats who outspokenly demanded the troops to pull out of Iraq are suddenly quiet and few have put a comprehensive strategy for us leaving Iraq. The President is taking into consideration different strategies and suggestions. Is he waiting for the profit sheets to come in? The fiscal year for most corporations are in September. From what I understand, he plans to make a decision after the holidays.
The bottom line with insurance companies is money. I know, I worked for the managed care industry. Controversial decisions would be made, not based on medical necessity so much but the threat of a law suit. The insurance companies wouldn’t be willing to pay for mammograms if it wasn’t cost effective for them. Obviously, mammograms and early detection due benefit women and the almighty insurance companies.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 19, 2006 at 5:59 PM
I repeat…better do your homework. On many things such as the war, etc… including the fact that insurance companies were “forced’ to cover mamograms, they didn’t do it out of the goodness of their hearts…I know, I work for that industry.
Try not to drink the cool aid.
Posted by babe on Dec 20, 2006 at 6:20 AM
Kimberly, you are right. Babe is out to lunch, corporations can’t making money killing off their consumers. GOVERNMENTS make wars.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 20, 2006 at 1:00 PM
Babe, it was AIPAC,the Israel Lobby, that got us into the war.
Corporate America had nothing to do with it and it was a leftist
Jim Jones who forced all those people to drink the poisoned
cool aid.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 20, 2006 at 4:58 PM
I clicked on some of the organizations that Lucinds Marshall belongs or writes for…wow, a lot of male bashing! The sites I saw were out of England and much focus was on the Ipswich murders. Angry about identifying the victims as “prostitutes”, angry about divulging that one prostitute was three months pregnant….angry that criminologists are trying to create a profile of the possible murderer…angry that it was suggested he may have been sleighted or abused by a woman…oh yeah, angry that the pregnant prostitute was singled out in mentioning her pregnancy because she was impregnated by a “male”....wow! I understand why Limbaugh calls such extreme feminists “feminazis’ but I prefer the term “heterophobes”. Does anyone remember Sybil? It was her mother that was so viciously cruel to her and her father was a weak man that did nothing to protect her. A CHILD CALLED IT, the child, again a victim of his mother’s abuse with a weak father who did nothing to protect him. Could it be that cruelty is not sex specific, abusers can be male and female? Why is it wrong to gay bash but male bashing is open season? Double standard don’t help one’s credibilty. thinkbeforeyoupink.org wants to know how much money actually goes to cancer research and its little videos suggest corporations only give pennies on a dollar. Most corporations give 25%. Maybe creating a national policy would be helpful but I don’t think the pharmaceutical companies will share their formulary secrets. This is a capitalist country. Maybe China or Cuba will come to the rescue.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 23, 2006 at 1:06 AM
Thanks, Kimberly, again for your sane comments.
Posted by blondemike on Dec 26, 2006 at 1:29 PM
Every year 100,000 people die from the adverse effects of medications and 1.5 million people are hospitalized. Recent Harris polls have shown that only 7% of Americans believe the pharmaceutical industry is “honest and trustworthy” and 58% of Americans do not think the FDA is doing an adequate job ensuring the safety and offiicacy of new prescriptions drugs…
But hey, what’s good for the corporation is good for me! And of course ALL corporations Always give back! All corporations have our best interests at heart…this is why we are in Iraq…. because those wonderful corporations want us to have more expensive gas!....
Posted by babe on Dec 31, 2006 at 4:46 PM
My brother in law is a research cell biologist and my sister is a pharmacologist. With his insight, she can better understand the pharmaceutical field and the varying affects on the human body, at the cell level. It is a fascinating science that has only been around briefly in the history of man. The use of herbal supplements are best understood as the “side effects’” have been long understood. The danger of taking herbal remedies in addition to prescription medicine is that the known side effects might vary or become greatly enhanced in a dangerous way. It is important that if someone uses herbal remedies or takes herbal supplements, that he let the doctor know if a prescription medicine is going to be taken.
It is clear that prescription medications can cause dangerous side affects and unfortunately, many deaths have occured. Pharmaceutical companies push their medication and I believe that sometimes crucial information might be witheld. That is wrong. It is also wrong that in the research and trial phase, doctors doing the research withhold bad results in effort to maintain grant funding for continued opportunity for drug trials in the future. It is unrealistic to have blanket faith that all corporations are honest and have integrity.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 31, 2006 at 6:03 PM
BTW, many lives are actually saved and the quality of life heightened because of prescriptions and the advancement of modern medicine. Those numbers far outweigh the number of lives injured or killed. There are always risks and the best thing a person can do is have complete and open dialogue with their physician about their lifestyle, drinking habits, prescription and non prescription drug use, street drug use, and of course the use of herbal supplements and remedies. Not all problems caused by a medication are a result of misinformation or information withholding.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Dec 31, 2006 at 6:20 PM
Re:The pink ribbon campaign:
Breast Cancer is safe
because we’d all miss tits if they were gone, eh?
( I realize this is not a PC comment…but it’s the elephant in the room, eh?)
I had a neighbour die of breast cancer in the last 5 years..she didn’t want the support of the many groups, or the intrusion of the many treatments…she had become exhausted by the power of her breasts, and by hoisting the world on their potential…she decided to die of breast cancer.
Because she had to die from something, and she chose to die of cancer in her breasts…as likely a place as any, in her opinion.
Posted by minerva_jones on Jan 1, 2007 at 1:39 AM
Minerva,
That is very sad about your neighbor. After going through chemo several times, I know of people that do refuse the treatment. It is devastating. You make a good point about the glorification of the breasts and how devastating it is to lose one, them. Our friend didn’t want to go through the pain of reconstructive surgery but was pressured by her husband. It is devastating enough to have the disease. It is imperative that one gather the support of friends and loved ones in going through the treatment of attacking the cancer and do what is necessary for the woman to recover and live healthily. Whether or not she chooses to go through reconstructive surgery should be her decision and those that truly love her should support her in her choices. Personally, nausea is far worse than physical pain for me. I have a high threshhold for pain. I don’t know if I could endure going through chemotherapy. I am certain that after a point, I too would decide my death was going to be inevitable at one point and have a hard time suffering through more chemo. I count by blessings that for today at least, I have not been inflicted by the disease.
Posted by kimberlyausten on Jan 1, 2007 at 5:05 AM
In the past few days several media outlets have opined on the role of the new media in the year ahead. One of the examples given of the power of the U-too, or however it is spelled, was that the Mentos and Coca Cola combination could be repeated in many combinations. My reaction was one of horror as I thought of the the water pulled from wells of increasingly rare clean water to make soda pop to use in amusing Internet videos as villages in India and elsewhere where bottling plants were placed find themselves without clean water any more.
I have a similar reaction to all of the pink items and corporate tie-ins for breast cancer and any other disease. I wonder why Yoplait cannot just give a set amount of its profits to breast cancer research instead of making women clean the tops and mail them in to a processing center. I wonder how many women, and men, buy items that they don’t really need and cannot really afford just because they have the pink symbol of donations to breast cancer causes. (If people buy what they would be being buying anyway, that is fine; but marketing is not done to encourage people who would buy anyway.) I wonder which diseases are not being treated or studied because they do not have such high celebrity attention.
Remember, heart disease kill more women than breast cancer. Plus, it may have been released after the article was written, but breast cancer rates have decreased dramatically because of the link found between hormone replacements and breast cancer. I cannot remember from where the funding for the studies that proved that link originated. Did it come from any of the pink product campaigns?
Posted by SillyLeftist on Jan 1, 2007 at 8:26 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
We really should see more of what we are trying to save. A topless walk for saving breasts would be a wonderful way to raise money, consciousness and, um, you know. . .
Does Lucinda Marshall know what doesn’t cause cancer?! Grilled chicken has carcenogens also…so do we go back to fried chicken and clog our arteries? How about eating chicken RAW! Then we can get sick more quickly and Marshall can speak the evils of chicken farming!!!
The point of buying those beautiful pink packages are numerous:
1) It’s a variation of a product you already had in mind
2) it doesn’t cost more to do something good for cancer research
3) it feels good to give to socially consious products
4) PINK is a visual reminder that it is time to check your breasts for lumps if you haven’t already been doing it and to remind your friends and family
I don’t personally care if Lucinda Marshall gets a mammogram or not. It is an individual choice. I do appreciate the medical community for doing all that they can to help women prevent and detect breast cancer and also to treat it. Nobody likes chemotherapy or radiation…but until science comes up with something better, whatareyagoin’do?
I don’t think this “femisist” really cares about women and health issues as much as she is trying to write a controversial piece and get her name out there. Congrats, Lucy, you are in print. Bottomline for you, isn’t it?!
Lucinda has made some really interesting points. One of the problems is that organizations that need money seem to think that they have to “sell” something to get people to give. Frankly I’d rather just give them the same amount of money so that all of it goes to work rather than buy something that I’d probably not buy anyway…such as pink M&Ms;.... and what is actually happening is that we’ve allowed corporate interests to promote their products rather than to make sizable donations to a cause that’s important to women.
And I agree with Lucinda’s information as to the causes of breast cancer, which again relates to corporations whose manufacture of chemicals and other products contribute massively to all kinds of disease in humans…
First of all, what is this quote by Jaynse Ashley? Penis trinkets?! Livestrong uses yellow wrist bands to promote testicular cancer awareness. No one has breasts trinkets for breast cancer awareness. Quote is nonsensical. Secondly, corporations are “giving” back and doing something for the good of the people. Hazards exist in industry…one cannot get around it. How many people who complain about the ills of industry only ride their bicycles to work, only use produce brought to retailers on a horse and carriage, only heat and cool their homes with what nature provides? I would be buying pink m&M’s because of the BCA program and the fact I buy the candy any way. I did go out of my way to purchase a pink Dyson as my old vacuum needed replaced. I did buy a whole bunch of BCA pink KitchenAid appliances and utensils for my daughter as her favorite color is pink, and I bought all of my daughters the pink Better Homes and Gardens cookbooks. We have a dear friend who had a double mascestomy 10 years ago due to breast cancer. She has two daughters that are genetically predisposed to breast cancer also. The genetic predispositions dramatically affects the how the environmental causes will impact the individual.
As a journalist, will Lucinda only submit and write for firms using only 100% recycled paper? Will she hand deliver each article? Will she rely on the “evil” transportation industry to get newspapers and magazines delivered? Will she only use the internet thus utilizing the services of the “evil” power industry? What kind of car does she drive? What kind of car do YOU drive?
Hypocrisy runs rampant, once again!
Before stating that anyone is a hypocrit on this issue or stating how corporations are “giving back” you’ll need to do your homework. It’s corporations that have gotten us into the war in Iraq and most all other wars. It’s corporations such as the World Bank and the IMF that have destroyed the economy in other countries.
It’s corporations that make products that pollute, poison, kill us, etc…all for a profit. All corporations are not suspect but most of them are. Do your home work…. sure Bill Gates gives back but he still has a monopoly on computer software and is one of the world’s richest men. I don’t begrudge him his wealth or even his desire to own all the software that runs all the computers in the world. I do believe that developing software probably doesn’t pollute, I’m sure there is not source code dumped into any rivers or burned to put into the air.
Yes, genetic predisposition will dramatically affect how the environmental causes will impact the individual…that doesn’t excuse us for creating these environmental clauses.
Buy whatever color you like of anything you like. My point was that I believe corporations are more interested in the bottom line than in our health and that when I give to the cancer foundation I give to the cancer foundation because ALL the money goes to help find a cure, not just a portion of something I buy.
Babe,
Economics 101: Business, corporations exist to make money. The fact that they chose to participate in not for profit organizations and share the wealth of their products is commendable as well as making good business sense. They offer products that will be purchased any way but contribute a specified percentage to go to these not for profit organizations. Their product might be more readily chosen because of this benefit. They enjoy tax write offs for these “donations”. I contribute to several charities and organizations as well as volunteering my time as well. Yea, me…
Why doesn’t Lucinda Marshall write a follow up article about seeing red for buying red, the multi-corporate effort to target donations to AIDS research and the rampant empidemic of AIDS in third world countries?
Also, I found her article suspect in regards to the year intervals between mammograms. My sister, a liberal femisinist doctor in the San Francisco area does not have concerns about a conspiracy in the health industry and recommendations for mammograms for women over the age of 40. She has a medical degree, unlike Miss Marshall. Environmental factors may differ from country to country. In America, this is our current protocol. Fortunately, insurances don’t consider what is going on in other countries in determining the benefits paid for mammograms or decide after the third negative result that they won’t pay for more mammograms unless they are medically indicated. In my daughter’s case, she is only 20 and has had three mammograms this year because she has cysts. Our insurance covers every mammogram despite what is done in Australia.
If I were to seek advice, I would go to my doctor, consult the web, and ask my sister. After reading Miss Marshall’s article, I find her “expertise” on this matter questionable. Her motives? Clearly not in the best interest of her fellow women.
BTW, corporations got us into the Iraq war and most other wars? Hmm, me thinks you need to do some homework on your own unless you are saying that corporations lobbied the congress and both parties , democratic and republican, voted to go to war in Iraq because ofc corporations. . Despite the “conspiracy theories regarding WMD, Saddam Hussein himself boasted of having them and refused continually to let the UN inspectors in to his country. The democrats who outspokenly demanded the troops to pull out of Iraq are suddenly quiet and few have put a comprehensive strategy for us leaving Iraq. The President is taking into consideration different strategies and suggestions. Is he waiting for the profit sheets to come in? The fiscal year for most corporations are in September. From what I understand, he plans to make a decision after the holidays.
The bottom line with insurance companies is money. I know, I worked for the managed care industry. Controversial decisions would be made, not based on medical necessity so much but the threat of a law suit. The insurance companies wouldn’t be willing to pay for mammograms if it wasn’t cost effective for them. Obviously, mammograms and early detection due benefit women and the almighty insurance companies.
I repeat…better do your homework. On many things such as the war, etc… including the fact that insurance companies were “forced’ to cover mamograms, they didn’t do it out of the goodness of their hearts…I know, I work for that industry.
Try not to drink the cool aid.
Kimberly, you are right. Babe is out to lunch, corporations can’t making money killing off their consumers. GOVERNMENTS make wars.
Babe, it was AIPAC,the Israel Lobby, that got us into the war.
Corporate America had nothing to do with it and it was a leftist
Jim Jones who forced all those people to drink the poisoned
cool aid.
I clicked on some of the organizations that Lucinds Marshall belongs or writes for…wow, a lot of male bashing! The sites I saw were out of England and much focus was on the Ipswich murders. Angry about identifying the victims as “prostitutes”, angry about divulging that one prostitute was three months pregnant….angry that criminologists are trying to create a profile of the possible murderer…angry that it was suggested he may have been sleighted or abused by a woman…oh yeah, angry that the pregnant prostitute was singled out in mentioning her pregnancy because she was impregnated by a “male”....wow! I understand why Limbaugh calls such extreme feminists “feminazis’ but I prefer the term “heterophobes”. Does anyone remember Sybil? It was her mother that was so viciously cruel to her and her father was a weak man that did nothing to protect her. A CHILD CALLED IT, the child, again a victim of his mother’s abuse with a weak father who did nothing to protect him. Could it be that cruelty is not sex specific, abusers can be male and female? Why is it wrong to gay bash but male bashing is open season? Double standard don’t help one’s credibilty. thinkbeforeyoupink.org wants to know how much money actually goes to cancer research and its little videos suggest corporations only give pennies on a dollar. Most corporations give 25%. Maybe creating a national policy would be helpful but I don’t think the pharmaceutical companies will share their formulary secrets. This is a capitalist country. Maybe China or Cuba will come to the rescue.
Thanks, Kimberly, again for your sane comments.
Every year 100,000 people die from the adverse effects of medications and 1.5 million people are hospitalized. Recent Harris polls have shown that only 7% of Americans believe the pharmaceutical industry is “honest and trustworthy” and 58% of Americans do not think the FDA is doing an adequate job ensuring the safety and offiicacy of new prescriptions drugs…
But hey, what’s good for the corporation is good for me! And of course ALL corporations Always give back! All corporations have our best interests at heart…this is why we are in Iraq…. because those wonderful corporations want us to have more expensive gas!....
My brother in law is a research cell biologist and my sister is a pharmacologist. With his insight, she can better understand the pharmaceutical field and the varying affects on the human body, at the cell level. It is a fascinating science that has only been around briefly in the history of man. The use of herbal supplements are best understood as the “side effects’” have been long understood. The danger of taking herbal remedies in addition to prescription medicine is that the known side effects might vary or become greatly enhanced in a dangerous way. It is important that if someone uses herbal remedies or takes herbal supplements, that he let the doctor know if a prescription medicine is going to be taken.
It is clear that prescription medications can cause dangerous side affects and unfortunately, many deaths have occured. Pharmaceutical companies push their medication and I believe that sometimes crucial information might be witheld. That is wrong. It is also wrong that in the research and trial phase, doctors doing the research withhold bad results in effort to maintain grant funding for continued opportunity for drug trials in the future. It is unrealistic to have blanket faith that all corporations are honest and have integrity.
BTW, many lives are actually saved and the quality of life heightened because of prescriptions and the advancement of modern medicine. Those numbers far outweigh the number of lives injured or killed. There are always risks and the best thing a person can do is have complete and open dialogue with their physician about their lifestyle, drinking habits, prescription and non prescription drug use, street drug use, and of course the use of herbal supplements and remedies. Not all problems caused by a medication are a result of misinformation or information withholding.
Re:The pink ribbon campaign:
Breast Cancer is safe
because we’d all miss tits if they were gone, eh?
( I realize this is not a PC comment…but it’s the elephant in the room, eh?)
I had a neighbour die of breast cancer in the last 5 years..she didn’t want the support of the many groups, or the intrusion of the many treatments…she had become exhausted by the power of her breasts, and by hoisting the world on their potential…she decided to die of breast cancer.
Because she had to die from something, and she chose to die of cancer in her breasts…as likely a place as any, in her opinion.
Minerva,
That is very sad about your neighbor. After going through chemo several times, I know of people that do refuse the treatment. It is devastating. You make a good point about the glorification of the breasts and how devastating it is to lose one, them. Our friend didn’t want to go through the pain of reconstructive surgery but was pressured by her husband. It is devastating enough to have the disease. It is imperative that one gather the support of friends and loved ones in going through the treatment of attacking the cancer and do what is necessary for the woman to recover and live healthily. Whether or not she chooses to go through reconstructive surgery should be her decision and those that truly love her should support her in her choices. Personally, nausea is far worse than physical pain for me. I have a high threshhold for pain. I don’t know if I could endure going through chemotherapy. I am certain that after a point, I too would decide my death was going to be inevitable at one point and have a hard time suffering through more chemo. I count by blessings that for today at least, I have not been inflicted by the disease.
In the past few days several media outlets have opined on the role of the new media in the year ahead. One of the examples given of the power of the U-too, or however it is spelled, was that the Mentos and Coca Cola combination could be repeated in many combinations. My reaction was one of horror as I thought of the the water pulled from wells of increasingly rare clean water to make soda pop to use in amusing Internet videos as villages in India and elsewhere where bottling plants were placed find themselves without clean water any more.
I have a similar reaction to all of the pink items and corporate tie-ins for breast cancer and any other disease. I wonder why Yoplait cannot just give a set amount of its profits to breast cancer research instead of making women clean the tops and mail them in to a processing center. I wonder how many women, and men, buy items that they don’t really need and cannot really afford just because they have the pink symbol of donations to breast cancer causes. (If people buy what they would be being buying anyway, that is fine; but marketing is not done to encourage people who would buy anyway.) I wonder which diseases are not being treated or studied because they do not have such high celebrity attention.
Remember, heart disease kill more women than breast cancer. Plus, it may have been released after the article was written, but breast cancer rates have decreased dramatically because of the link found between hormone replacements and breast cancer. I cannot remember from where the funding for the studies that proved that link originated. Did it come from any of the pink product campaigns?
register a new account »Posting Security