So, why do they focus so much in those pink ribbons and breast cancer when the other diseases kill more women? I just think all these cancer awareness is just full of it. The are just looking for cure but not prevention when we know cancer is 5-10% passed in our genes the rest is natural cause. And we know our foods have something to do.
Cancer - 7 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
IDK but I do wish more attention would come to heart disease and lung disease. I am 33 5 ft 9 in tall 135 pounds. Eat healthy and excercise and I had a heart attack at age 29 and I now have COPD and have never smoked a day in my life. I know one of these 2 things will kill mme and it stinks cause I take very good care of myself.
2 :
It isn't the medical community that is focusing on breast cancer . . the breast cancer awareness campaign is fully in the private domain and funded by private organizations . . the breast cancer awareness came about because of Evelyn Lauder who had breast cancer about 30 years ago . . she is the founder of the cosmetic company Estee Lauder. She wanted to engage her company and businesses in bringing about breast cancer awareness using pink ribbons on her products . . which she did back in 1992 . . she openly promoted the idea to other businesses . . and along with the Susan Komen foundation established a strong and popular breast cancer awareness campaign that has grown throughout the years. It was not like this in the beginning . . trust me . .it has grown throughout the years. You have no idea what cancer was like in 1971 or why a 'war was declared' on the disease . . nor do you have any understanding that women were dying because no one wanted to say the word 'breast' out loud . . the early focus was on children with Leukemia and not on women or men with cancer. Most people just died anyway. But the issue of breast cancer, the idea that no one could say 'breast' on television or in public, and the fact that women were dying from the disease silently created a powerful grassroots movement and anger among women's groups. It didn't happen all at once . . it took years. Cancer is an ancient disease. It has nothing to do with food. No one knows what 'causes' one person to get cancer while someone else will not get it. It is rarely hereditary and other factors are considered 'risks' but do not tell the whole story since not everyone exposed to 'risks' ever develops cancer. There are absolutely no societies, groups or cultures in the world in which cancer is not present . . not one . . with over 200 different types of cancer you will find cancer in every single one. If there were such a group than it would be well documented . . and that evidence does not exist . .except in urban legend. The History of Cancer - an ancient disease http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/cid/documents/webcontent/002048-pdf.pdf
3 :
Yes, cancer does has a lot to do with the food we eat. Did you know no cancer will ever form in your body where the enzymes are released from the pancreas into the duodenum (first section of the small intestine). Cancer cannot grow in an enzyme rich environment. Enzymes are present in raw uncooked foods like fruits and vegetables but are killed when exposed to heat. All cancer free societies around the world eat natural unprocessed healthy foods full of enzymes and are not exposed to the toxins we are exposed to. "Researchers found at an average of 91 "industrial compounds, pollutants and chemicals" in the blood and urine of nine volunteers and a total of 167 chemicals in the group. According to the research, conducted by Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York with the Environmental Working Group, "76 cause cancer in humans or animals, 94 are toxic to the brain or nervous system, and 79 cause birth defects or abnormal development." None of the people tested worked with chemicals or lived near an industrial facility." http://www.advancedhealthplan.com/toxicbody.html
4 :
Most lung cancers in women are preventable. NO ONE can protect you from breast cancer.
5 :
Because the data you are looking at is modern. The campaign has been quite effective in reducing the mortality of breast cancer due to screening and early detection. It was once far, far worse. Breast cancer also appears to be mostly genetic in origin. In contrast, most lung cancers are environmental, smoking.
6 :
I think it is because of how treatable breast cancer is caught early. If caught at stage 0 or 1, its almost always curable. And if regular check-ups starting at age 30 are conducted, breast cancer deaths could drop by a huge amount. That being said, you do have a point though. Because we could say the same thing about colon cancer, and a variety of other cancers also. Women have just been very effective at being vocal about breast cancer. Which is a good thing!
7 :
Why not. We know a lot more about what causes lung cancer and heart disease than we do with breast cancer. We have only spent a lot of money on breast cancer for about 10 years we have spent tons of money on heart disease for much longer (keep in mind that we still have a long way to go and money to spend on women's heart disease and treatment as it is not the same as men's). If you are not aware of it you can treat or cure it in time. I just went through prostate cancer surgery. I was lucky as everything and everybody said I didn't have cancer based on the normal procedures but I took it one step further and had a biopsy performed and they found cancer which I had to have surgically removed. A similar thing happened to my mother and the advancements then weren't as far as they are now and she died from it. So what is the cause there are a lot of things that need to be addressed to remove this or make more strides forward to helping women with this terrible disease. I hope this helps and you get yourself involved in solving the issue and not condemning what is being done. good luck
