Saturday, April 28, 2012

What are your opinions of the color pink for Breast Cancer

What are your opinions of the color pink for Breast Cancer?
Breast Cancer supporters wear pink, should they change the color to a more neutral color since men also get breast cancer?
Polls & Surveys - 17 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Real men wear pink.
2 :
it mostly affects woman so no
3 :
I think pink's fine. Cause pink is like a girl colour!
4 :
It's the thought that counts...
5 :
They should just show a nipple.
6 :
i don't think so. we just had breast cancer day or whatever you would call it at school and everyone wore pink, even the guys. most guys don't mind wearing pink.
7 :
Not exactly sure why pink is the color. I personally think it's nice. My mom had breast cancer and I sometimes wear pink to support her. Especially this month, since October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
8 :
i think its a bit sexist. pink for women really? and your right men do get breast cancer... and i bet some of them dont like pink. they should definately change it
9 :
hmmm good point i think they should i mean most men dont wear pink it should be green or mabe not even a color but a symbol that can be any color
10 :
men can wear pink too :)
11 :
No, I don't think so. Pink is for anyone who likes it. I don't know who the fool was who decided blue is for boys and pink is for girls. They need smacked.
12 :
WTF? If they change the color, it shouldn't be for that reason. Pink is cliche of being a female color and for that reason, I don't like it. However, a lot of men wear pink (pink shirts, ties, etc), so I don't think it matters to the ones who have breast cancer, or the ones who don't.
13 :
Does it really matter? Dick head.
14 :
There are only two types of men that wear pink. 1) Brass ballz the size of bowling ballz, or 2) Gayer than a two dollar bill.
15 :
Maybe. This is actually a good point. Pink IS a naturally feminine color. Even though more women get breast cancer, men can get it too.
16 :
wow.... while regular color for cancer is ivory but yea i agree with the 1st answer real men wear pink lol
17 :
Having just finished designing and laying out a special section on Breast Cancer Awareness for a major daily newspaper, I am sick to death of the color pink. Hotpink, shocking pink, brink pink, carnation pink, cherry blossom pink, 100% magenta - I won't design with it ever again. Never, I say.



Read more discussions :

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Does getting pregnant earlier in life reduce the chances of getting breast cancer

Does getting pregnant earlier in life reduce the chances of getting breast cancer?
Has anyone heard something like this or can they provide a link that covers the question? My girlfriend is in a high-percentage group of potential breast cancer victims(history of occurance in her family) and would like to do whatever she can to reduce her risk. She has heard that getting pregnant before 25 or 30 greatly reduces her chances to develop the cancer. I believe the reasoning is that estrogen and hormone levels decrease after getting pregnant for the first time. Does anyone know anything about this?
Women's Health - 2 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I'm not sure about the age limits - but I do know that women who have a child and breast feed decrease chance of breast cancer by 1/3 -- which may be significant for her - check with AM Cancer Society for info - But that should not be the main reason for having a child - you should want a child and be willing to raise it in a loving, committed relationship -
2 :
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_2X_What_are_the_risk_factors_for_breast_cancer_5.asp "Women who have had no children or who had their first child after age 30 have a slightly higher breast cancer risk. Having many pregnancies and becoming pregnant at an early age reduces breast cancer risk." So delaying children until after 30 could make it more likely to get breast cancer. However, potential risk-lowering of breast cancer is really not a good reason to have a child in a hurry. Breast feeding also significantly lowers the risk of breast cancer, the longer you do it the more it lowers the risk. It's recommended to breast feed for at least 2 years. Harriet


Read more discussions :

Friday, April 20, 2012

Would it be offensive if a store sold wigs while supporting women with breast cancer

Would it be offensive if a store sold wigs while supporting women with breast cancer?
I want to offer a company a product (in this case wigs) while being corporate sponsors/partners/whatever with a breast cancer association. Do you think it'd offend women with breast cancer, rather than like the selling of the wigs?
Cancer - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I don't see how it would be offensive. Ironic, yes, but offensive, I doubt it. In fact, it might actually be kind of good, since many women who lose their hair during treatment buy wigs. I mean, if the kind of wigs you are selling are like, silly, Halloween wigs or something, it might be kind of ironic, but no one will really care. The important thing is that you are helping out this nice association. People will focus on that more than the insignificant irony that you sell wigs as well.



Read more discussions :

Monday, April 16, 2012

What are my chances of having breast cancer

What are my chances of having breast cancer?
my mom had breast cancer when she was younger. i am now 18. what are the chances of me getting it. also, i seem to be sick constantly, maybe due to a low ability to fight illness?
Cancer - 6 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Breast Cancer is not always about Genetics. I for instance got breast cancer all on my own, with no help from my Father's Breast Cancer, His Mother, Her Mother, and my Mother and her Sister! If you want to find out where you stand, take the Genetic Blood Test. Simple Blood test, will tell you what your chances are and if you carry the gene from either one of your parents.
2 :
I seen a cancer cure. heat maple syrup at a lot temp with 1/3 baking soda for about 10 min and take 3 times a day. The cancer cells eat the sugar and take in the soda with it. the soda kills the cancer.
3 :
The chance that any women will get breast cancer is not good. One in eight will get it in their lifetimes, so that is why it is so important to do self-examinations. (No need to until over 35.)
4 :
This depends if your mother's breast cancer was the related to a inheritable genetic trait (fewer than 10% are). If it was, you have a 50% chance of having inherited a higher risk. Talk to your Dr and they will probably suggest you have annual breast checks by your Dr and a baseline imaging (mammogram, ultrasound, MRI, depending on age etc) starting 10 years younger than the age your mother was when first diagnosed. Don't let this rule your life. Over 90% of breast cancers are just due to factors unrelated to family. Your general health is of more concern and it sounds like your immune system is in poor condition. This is usually related to poor general nutrition but see your Dr and get it checked.
5 :
I would talk to a doctor...I would also check out the susan komen foundation as they have raised billions in creating awareness for breast cancer only. I know only 20% of the billions of dollars they get goes to finding a cure, but at least by creating awareness they can continue to raise more and more money. fyi women over 50 get breast cancer less then 1% of men get breast cancer children are not affected by breast cancer.
6 :
Hereditary breast cancer is rare; only 5- 10% of all breast cancer cases are hereditary, and those are due to a rare inherited faulty gene. If your mother's cancer was due to one of the rare genes known to be responsible for hereditary breast cancer, you have a 50% chance of having inherited that gene. Inheriting the gene would not mean you would definitely develop breast cancer; it would mean you had a 50 - 80% chance of developing it by the age of 75 - 80. If, like 90-95% of breast cancer cases, your mother's cancer was not due to one of the BRCA genes, then you are at no known increased risk for breast cancer. As the daughter of a woman who had breast cancer, you will be treated as at increased risk simply as a precaution; all that means is that your routine mammograms will begin when you are 10 years younger than your mother was at diagnosis. Being sick often has nothing to do with your likelihood of developing cancer.



Read more discussions :

Thursday, April 12, 2012

If a liberal in her 40s gets breast cancer from being denied yrly mammagrams does she become a conservative

If a liberal in her 40s gets breast cancer from being denied yrly mammagrams does she become a conservative?
Won't women who get breast cancer blame liberals? It would be their fault since there was no way to detect the cancer earlier. Liberal politicians want to take away our rights - doctor patient relationships and control our fate. Does she become a conservative supporter?
Politics - 20 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Its a suggestion, not a command.If you want yearly examines get them.
2 :
The government is not going to act on the task force recommendations. Pay attention.
3 :
Better yet...will the black women stand up and speak up for themselves? They get more and die more from breast cancer than any race....are they going to demand affirmative action for their medical rights when we can't? BET THEY GET IT TOO! And those that still think you have a choice in this you are really not paying attention are you? WHAT PASSES and what you are TOLD are two different things. HOW can you believe an administration that has over 500 days of lies? If you believe this..you are REALLY IN TROUBLE! THE MEDICAL CZAR IS GOING TO DETERMINE WHAT YOU GET AND WHAT YOU DON'T GET. YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE APPROVAL OF EVERYTHING! IF you can't imagine and understand what THAT MEANS..you are seriously in denial! This is why europe's health care is not so great.. For all types of cancers, European men have only a 47.3 percent five-year survival rate, compared to 66.3 percent survival rate for American men. The greatest disparity was in prostate cancer, which American men are 28 percent more likely to survive than European men. European women are only 55.8 percent likely to live five years after contracting any kind of cancer, compared to 62.9 percent for American women. In five cancers -- breast, prostate, thyroid, testicular and skin melanoma -- American survival rates are higher than 90 percent. Europeans hit a 90 percent survival rate for only one of those -- testicular cancer. Most disturbingly, many cancers in Europe are discovered only upon the victim's death -- twice as many as in the U.S. Consequently, the European study simply excluded cancers that were first noted on the death certificate, so as not to give the U.S. too great an advantage. I have HAD CANCER and survived. I KNOW HOW Important early detection is. I would be DEAD if I had not found it when we did! It is serious stuff. And those that have not had it and have not faced the fear of death are politically inclined and not for LIFE! When you can stand there and say this isn't going to happen..when you can say it is ok....then it should happen to YOU. YOU should have to wait and worry and wonder while something eats away at you and wonder when and if they can get it time so you can watch your grandbabies and children grow up. Canada and Europe do not have great success in cancer survival rates. THAT IS WHY THEY COME HERE! You dems are lost. And heartless and cowards to not face up to your party for LIFE. You claim you want life...but you don't stand up for it. You stand for your party and not for yourselves! I knew someone would say BUSH DID THIS...God..you people are heartless and crazy...you don't stand up for NOW..and what is going to happen..but you live in what you THINK Is the past and blame blame blame. THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE DEMS. THey can't live in NOW...and DO ANYTHING....THEY DO NOTHING BUT HURT AMERICANS! Then they blame BUSH! UNBELIEVABLE! Your children are going to have to learn responsibility sometime in their lives...I hope they have great teachers because you teach them to blame and not accept responsibility for THEIR LIVES and THEIR ACTIONS by this constant cowardice blaming!
4 :
Why would they blame Liberals for getting breast cancer? Mammograms tell you if you have cancer it doesn't prevent it. I do not want government controlled health care but let's be realistic here.
5 :
You betcha. A conservative is a liberal who's been mugged. Obama just mugged women below age 50. Ooh, that's gonna hurt.
6 :
You wish it were that simple.
7 :
She will....for how ever long she has which isn't that long so in the big liberal picture, she doesn't matter.
8 :
GET YOUR MAMMOGRAMS. I'm not usually a conpiracy theorist, but I do believe the govt is trying to make our Health Care system look inefficient. The American Cancer Society issued a statement saying that they disagree with the statement about not getting a mammogram, in fact they believe you should get one when you're 40 unless you have a history of it in your family, then get one when you are 30. Political parties should not matter when it comes to your health. It's unfortunate that the leaders of our political system back this up. P.S. I'm a conservative.
9 :
Nope. She thanks the liberal rules for "letting" her live as long as she did and says the cancer is Bush's fault.
10 :
No just a dead dumb liberal .
11 :
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea of the government deciding when and what tests a person can get. This feels like the twilight zone to me. If we get universal health care, the government will be telling people. It won't be a suggestion.
12 :
Actually, dead end resources can cause the death of women. It is commonplace for agencies to offer free screenings, then deny access to them for various reasons. The political pandering found within various social services creates a forum of rally used to disenfranchise individuals from various programs. It's socialism and coercion. Various government agencies receive political donations from various organizations, what they get in return is political rally within the programs they fund and human research subjects. It's all managed by the Federal and State governments.
13 :
Flaw in the question - the lack of mammogram does not cause cancer...if she's got it, she's got it... What you are talking about is early detection...so more like if a woman is going to die from breast cancer from being denied yearly mammograms... But as a Canadian, I can tell you that the universal medical care here ensures that the woman who would have died because she couldn't afford a free market mammogram gets one just like the woman who could afford to pay for it.....unsure why your proposed system would be different....
14 :
That recommendation will change, don't worry. Keep trying to recruit. Just know that in 3 years, it wont amount to anything.
15 :
Who says anybody will be denied yearly mammograms? And why would the woman become a conservative, so she could give up her rights to control her reproductive choices? Get real.
16 :
Yeah, because people with cancer don't need any support themselves but always look to support crooked politicians.
17 :
I know where you are coming from, and I am totally against socialized health care. But what stoppped these women from paying for there own mammogram?? It's not that expensive, people act like its impossible for anyone to pay for anything themselves. If the law passes, then all that means is that your insurance won't cover the cost of a mammogram at a certain age, it doesn't mean you can;t get one. I get the point about rationed health care, but really all this talk seems a little 'over the top'.
18 :
You don't make any sense it's the Cons that don't want to make health care affordable for everyone so woman can get the care they need if your talking about the study that came out a few weeks ago about mammograms that started when Bush was Pres.
19 :
IF you have no family history of breast cancer, IF you have no symptoms, and IF you don't find a lump yourself, then the extra exposure to x-rays may be more harmful to your health than delaying the first Mammo. I would still have been advised by my doctor to get that first mammo at 40. Well, actually, I got the first one at 33. NONE of the new recommendations would have changed any of the treatment I sought or received. I worry that the new recommendations may stop some women from seeking treatment, but as is always true, we have to be advocates for our own health. I have never and I never will rely on some panel to make my personal choices nor will I hold those people responsible for my well-being. By the way, no one is denied the right to a mammogram under the new guidelines. If she thinks she needs one or her doctor advises her to get one, her medical insurance will continue to pay the way they have been. She just better hope she doesn't have her coverage rescinded if she does have cancer, or she better hope that she doesn't lose the job through which she currently has insurance while she is ill. Until health care insurance reform is passed, those are bigger threats to her. If either of those outcomes become reality as they have for thousands and thousands, perhaps she'll become more liberal, and her conservative loved ones will have a reason to rethink their own positions.
20 :
I think you're alluding to rationing... which according to every DEMONcrat there won't be. Except you won't be able to get what you want when you want it. Rationing will be come a word you can't say.. it will be the "R" word. And if Gramps needs a pace maker at age 87, well a panel of "comparative cost study experts" might say spending that type of money on an old man isn't money well spent.... but don't you dare call them a "death panel". Sunlight kills all vampires and blood suckers. Let the light shine, baby.. let it shine...



Read more discussions :

Sunday, April 8, 2012

How often should a woman check her titty for breast cancer

How often should a woman check her titty for breast cancer?
Please no joke responses. I'm talking about breast cancer. A very serious issue.
Women's Health - 5 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
She should do it every month, and not around the time of her period as they tend to be a little swollen and lumpier then. I took your question seriously but it was tough to, seeing the disgusting name you've chosen for yourself invites all kinds of sick responses....
2 :
Hi You can Check for breast cancer once in a fortnite. Its recommended by all Docters these dayz. You can search more about this below.
3 :
Well the reason why females are suppose to give themselves self breast examinations, is so they can be familiar with their breasts; every bump they feel; but if a female does feel a bump; those are just milk ducts more likely but if you feel something new that seems out of place; than I would go to the doctors! But you're suppose to do it; everytime you take a shower! The skin is wet; that way you're able to feel the bumps more easily!
4 :
Depending on the age.Every six months. But you can check up daily when you are bathing palpate with fingers whether there is any lump in your Breast.
5 :
every month



Read more discussions :

Wednesday, April 4, 2012

I need a good and a bad website about breast cancer! Anyone can give me links

I need a good and a bad website about breast cancer! Anyone can give me links?
I have to do a web analysis is to explore the internet.WEB ASSIGNMENT will consist of an analysis of the WEBSITES and NOT a research report on the issue that is being discussed. I can't find any bad websites about breast cancer. Please help!
Cancer - 1 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Thank God you can't: cancer is a serious subject. But what your assignment is asking you, is to compare the websites themselves. How functional are they to you? Are they easy to get around in? Is it easy to find information you want, or do you get frustrated trying? Stuff like that. And it is subjective as well -- it's about if YOU find it frustrating, and why. Be specific.Try using breastcancer.org and webMD.com as sites; they deal with cancer in different ways, and so their websites are totally different. If you don't like one, say why, and like I said, be specific. Good luck!



Read more discussions :

Sunday, April 1, 2012

Why do we spend so much more money on breast cancer research than other forms

Why do we spend so much more money on breast cancer research than other forms?
I just read several articles about cancer deaths and found that far more men die of prostate cancer than women die of breast cancer. Also, men are much more likely to get this cancer than women get breast cancer. Everywhere we look (on TV, radio, bumper stickers) we see pink. Even with all the hubbub about tobacco causing deaths, we don't spend nearly as much money on lung cancer research etc. Why is there such a disparity? Oh, I was also wondering if it might help to start making brown ribbons to raise awareness to Prostate Cancer! ;-P
Cancer - 8 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I'M REALLY NOT SURE, BUT THE WAY I SEE IT IS..IF YOU GET CANCER FROM TOBACCO IT WAS A CHOICE.BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE CHOICE OF SMOKING OR NOT! BUT YOU DON'T CHOOSE BREAST CANCER
2 :
Because we're closer to finding a cure to breast cancer than we are to a lot of other cancers.
3 :
Breast cancer is a very "popular" cancer, and it receives a lot of public attention because it can destroy one of the most visibly "important" parts of a woman's body.
4 :
yeah, I don't really feel sorry for a smoker with lung cancer. And what can I say, men love the (.)(.)s. Maybe that is why we spend so much more on breast cancer research. Seriously, fewer women die of breast cancer BECAUSE we have put forth so much effort in fighting it, not the other way around. Perhaps we should up the research we do on prostate cancer as well. Send me a brown ribbon......
5 :
I dont know. But dont I think a difference in publicity in this case means a difference in research funds. Not all the money in research comes from such campains. If you look at the actual funds, even for academic research, most of it (the biggest amounts, which are actually an investment) comes from pharmas. If there are a lot of people suffering from it, pharmas will definetely invest. The more people, the more money they get. Remember, those companies are in stock markets, in which retirement funds are invested... You wouldn't like them to make bad investments, would you ?
6 :
While all cancer is obviously a terrible thing, most people don't realize how "ordinary" it is: about 1 in four of us will develop some form of cancer in our lifetime. Prostate cancer generally strikes older men, and though sometimes very serious, the men who have it often die of something else age-related first. Breast cancer strikes women of all ages. Breast cancer has also become one of the more "manageable" cancers over the last few years. I know this sounds like a cold, hard choice, but who would you rather save, if you had to choose; a 25-year-old mother of two babies, or a 74-year-old grandfather who has lived a rich, full life? Lung cancer from tobacco products is a lifestyle choice! * (Yes, I know that not all lung cancer is a consequence of tobacco use, but an awful lot of it is. )
7 :
All cancer deserves equal funding. It is an absolute horror no matter what age, stage or grade or type of cancer you have. A horror. I cannot in good conscience try to pick out one cancer that should receive more attention and more funding than another, including breast cancer. I am glad that they have the support and organization to lead the fight against their cancer. On the other hand, I have a child with a rare cancer. There is always a sinking feeling in my gut because children and young people with his disease are dying. Pretty much all of them . . and it is a rotten, rotten cancer that robs these young people of life. Their bellies fill up with multiple huge tumors that become so heavy they can no longer stand up. I cannot even convey how misearable this disease is. It is so difficult when the little ones, the five to ten year old children have this cancer. I know that there are other diseases out there that deserve funding and research, but my heart aches for the young people suffering from abdominal sarcoma. There are no pink ribbons for them. There are no advocates for them. They are invisible in our society. They die slowly and painfully and out of the way so that no one notices. And, it's nobody's fault. But, back to the question, the reason for the disparity is simply . . large numbers of people, survivors, and a good solid organization dedicated to education and advocating for funds to stop breast cancer. Rare cancers do not have the organization because they don't have the numbers of people needed for a campaign and truthfully, few survivors are left to advocate for their disease. And, although the medical community is intrigued by this rare cancer, currently funding is limited for cancers that could save so few people, and there is no active research taking place. People with rare cancer at the moment . . are expendable. They are the part of the statistics rattled off casually. But what can you do? There is little we can do about it. So, we just do the best that we can and always stay focused and hopeful. And, yeah, we support research for all cancer. Maybe someday I'll have the energy to do more. But, for now, I do what I can by doing research and have created a patient database searching for treatments that may benefit them all.
8 :
Please advise where you have read such articles. Also, brown ribbons are already available and several parties already display them. I would suggest checking out the National Cancer Institues website to get a better grasp on what the statistics show regarding these two cancers. I am not sure if you are aware, but breast cancer can effect women at a very young age. Girls as young as 13 years old have been known to have this terrible diease. Also, if you check out the staticstics on the National Cancer institutes website you will find that 80% of the men who are diagnoised with Prostate cancer are over the age of 65. Also, check the American Cancer Society statictic and compare. Here is the info I found, and I would consider them a viable source of information: 212,920 women will be diagnoised with breast cancer this year, 40,970 will die. 234,460 men will be diagnoised with prostate cancer this year, and 27350 will die. Note that the diagnoises rate for breast cancer does not include the men that will also be diagnoised. So if you go by these numbers more women will die this year of breast cancer then men dying of protate cancer. I guess what I am trying to say is that both dieases are terrible. I doubt you will find anyone that would argue that. All cancer is terrible. But if you want reliable numbers, check reliable sources. The National Cancer Insitute has access to SEER which really has more statistics then either you or I would ever need, however, if you are a numbers person like me, you will love it. One other item to think of is that there are organizations that have dumped millions if not billions of $$ into education about breast cancer such as the Komen Foundation. Yes, the use of the pink ribbon can be overwhelming, not to mention if a company gives a whopping 1% of their profit to research. Also, I am sure that in one way or another you are being affected by prostate cancer and my thoughts are with you. Best of luck on getting that brown ribbon out there! :)




Read more discussions :