Friday, October 4, 2013

It's That Time Again

Greetings sheeple! Once again, it's time to join in with the NFL, the American Cancer Society, and some of the world's largest corporations to get together and raise awareness!

Hot Pink football gear is here!

After all, this is a cause we can all agree on, right? Who doesn't want to protect and preserve some of the most beautiful specimens found anywhere in nature?

Long time readers know that I've previously helped raise awareness by highlighting some issues regarding breast cancer, like the ABC connection, and how the American Cancer Society's directors have close financial ties to the mammography machine manufacturing industry.

Since I've blogged about this topic so much in the past, I've decided to make this post a round up of all the issues behind this major Cancerous Corporation-driven media push to raise awareness and get all the ladies to schedule their yearly annual appointment to radiate their breasts in the name of Brea$t Can$er Prevention.

* Women who have had abortions and have never carried a baby to full term are at a higher risk of developing breast cancer.  

The Abortion/Breast Cancer Connection

A teenager, who has an abortion between 9 and 24 weeks, has a 30% chance of developing breast cancer in her lifetime. If that same teenager also has a family history of breast cancer, the risk increases so much that one study showed all such women developed breast cancer by the age of 45.

* Women who get a yearly mammogram are actually exposing their breasts to potential cancer-inducing radiation.

The Food And Drug Administration Admits Risks Of Medical Radiation While Ignoring Dangers Of Mammography 

Thus, premenopausal women undergoing annual screening over a ten-year period are exposed to a total of at least four rads for each breast, at least eight times greater radiation than FDA's "cancer risk" level.

* Most women "diagnosed" with breast cancer via mammography never had a cancer problem to begin with.

Check out this article from The New England Journal of Medicine:

Effect of Three Decades of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Incidence

The introduction of screening mammography in the United States has been associated with a doubling in the number of cases of early-stage breast cancer that are detected each year, from 112 to 234 cases per 100,000 women — an absolute increase of 122 cases per 100,000 women. Concomitantly, the rate at which women present with late-stage cancer has decreased by 8%, from 102 to 94 cases per 100,000 women — an absolute decrease of 8 cases per 100,000 women. With the assumption of a constant underlying disease burden, only 8 of the 122 additional early-stage cancers diagnosed were expected to progress to advanced disease. 
After excluding the transient excess incidence associated with hormone-replacement therapy and adjusting for trends in the incidence of breast cancer among women younger than 40 years of age, we estimated that breast cancer was overdiagnosed (i.e., tumors were detected on screening that would never have led to clinical symptoms) in 1.3 million U.S. women in the past 30 years.
We estimated that in 2008, breast cancer was overdiagnosed in more than 70,000 women; this accounted for 31% of all breast cancers diagnosed. 

*  The Mammography Manufacturing Industry is part of a coalition of global corporate enterprises who's only real motive in promoting Awareness every October, is PROFITS, not women's health.

Corporate Sponsors Control Mammography Industry Warns Cancer Prevention Coalition

 ACS has received contributions in excess of $100,000 from a wide range of “Excalibur donors.” Some of these companies were responsible for environmental pollution with carcinogens while others manufactured and sold products containing toxic and carcinogenic ingredients.

These donors include:

• Petrochemical companies (DuPont, BP and Pennzoil)
• Industrial waste companies (BFI Waste Systems)
• Big Pharma (AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Company, and Novartis)
• Auto companies (Nissan and General Motors)
• Cosmetic companies (Christian Dior, Avlon, Revlon, and Elizabeth Arden)
• Junk food companies (Wendy’s International, McDonalds’s, Unilever/Best Foods, and Coca-Cola.
• Biotech companies (Amgen and Genetech)

There's a very good reason why our mass media driven society goes all out every October to raise awareness and get women to go get exams done... fear-based MARKETING.

Now, of course, none of this should detract from the fact that Breast Cancer is a very real disease that afflicts, kills and maims women all over the world.

But we need to be aware of the financial motives of an industry that exists to profit off of the fears of a real disease....and to understand that getting regular, annual Mammograms can actually cause the very disease women are trying to prevent!

So we need to take a different approach here, and encourage non-radioactive methods for helping to prevent the proliferation of this dread disease.

Vox offers his own suggestion for such a campaign:

As the NFL ceaselessly works to remind us, October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.  So, in the spirit of the month, I'd like to encourage everyone, male or female, to fight breast cancer the next time you are in line at the supermarket or the mall behind a woman.

Just reach out with both hands and give the woman in front of you a thorough breast exam. You never know, you just might save a life! And while she might seem a little surprised at first, show her your pink ribbon and warn her about the dangers of that terrible, terrible disease. It's all about awareness, after all.
I concur wholeheartedly!

Let's all do our part!

Don't forget that manual inspections are not the only non-radioactive tool we have in fighting this dread disease...visual inspections can be potentially life-saving too!



earl said...

I've also read there is a connection between birth control and breast cancer. When you mess with hormones like that, ride as many cocks as possible, and never get pregnant bad things will happen.

Big pharma...keeping women on pills for a lifetime.

baux said...

Excellent piece. Amazes me that people don't bother looking into what they're subjecting themselves to when they follow a course of Western medical treatment.

Double Minded Man said...

Birth control and abortion have the same mechanism for increasing breast cancer.

Both tell the body that you are pregnant, and so the body starts creating undifferentiated breast cells. At the end of the pregnancy these cells will become milk producing cells. However, in the case of an abortion or the pill, the body never gets around to telling these cells to differentiate. And these undifferentiated cells are the ones most prone to cancer.

Because the body really only goes through this process once, at first child, you are at the greatest risk of breast cancer if you have either one of these before your first child is born. and preferably breast fed as well, as this is also shown to reduce the BC risk.

dannyfrom504 said...

i almost did a post on this but then said, "keoni's going to cover it."

i was right.

you know, even the NCAA is being encroached by the pink mafia. also, Penn and Teller did a great episode on breast cancer for their show "bullshit". you might want to check it out.

lozozlo said...

I've also read there is a connection between birth control and breast cancer. When you mess with hormones like that, ride as many cocks as possible, and never get pregnant bad things will happen.

Big pharma...keeping women on pills for a lifetime.

All of it funded by Bernanke bucks, lzlzlzoozozozlo!

Anonymous said...

Someone wrote to Gooddell asking could the refs use pink flags to show penalties.
With all the pink on view players, officials, coaches, commentators and fans did not know if penalties were be called or not.
$29 million Gooddell did not think through "Sell more pink to our female demographic month" that well.

Richard Nikoley said...

I think a few of your pics gave me "raised awareness."

tarnishedsophia said...

Hopefully you mean "not carrying through with a pregnancy can be bad for your health", not "every woman should endure pregnancy". I agree that many women use too much birth control, and that abortion should only be considered in extreme circumstances...but no one should ever *have* to be pregnant. After all, their partner could be infertile or have had a vasectomy, or the woman just doesn't want to deal with the troubles of childbearing.