| Author |
Topic: Sheryl Crow...breast cancer |
rockchalkchick
Cool Runner |
 posted Feb-26-2006 08:59 PM
   
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61:
sigh.........no it isn't "silly". In the end, no matter how one arrives there, it is the failure of the pump that ends life.
But that's just it - cardiac arrest isn't (necessarily) caused by cardiovascular disease.
IP: Logged |
Maureen61
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rockchalkchick:
But that's just it - cardiac arrest isn't (necessarily) caused by cardiovascular disease.
I know that. I guess I am not sure I understand your point. I don't want to sound like a cold hearted witch, because I am not. Again, I care for dying people every day. It is never easy, no matter the reason. I won't take you into the years I worked with children dying with leukemia, brain cancer, bone cancer, ctc., etc., I am just trying to raise awareness. ------------------
Moi!
IP: Logged |
ferrellk
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:05 PM
Maureen. This shouldn't have to evolve into an how many sick people have you known battle. "I've known more!" "No I've known more!"  But, since you asked, my mother, both of my grandmothers, and my maternal aunt have had pre-menopausal breast cancer. 2 died of it. And if probability and genetics are any indications, I will probably get it. Let's just say it is on my mind. The reason people pay more attention to breast cancer than heart disease is for the reasons I stated above. It has been marketed better, and in the end is an easier sell. I never said I agreed with it or the stereotypes behind those reasons. If you read what I ended with, I said, "a shame, really".
IP: Logged |
moroccangirl
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellk:
Maybe he'll go ride a bike about it.  In regards to the debate heart disease/breast cancer blah blah blah. Breast cancer is an easy sell for PR. You can have nifty yogurt cup campaigns, and cute pink ribbons worn by sexy celebrities (like Sheryl Crow for example). It is a chic disease. Breast cancer, because it is seen as a solely genetic disease by many, is acceptable. Even rich, pretty, thin white girls can get it. Heart disease, as it is seen as more of a lifestyle disease, is for the obese, the uneducated, the minorities, the poor. At least that's the stigma it carries. Who wants to associate themselves with that? A shame, really. Just my rambling 2 cents.
It is a predominantly 'female' cancer, but men get it too. (very small percentage)
And it grows faster, and more furious in men.
IP: Logged |
ferrellk
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by moroccangirl:
It is a predominantly 'female' cancer, but men get it too. (very small percentage)
And it grows faster, and more furious in men.
Good point. Men are definitely overlooked in this disease.
IP: Logged |
Maureen61
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:09 PM
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellk:
Maureen. This shouldn't have to evolve into an how many sick people have you known battle. "I've known more!" "No I've known more!" But, since you asked, my mother, both of my grandmothers, and my maternal aunt have had pre-menopausal breast cancer. 2 died of it. And if probability and genetics are any indications, I will probably get it. Let's just say it is on my mind. The reason people pay more attention to breast cancer than heart disease is for the reasons I stated above. It has been marketed better, and in the end is an easier sell. I never said I agreed with it or the stereotypes behind those reasons. If you read what I ended with, I said, "a shame, really".
I am sorry. I am really a very nice person. No women in my family have had breast cancer. Doesn't mean I won't. I guess for whatever reason, maybe my daily work with those newly diagnosed, it scares me. I certainly do not mean to diminish anyone. If I did, I apologize.
------------------
Moi!
IP: Logged |
HeavyFeet
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:10 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61:
I know that. I guess I am not sure I understand your point.
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61 earlier in this thread:
Heart disease, eventually everyone succumbs to. It is largely lifestyle. Don't get me wrong, not always. It is difficult to get this across in words, but What I know is what I see in my daily work.
I think her point is that you come off like you don't really know what you're talking about by saying that everyone succumbs to heart disease, and as long as you keep trying to drive that point home, it doesn't matter how many people you care for, or what ailments they have, you don't come across as credible.
IP: Logged |
rockchalkchick
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:15 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61:
I know that. I guess I am not sure I understand your point. I don't want to sound like a cold hearted witch, because I am not. Again, I care for dying people every day. It is never easy, no matter the reason.
Sorry - my point is just that your comment that "everyone dies of heart disease" is off, since it seemed like you were equating cardiac arrest with heart disease. Believe me, I respect everything health care professionals do, I really do. I went into research because I know I couldn't take the stress of daily interaction with patients - the emotional toll is huge. But I suppose the proximity is what makes it seem so hard - heart disease kills more, but it's often a more quick and "painless" way to go. Seeing the effects of breast cancer on individuals and families is tough, but it still comes down to the fact that it's been blown out of proportion to a large extent - everyone knows a lot about breast cancer, a lot of women I know fear it and are paranoid about getting checked, but aren't bothered to do basic day-to-day tasks to help their overall health (including cardivascular). It just bothers me that people are more worried about a relatively minor threat (the "one in eight" number is thrown around a lot, but 80% of those enter full remission - breast cancer isn't the death sentence it's often thought of), when they don't bother about a more significant threat of death and debilitating disease (stroke and MI).
IP: Logged |
ferrellk
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61:
I am sorry. I am really a very nice person. No women in my family have had breast cancer. Doesn't mean I won't. I guess for whatever reason, maybe my daily work with those newly diagnosed, it scares me. I certainly do not mean to diminish anyone. If I did, I apologize.
You did not diminish. Maybe I could have been clearer. The marketing of disease awareness campaigns is important but subject to the same "Madison Avenue" problems as anything else. Every time I see a celebrity with a ribbon I bristle...but at the same time I recognize that they may potentially save a life. Catch 22. As for being scared...trust me, I understand. But, I have decided that I can't live in that fear every day. Good medical care and being proactive are important. You do what you can do and leave the rest up to fate, I guess. One never knows. My mother's good friend just died on Christmas Day of breast cancer. She was diagnosed 8 years ago, had a mastectomy, chemo, drugs, etc. Beat it into remission. Had a productive 8 years of work and kids and living life. It came back a few months before xmas pretty hard and spread. She, her husband and kids (3 teenagers) had a cruise planned. She was pretty sick but was determined to go on the trip. They went, had a good time, and she died in her sleep on the plane on the way back. You really just never know.
IP: Logged |
Maureen61
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 09:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by HeavyFeet:
I think her point is that you come off like you don't really know what you're talking about by saying that everyone succumbs to heart disease, and as long as you keep trying to drive that point home, it doesn't matter how many people you care for, or what ailments they have, you don't come across as credible.
"not credible"? Maybe I am not being clear. Believe me when I say I do know what I am talking about. I am sorry if I have been misunderstood...............
------------------
Moi!
IP: Logged |
Iontach
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61:
Maybe I am not being clear.
You are being very clear. You assert that cardiac arrest happens to us all in the end. This is true. You apparently think that cardiac arrest is the same thing as heart disease. This is not true. Cardiac arrest is the stopping of one's heart. This can happen for a number of reasons. It can happen because one has been decapitated. Or drowned. It is simply silly to say that someone whose head has been cut off, or who has drowned, has died from heart disease. It is for this reason that "cardiac arrest" CANNOT be given as a direct cause of death on a death certificate (cf. my earlier link). Because it's not a cause of death. You're clear, but you're wrong. Sorry.
IP: Logged |
jcumming
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:23 PM
Wow, this one deteriorated and people tried to back up and get it back on the rails, but it just isn't happening.Breast cancer is a chic disease??...and you had family members die from it??? Wasn't too chic when my wife died...it was downright horrible. OK, back to the debate on whether it's better to freeze to death or boil to death. [This message has been edited by jcumming (edited Feb-26-2006).]
IP: Logged |
Iontach
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jcumming:
Breast cancer is a chic disease??...and you had family members die from it???Wasn't too chic when my wife died...it was downright horrible.
No, JC, that wasn't ferrellk's point at all. Her point, and I think it's a true one, is that breast cancer can be made a chic cause - pretty pink ribbons and all. It strikes women out of the blue, for no apparent reason, and it's hideous - you know all this. Precisely because it's a bolt from the blue, or from the helix, it can't be muddied by the suggestion of "bad choices" in the past, as heart disease or stroke or lung cancer can. It's about the marketing of awareness of the disease, not the marketing of the disease. And that marketing is successful - compare breast cancer awareness with testicular cancer awareness. Lance has helped, certainly, but before that?
IP: Logged |
Eats Raw COOKIE dough
Member |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:40 PM
i was thinking just how rare it is that celebrities get sick and die.
IP: Logged |
noley85
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jcumming:
Breast cancer is a chic disease??...and you had family members die from it???Wasn't too chic when my wife died...it was downright horrible.
OK. This is all I'm pulling from this... 
IP: Logged |
ferrellk
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:49 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jcumming:
Wow, this one deteriorated and people tried to back up and get it back on the rails, but it just isn't happening.Breast cancer is a chic disease??...and you had family members die from it??? Wasn't too chic when my wife died...it was downright horrible.
Yes I did have family members die from it. And it is horrible. I obviously didn't make myself clear when I was talking about the differences in the marketing of breast cancer awareness versus heart disease awareness. You may not have read my clarifying comments further on being inflamed by the misinterpretation of what I was trying to say. And I don't blame you. I was being tongue in cheek/sarcastic (which doesn't always translate well on in written form). I can't stand the double standard of the marketing of disease awareness. There is, in my mind, no reason why one disease should get precedence over another. However, it seems that Hollywood has latched onto breast cancer for the very reasons I stated. And, as I said, I don't agree with those reasons or support them. They are misguided and wrong and trivalizing to those that suffer(ed). Of all people, I am not belittling this issue. Edited to add: lontach summed up what I was trying to say better, I think. [This message has been edited by ferrellk (edited Feb-26-2006).]
IP: Logged |
jenotter
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 10:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Maureen61:
The fatal breast cancers are mostly genetic.
Just for the record... Only about 10% of all breast cancers are genetic - the other 90% are considered "sporadic" (i.e., no detectable genetic link, but could be a gene mutation that has not been discovered yet) The fatal breast cancers are the ones that are detected at a late stage - at my hospital, those are usually the women who are too young to be getting regular mammgrams (i.e., under age 40) or are in women who don't get regular mammograms or do self-exam, so by the time the cancer is found, it's big. There are also some cancers that are not easily seen on mammogram and/or are more aggressive in nature. Edited to add: I'm not trying to stir up anything...I work in the field and it's extremely important to me that people are informed. [This message has been edited by jenotter (edited Feb-26-2006).]
IP: Logged |
iNEVEReverRUN
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:03 PM
I have two women fighting breat cancer in my department (of 18 people) chemo, surgery, radiation - weight loss and no hair. One of the them caught it at her 40 year full check-up!My grandmother had it in her mid-70s and then lived another ten years. We watched a close friend die of breast cancer and her husband bury her (she was an RN) in her mid-40s and I can say it is not a chic illness and I don't care how many people wear pink ribbons. I only know one person with heart disease my father he is 70 and it is because of his lifesytle so my observation is that Maureen is right. I think she has been jumped on and misunderstood when she was just trying to say get checked and take care of yourself. Why is that wrong?
IP: Logged |
jenotter
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iNEVEReverRUN:
I have two women fighting breat cancer in my department (of 18 people) chemo, surgery, radiation - weight loss and no hair. One of the them caught it at her 40 year full check-up!My grandmother had it in her mid-70s and then lived another ten years. We watched a close friend die of breast cancer and her husband bury her (she was an RN) in her mid-40s and I can say it is not a chic illness and I don't care how many people wear pink ribbons. I only know one person with heart disease my father he is 70 and it is because of his lifesytle so my observation is that Maureen is right. I think she has been jumped on and misunderstood when she was just trying to say get checked and take care of yourself. Why is that wrong?
I'm sorry to hear about the poeple in your life who have gone through this - it's a horrible disease, as are all cancers. That goes for everyone who's had someone have to deal with this. I'm sure most of us would love to be put out of business if they could find a cure.....we've come a long way, but still have a long way to go.
IP: Logged |
rockchalkchick
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iNEVEReverRUN:
I only know one person with heart disease my father he is 70 and it is because of his lifesytle so my observation is that Maureen is right.
You realize that this argument is about as valid as me saying I've never known anyone with breast cancer therefore it's not a threat to anyone, right? I don't think anyone is trying to say that breast cancer isn't a devastating and difficult disease. It's simply that I (and I'm assuming others) have been overwhelmed and to an extent turned off by the extreme push for breast cancer publicity - the Susan Komen foundation isn't the only cancer research going on and breast cancer isn't the only (or primary) killer of women. I see people in various stages of disease every day. Every one of them is difficult and often heartbreaking. And every one of them deserves attention - I guess that's what bothers me some days.. the idea that breast cancer patients are somehow more important than the rest. (I realize it's not really true, but it comes across that way too often - you can't go anywhere in October without seeing "pink ribbon" stuff everywhere - it's a hip way to say "see, we care about sick folks")
IP: Logged |
zzzinaaa
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:27 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rockchalkchick:
You realize that this argument is about as valid as me saying I've never known anyone with breast cancer therefore it's not a threat to anyone, right?I don't think anyone is trying to say that breast cancer isn't a devastating and difficult disease. It's simply that I (and I'm assuming others) have been overwhelmed and to an extent turned off by the extreme push for breast cancer publicity - the Susan Komen foundation isn't the only cancer research going on and breast cancer isn't the only (or primary) killer of women. I see people in various stages of disease every day. Every one of them is difficult and often heartbreaking. And every one of them deserves attention - I guess that's what bothers me some days.. the idea that breast cancer patients are somehow more important than the rest. (I realize it's not really true, but it comes across that way too often - you can't go anywhere in October without seeing "pink ribbon" stuff everywhere - it's a hip way to say "see, we care about sick folks")
It's all in the marketing. Look at the billion yellow bracelets Lance Armstrong has sold to help find a cure for testicular cancer.
IP: Logged |
rockchalkchick
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:36 PM
quote:
Originally posted by zzzinaaa:
It's all in the marketing. Look at the billion yellow bracelets Lance Armstrong has sold to help find a cure for testicular cancer.
Yeah - frankly, those kind of bug me, too. On one hand, I have to appreciate any attention for research, be it through Komen, Armstrong, or other ad campaigns. But, at the same time, the private funding tends to be so political, not necessarily supporting the best scientists but the best salesmen (I realize that's true for most grants!). I've worked on grants for MS foundation, Heart Assoc. and NIH, and they all have their pros and cons. I don't mind any money folks want to send to research, but it's hard to explain that science isn't often a linear field - research done on one disease or focus can sometimes be a breakthrough for something totally different, and disease-specific research can sometimes miss this.
IP: Logged |
iNEVEReverRUN
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by rockchalkchick:
You realize that this argument is about as valid as me saying I've never known anyone with breast cancer therefore it's not a threat to anyone, right?I don't think anyone is trying to say that breast cancer isn't a devastating and difficult disease. It's simply that I (and I'm assuming others) have been overwhelmed and to an extent turned off by the extreme push for breast cancer publicity - the Susan Komen foundation isn't the only cancer research going on and breast cancer isn't the only (or primary) killer of women. I see people in various stages of disease every day. Every one of them is difficult and often heartbreaking. And every one of them deserves attention - I guess that's what bothers me some days.. the idea that breast cancer patients are somehow more important than the rest. (I realize it's not really true, but it comes across that way too often - you can't go anywhere in October without seeing "pink ribbon" stuff everywhere - it's a hip way to say "see, we care about sick folks")
What I posted was my own antidotal evidence –sorry that it is not valid for you. Why are you so angry about this topic? I think assisting dying people must be a difficult and stressful job – I am sure the patients appreciate you caring attitude. Are you an RN like Maureen61 or a Dr? What illnesses are they struggling with that are not being researched? Inform us so that we may be enlightened and can begin to help you get the word out. You know that is what Susan Komen’s sister did when Susan died of breast cancer in her 30s – she started the foundation as a way to remember Susan. The success did not happen over night. Additionally, you jump to conclusions. Why do you assume you know the reason someone wears a pink ribbon? Maybe they do it in remembrance on the anniversary of a loved ones death – and if not does it really matter in the grand scheme of things. I definitely don’t think they wear it with the notion that “breast cancer patients are some how more important then the rest.”
IP: Logged |
hahaoya
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iNEVEReverRUN:
and if not does it really matter in the grand scheme of things.
1! Awareness and a show of support is nothing to thumb your nose at. I mean...really people. [This message has been edited by hahaoya (edited Feb-27-2006).]
IP: Logged |
wyrillco
Cool Runner |
posted Feb-26-2006 11:57 PM
I have a grandmother who has beat breast cancer twice, a grandmother with Parkinson's, a grandmother with high cholesterol and diabetes, and a grandfather dying from heart problems. A guy I work with is battling testicular and bladder cancer. I lost a guy I worked with last year to heart problems, and I lost a grandfather to a stroke. They all suck. Death sucks. Disease sucks. It all sucks. And I am pretty freakin' upset about it right now. I don't think anyone should be fighting over which is worse, or mad that some diseases get more public attention. I'd give my money to all the causes if I could, but I just can't do that. I have three very personal reasons to give to breast cancer research, and many personal reasons to give to the American Cancer Societ. And I do. So let's just suffice it to say we all have our personal causes, and that is ok. ------------------
Courtney
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
 |
