You know I had to be skeptical when I saw the word aggressive right next to black women in this article (because I do believe the subconscious mind is always working, even in the *objective* mind of the news reporter), but this study is attempting to separate biological factors from socio-economic factors in the survival rates of black women with breast cancer.
Black women with breast cancer are more likely to suffer from a more aggressive and harder-to-treat type of tumor than other women, according to a study of more than 2,100 Houston patients.In research that cautions against putting too much emphasis on socioeconomic factors, scientists at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center reported Monday that tumor biology is a component in the lower rates of breast cancer survival among black women.
"The study adds to the growing body of evidence that both tumor biology and access to care and other important socioeconomic factors are involved in the lower survival rates seen among African-American women with breast cancer," said Dr. Peggy Porter, a researcher at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. "It shows the need to tease out how much of the issue is biology, how much is socioeconomics and what can be done about it."
It could very well be a combination of factors, but it is important to take any type of study with caution. To say that black women just *get* more aggressive tumors (not that I think that is what they are saying here) could affect health care policy designed to help neglected communities. Just a thought.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Race and breast cancer..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/4180
To say that black women just *get* more aggressive tumors (not that I think that is what they are saying here) could affect health care policy designed to help neglected communities. Just a thought.
Not sure what you mean here. IF (a currently unknown "if") black women are more predisposed to certain types of breast cancer (entirely possible) how would knowledge of that fact be a bad thing?
because I do believe the subconscious mind is always working, even in the *objective* mind of the news reporter
Don't you mean:
because I do believe the subconscious mind is always working, especially in the *objective* mind of the news reporter
?
AFAIC, this is one of those cases, though, where more knowledge ought to help treat cancer better, but I could be wrong. Does knowing that we Ashkenazim are more likely to have more aggressive breast cancers help our treatment? Hmmm ...
i'm not a doctor, so i can't say for sure if there's something genetic that predisposes people of african descent to more aggressive forms of cancer.
what i do know is that african americans in the US have myriad health disadvantages and that as long as new technology for preventing, detecting and treating cancer becomes available to those who can pay for it (out of pocket or with insurance), the inequities keep getting larger. generations of this disparity might have a lot more to do with the aggression of a tumor than the color of one's skin. just a thought.
(see paul farmer's work on structural violence for a better explanation of what i've poorly expressed here.)
Sailorman, one of the residues of racism is that people with white and Asian genes are overrepresented in scientific tests, so drugs are likelier to be effective on people with these genes than on people with African genes.
Therefore, it makes sense to separate genetic factors into those that really are genetic - for example, it's perfectly plausible for whites to be more cancer-resistant - than factors that are influenced by which drugs are available.
Actually, i'd disagree that "it's perfectly plausible for whites to be more cancer-resistant," if what's meant by that is there's any objective gene difference that we know is linked to cancer resistance. If that were the case, we'd have much better remedies for those white people who get cancer.
I sure do wish there'd be more studies of environmental causation of cancer instead of attempts at proving genetic links. Since both race and class are linked to whether your house/school/workplace happen to be near or on a hazardous or contaminated site. And since we do have a pretty good idea that there are chemicals produced or used by medical waste incinerators/recycling facilities/electronics manufacturers/nuclear plants/the agricultural indusrty etc. etc. On the other hand, we only a tenuous idea that there will emerge any clear links to genetics uncomplicated by other factors. But it's much more convenient to explain an illness by skin color or 'lifestyle choice' than to regulate industry!
oh well...
Actually, i'd disagree that "it's perfectly plausible for whites to be more cancer-resistant," if what's meant by that is there's any objective gene difference that we know is linked to cancer resistance. If that were the case, we'd have much better remedies for those white people who get cancer.
Why? It's not as if public heath officials go out of their way to spite black people. They just happen to test drugs on non-black people.
I've always had a low white blood cell count. When I was a kid, it was debilitatingly low--I was homeschooled because every time I was in an environment with a bunch of other kids, I got sick and stayed sick. As I hit my late teens, it started going back up.
One day, one of my doctors told me: "Well, Tom, I've got some great news. If you were African-American, your white blood cell count would now be almost average."
I had no idea, until then, that there was apparently a mean statistical difference in the white blood cell counts of whites vs. blacks.
I'm skeptical of all race-essentialist studies because there's no significant way to eliminate environmental factors, to determine how much mixed-race ancestry one might have, and so forth, but anything that prevents breast cancer is a good thing--as long as nobody forgets the asterisk.
Cheers,
TH
Re race bias: If nothing else, wealth is disproportionately concentrated in the hands of whites. It stands to reason that they would disproportionately benefit from medical research in a free-market system impacted by long-term institutional racism. That's why conscious antiracist work needs to be done to compensate for this.
Cheers,
TH
I was under the impression Asians are underrepresented in medical studies because they either are not asked or they don't fill out surveys.
I'm not talking about American medical studies. I'm talking about Japanese, Korean, and increasingly Chinese ones.
I had no idea, until then, that there was apparently a mean statistical difference in the white blood cell counts of whites vs. blacks.
Yep. Our counts are always a little low -- which is normal for all of us, but "low" when compared to the "average" [mostly calculated for white Americans].
Since both race and class are linked to whether your house/school/workplace happen to be near or on a hazardous or contaminated site. And since we do have a pretty good idea that there are chemicals produced or used by medical waste incinerators/recycling facilities/electronics manufacturers/nuclear plants/the agricultural indusrty etc. etc.
This is pretty interesting, ktb. Another factor that researchers have studied is processed food. I know that may stem from lifestyle choice more than environmental factors, but socioeconomically, lower-income households consume more processed food because of its affordability than fresh/freshly prepared food. I think that finding's significant too when evaluating the chemicals between the class gaps.
IF this is the same study I heard discussed on NPR recently the issue was more socio-economic than biological. The woman who ran the study talked about stress causing the mechanism our body has that fights mutant genes (aka cancer) and that a great many black women live in situations with great stress. I think this is the story, but I could be wrong (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6367587)
Do people do these studies outside the US? If I'm not mistaken, Britain has no racial IQ gap, so some of the environmental factors that hurt black Americans, like proximity to toxic waste, are probably absent.
Just a note on the "aggressive" tumors that African-Americans tend to experience. To the best of my knowledge, having covered both cancer and women's health issues in nursing classes this past semester, the issue is the timing of diagnosis. Black women tend to have less access to health care, and are thus diagnosed with breast cancer at a later stage than women who have better health care. It's not a different type of cancer, per se, but when and with what level of involvement outside the breast tissue the cancer is diagnosed.