As I scour the news for and about women I find study after study on women's health. In the recent few weeks there have been several studies that seem to be contradicting themselves and leave many women with a lack of understanding as to what is a proper diet and what will prevent heart disease.
Among the headlines: Low-fat diets may not significantly lower the risk of heart disease or some cancers. Exercise might not change your chances of getting colon cancer. Taking estrogen doesn't up the odds of heart disease, if you've had a hysterectomy.And the chalky calcium pills may be for naught: They don't appear to help prevent broken bones.
Whipsawed by contradictory advice, some women said the latest findings won't make them change their ways. After all, even if the studies found some habits weren't helping, they weren't hurting either.
The reality is that many of these studies are funded by companies that are looking to make money off a new (fad) solution or product. The corporate takeover of women's health has been a problem for over 60 years and has made it difficult to understand what is healthy for women or what *truly* affects women's health such as environmental issues, cultural issues, stress etc. Women's health is BIG business and then tends to distract us from having holistic understandings of health. (imho)
All I can say is GO VEGAN, hehe.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Confusion in women's health..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/1679
So you add to the chorus of questionable advice with some more, even less-substantiated advice. Great, thanks.
Corporate? Granted there are a great deal of big Pharma companies out there trying to make everything into a for profit cure-all pill they can sell you. However, the Women's Health Initiative which conducted the studies discussed are privately (NIH) funded studies attempting to find evidence as to what behaviors are and are not helpfull. The people involved in the study are hard working doctors and public health officials trying to find the best way to improve the health of women in this country and the world. All the things you mention as truly affecting women's health are very important factors, but just because studies have contradictory results doesn't mean you should hide behind a tree. I think the problem the article highlights, if intentional or not, is the way the media takes studies and misinterprets, overblows, or de-contextualizes their meaning.
I think the problem the article highlights, if intentional or not, is the way the media takes studies and misinterprets, overblows, or de-contextualizes their meaning.
stu,
You're spot on. When articles from, to take just the latest example, AP and Reuters on the exact same study report different findings, or the title/opening paragraph of the same article contradicts information in the body of the article, the problem is not with the studies. It's the reporting.
From the 16th century onwards it became fashionable for sons of the nobility to take an extended Grand Tour of Europe as an educational experience. The equivalent today is perhaps the backpacker trip. Health tourism, such as visiting spas to take the waters, developed early and became popular by the 18th century. They helped create cities like Bath, Karlsbad or Baden Baden, which provided an active social life for their fashionable visitors, such as balls and tournaments.
The tourism industry as we know it can be dated back to 5 July 1841 when Thomas Cook, a Baptist minister, organized transportation and entertainment for 570 people travelling from Leicester to Loughborough to attend a temperance rally. He thought that the new power of the railways could help the cause of temperance. Cook argued that the lower and middle classes would be better off if they saved their money for trips rather than spending it on booze.