BlogHer - Pink Ribbon Madness: Say No to Breast Cancer Exploitation for Corporate Profit - Comments

Exactly how I have been feeling!

jennabee25 — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:00:15 -0500

Thank you for hitting the nail on the head in this post. It seems like everything has a pink ribbon slapped on it and sold. Batteries? Calculators? Hairbrushes? It's nauseating.

Breasts of Canada

Denise — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:19:19 -0500

Sue is a longtime friend of BlogHer and going through a rough time at the moment. She would be thrilled if you joined the cause. Here is her link: http://www.breastofcanada.ca/

I own her 07 calendar and am so sorry she isn't able to post one for 08 but am hopeful that an 09 calendar will be available. So hopeful.

~Denise
Fast Times @ Homeschool High & Flamingo House Happenings

Breast link

alyssaroyse — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:16:38 -0500

does anyone have a link to the Breast Health Awareness Campaign that Purple Woman mentioned? I'd be happy to blog about it, post a link etc....
___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE
make some good news!
www.JustCauseIt.com

What Ever Happened to An Ounce of Prevention...?

Purple Woman — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:30:48 -0500

Thank you for this post. I've been thinking the same sentiment for some time now. Exploitation is the right label. I am sure some good must come from all the charity-based marketing.

In the Pink hysteria, we forget that we can prevent cancer from ever occurring. Yes, I really do believe that. So does Sue Richards, the social entrepreneur who created the Breast Health Awareness Campaign (no color-ribbon associated with it, no corporate deals). This Canuck lass created the Breast of Canada calendar to help her get the word out. She is the first person I met at BlogHer '06.

She needs our help as Ambassadors to her message.

Teri Tith
Creator & Contributing Editor
Purple Women & Friends

Iodine and Breast Cancer Prevention by Jeffrey Dach MD

jeffreydach — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:58:05 -0500

October should also be called Iodine Supplement Awareness Month, since Iodine is the key to breast cancer prevention.

Fibrocystic Breast Disease, the Iodine Deficiency Connection

A good friend of ours just went through an ordeal with breast cancer. The incidence of breast cancer has increased to 1 in 8 women, with 4,000 new cases weekly.

You might ask, could there be a preventive measure which is safe, cheap and widely available that has been overlooked?

The answer is YES , and it’s the essential mineral, Iodine, which was added to table salt in 1924 as part of a national program to prevent Goiter. It turns out that this same Iodine in table salt is the key to breast cancer prevention as proposed by the following list of prestigious doctors:

Guy Abraham, MD, Robert Derry MD PHD, David Brownstein MD, George Flechas MD, Donald Miller, M.D.

Dr. B.A. Eskin published 80 papers over 30 years researching iodine and breast cancer, and he reports that iodine deficiency causes breast cancer and thyroid cancer in humans and animals. Iodine deficiency is also known to cause a pre-cancerous condition called fibrocystic breast disease.

W.R. Ghent published a paper in 1993 which showed iodine supplementation works quite well to reverse and resolve fibrocystic changes of the breast, and this is again the subject of a current clinical study.(Can J Surg. 1993 Oct;36(5):453-60.)

Despite its obvious potential, not much has been done with Iodine treatment over the past 40 years in the United States. Since iodine isn't patentable and is therefore unlikely to be profitable to market, there is no money to fund studies for “FDA approval". However, FDA approval is not required since Iodine is already an additive to table salt at the supermarket.

For more information see my newsletter

http://jeffreydach.com/2007/05/05/jeffreydachdrdachiodine.aspx

Jeffrey Dach MD
4700 Sheridan Suite T
Hollywood Fl 33021
954 983 1443
www.drdach.com
www.jeffreydach.com

wishful thinking at best

Suzanne Reisman — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:26:31 -0500

I'm not aware of any scientific evidence that backs your claim that long term breast feeding is the only way to prevent breast cancer. Plenty of women who never give birth also do not get cancer. Further, most women who breast feed live in the same polluted and toxic environment that we all live in. Given the strong link between various environmental toxins from pollution, pesticides, and other waste from industrialized living, I tend to doubt that breastfeeding or lack thereof is what is affecting breast cancer rates. Women who tend to breastfeed longer (up to three years, as you suggest) also tend to live in non-industrial societies. They also tend to live shorter lives in general than women who live in industrial nations. It seems that there are many factors that influence their lower rates of breast cancer, not just breast feeding.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS)& Other Rants

BE Careful with your assertions, and your breasts

alyssaroyse — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 20:53:17 -0500

Your assertion that breast-feeding is the ONLY way to prevent breast cancer is both untrue and unfair. There are, in fact, many things we can do to LESSEN (but not entirely prevent) cancers of all sorts. That includes a healthy diet free of pesticides and highly processed foods, (of which more are consumed in the US than almost anywhere in the world.) Staying fit and keeping weight low, as there is a causal relationship between obesity and many cancers, not to mention a general stress on the immune system. (Again, more obesity here than just about anywhere else in the world.) Getting enough Vitamin D and omega 3 fatty acids, both of which can be tough, so it takes effort. In the case of breast cancer, there is a mounting pile of research suggesting that soy, due to heavy estrogens, may feed the growth of breast tumors. (More soy here also, as it is in our highly processed foods, and increasingly used as a substitute for all sorts of foods, as well as for a cheap filler and protein source. We consume it in countless ways, far more than in the diet of any other country, and in a highly processed form.)

To suggest that women are giving themselves breast cancer by not breast feeding long enough is really unfair and punitive. Is it something that we should look at? Absolutely. Are there lots of good reasons for women to breast-feed? Absolutely. But be very careful when you suggest that is the only thing we can do, and inadvertently blame women for giving themselves cancer.

Not everyone can breast feed. I, for one, found myself with an exploding appendix when my daughter as 6-weeks old and nearly died in front of my husband and crying daughter. Needless to say, my body shut off the milk supply in order to save my life. I tried, and could NOT get the milk to come back. I made the mistake of calling the La Leche League seeking advise and was told, i kid you not, "they have pills that will make men lactate. you could do it if you really cared." She then told me that my daughter would hate and resent me, that children who are not breast fed never learn to bond with people, and that she would be at risk of countless diseases if i didn't make the milk come back.

This kind of zealotry (that perhaps I am mistakenly hearing in your post) is really unfair and abusive to women who are doing the best they can in the lives that they have chosen to live.
What of the hourly worker who has to go to a service industry job for 8 hours a day? Or the woman with the health condition that precludes breast-feeding?

You cannot prevent breast cancer simply by breast feeding. You need to make comprehensive lifestyle choices, and even then, there's no guarantee. If you have such a guarantee, that also precludes everything else, I'd be thrilled to see it.

___________
Alyssa Royse
JUST CAUSE
make some good news!
www.JustCauseIt.com

Preventing Breast Cancer

Sheanie — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 19:21:07 -0500

There is only one thing a woman can do to prevent breast cancer. That is to breastfeed her babies for as long as possible. I am not talking about "the 6 weeks" but years. As in 2 years, 3 years per child. The United States is one of the few countries in the world where nursing beyond 6 months is uncommon. The Pink Ribbon Campaign ignores the preventative value of breastfeeding.

Excellent!

Mama Zen — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 14:04:22 -0500

If a company donates a percentage of profits to research, etc., fine. And, if I choose the pink can of soup over the "regular" because the company is making a donation, that's fine, too. But, I totally agree that companies are misleading consumers as to how MUCH is being donated.

www.thezenofmotherhood.blogspot.com

So Glad I found this Post!

SingForHim — Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:07:19 -0500

Yesterday, I saw a $15 travel coffee mug, and I thought I might buy it if, say, 50% of the price went to Breast Cancer. I was appalled that they inflated the price so much, only to give 5% to the cause. I decided to give my $15 directly to the cause and get a $5 regular coffee mug instead. I was wondering if I was the only one disenchanted with the pink ribbon machine, and found your post through Google. Thanks!

Sarah @ Real Life

Right on Suzanne

suebob — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 09:51:36 -0500

I posted about this last year - about Yoplait lids - rinse off, save and mail lids, all for a couple cents. It would take me months to even earn $5 for breast cancer.

Personally, I think most fund-raising is stupid. Just make a plan at the end of the year for the next year, write the checks on a regular schedule, and be done with it. Then when I am asked to donate to other causes, I can truthfully explain that my giving is planned and that I am supporting the causes I can to the maximum that I am capable. Those causes don't have to give me a gala, a dinner, or a t-shirt. It saves them money and time.

I am lucky enough to have a workplace that matches my giving commitment at 50 percent. If I donate $100, they turn it into $150. This is one of my favorite perks.

It goes beyond that, though

Suzanne Reisman — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 00:30:39 -0500

Yoplait was busted in Georgia several years ago for doing exactly that - promising to make donation, and not following through on it. Further, the fact that most of these companies puts a cap on their donations is problematic for me. If you sell significantly more product because people think they are helping a good cause, and the company maxes out on its cap, then every single purchase above that cap leads to profit with zero donation attached to it. It's hard to tell what is going on because companies only report what they gave, not how much they sold.

Causes do need money. No one is disagreeing about that. (Although exactly what cause we are contributing to at this point is very muddled - I have a long comment at the bottom about the fractured giving and messaging that has resulted from so many organizations jumping on the bandwagon.) However, cause marketing has perverted much of the system. Please read Samantha King's book, "Pink Ribbons, Inc." Her research is eye-opening, and really changed how I thought about this topic.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS)& Other Rants

Good intentions, yes

Suzanne Reisman — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 00:23:28 -0500

Hi Helene,

I've been thinking about your comment for quite a while. I understand that not all companies that go pink in October do so for cynical reasons, and I think what you are doing is wonderful. However, my beef with Breast Cancer Awareness Month and the pink ribbons also stems from the fact that so many companies and organizations have jumped on the bandwagon that the message is diluted. What is October about at this point? It seems to be split into three camps of fundraising:

1. To increase awareness of breast cancer. For the most part, this goal is accomplished. The only women who are unaware of breast cancer are marginalized women who are unlikely to be reached the various pink ribbon campaigns anyway. Does this mean we should give up and not try to reach them? Of course not! But it requires different tactics and different types of outreach to break through cultural barriers and stigmas to get the word out, and a month of pink ribbons is not ever going to achieve that.

2. To promote early detection. Yes, we know that early detection saves lives. But detection alone is not going to save women if they can't afford or access subsequent treatment. None of the main organizations that benefit from the October campaigns offer women health insurance or affordable medical care, so while it is important to get mammograms and find cancer early, there are millions of women who will die anyway because they can't do anything about it once they learn they have cancer. This is a broad policy problem that requires serious commitment to improving women's health, and the current pink ribbon campaigns are not addressing this.

3. To find a cure. Finding a cure is certainly a laudable goal, although Breast Cancer Action, a nonprofit advocacy agency run by and for women with breast cancer, points out that we've been looking for a cure for years and aren't even close. The emphasis on finding a cure takes away attention from finding out what causes breast cancer in the first place and then preventing it. Since many of the companies who support finding a cure happen to manufacture products that may cause cancer, this is not something that they are particularly interested in. Cleaning up our environment and helping people eat healthier diets and exercise more would also potentially help prevent cancer in the first place. Again, this is a complicated issue and it is much easier to gloss over the deep structural flaws that exist and try to cheer people up by promoting a cure that may never come.

Again, I am not glib or cynical about this. As it is also a disease that has impacted my life, I take breast cancer very seriously. I demand better solutions than what we are being offered, and reject the notion that we can shop our way out of this disease, although I appreciate the sincere efforts that people like you and Mata's friends make to help women. We need more earnest people and less quick fixes.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS)& Other Rants

Pink with out a Profit

moddivorce — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 15:03:33 -0500

Thank you Mata H! My business blog has gone pink for October in an effort to make Breast Cancer a household phrase that reminds women to get their mamograms. My grandmother died of breast cancer and my aunt is fighting it for a second time but this time the breast cancer is in her liver and bones so it's more about prolonging her life. I don't profit from this financially but I hope all of us women profit from the campaign by raising our awareness and stirring up a fire that helps each other.

Yes, big corporations profit off of everything - Christmas, Easter, Breast Cancer - but if their efforts, even if backed by "evil" intentions, save one mother, daughter, sister, grandmother, wife's life - I'll eat the yogurt with the pink lid.

Helene.
ps. I think lung cancer beats out breast cancer for the top killer of women. Maybe we need a new ribbon and awareness campaign for that!!!

More women are killed by...

Suzanne Reisman — Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:58:51 -0500

Last October, BlogHer Contributing Editor Denise pointed out that heart disease kills nearly seven times more women each year than breast cancer does, and that strokes cause more than two times more deaths than breast cancer. In fact, Denise wrote that one out of every two women will die from heart disease or a stroke. Even chronic obstructive pulmonary disease kills 22,000 more women than breast cancer every year, and yet I've never even heard of this disease.

Why does breast cancer get all the press? I honestly believe it is because it is sexy (everyone loves luscious, heaving breasts!) and our culture is so breast-obsessed that women fear losing their breasts more than is rational. Clogged arteries are so much less loaded than images of one-breasted women.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS)& Other Rants

Pink Ribbon Madness: Say No to Breast Cancer Exploitation for Corporate Profit

Suzanne Reisman — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 08:36:22 -0500

October is a great time of the year. Those of us who live in certain climates are treated to a beautiful show from nature as the leaves on trees turn vibrant reds, oranges, and yellows. Kids of all ages rejoice in Halloween festivities, dressing up in costumes and stuffing their faces with candy. It's a life-affirming month, assuming that you can avoid what has come to be the tyranny of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

By no means do I take breast cancer lightly. Almost 30 years ago, when my mom was only 33 years old, she discovered pus oozing out of one of her nipples. She saw a doctor, had a biopsy, and learned that she had cancer. In those days, there were few choices and a lot of stigma, particularly for a woman so young. Immediately following the biopsy results, she was rushed into surgery, had a mastectomy, and at the same time, received a breast implant so she would be "normal." I was only four and my sister was not even a year old at the time, and we know how lucky we are to still have our mom in our lives, even if the implant leaked and caused other long-term health issues.

Last year, Dr. Samantha King wrote a groundbreaking book, Pink Ribbons, Inc. about the travesty of the mockery of a sham that is the pink ribbon campaign. Misty McCormick Chisum's review of the book at Feminist Review sums up exactly how I felt when I learned about what the pink ribbons were really about:

Who hasn’t done it? Who hasn’t bought that extra cup of yogurt or that pink scarf that matches nothing in the closet just to show support for the breast cancer cause? Most women have seen what breast cancer can do in the lives of real women, whether we have endured it first-hand or watched a loved one struggle to survive. I have always felt that sweet inner glow after making a purchase if I knew that a small percentage of the proceeds would go to support breast cancer research. As a consumer, I felt that I was doing my part. I never questioned why my philanthropy needed to be tied directly to my consumerism. I never questioned it, that is, until I read Pink Ribbons, Inc.

What do big corporations and politicians have in common? According to Samantha King, an Associate Professor of Women’s Studies and Physical and Health Education, both groups have profited from our society’s fascination with breast cancer. King offers a searing discussion of the push toward “strategic philanthropy” in the last two decades of the 20th Century. With the current stress on cause-related marketing, corporations exploit the public’s civic goodwill as they fight “to gain ownership over the issue.”

Reading King’s analysis of the issue made me for the first time question who really benefits when I “think pink” at the cash register.

Corporations push breast cancer in October because it works to sell more products. Women worry that some day they will face breast cancer or already know someone who has. They want to help. And what way is better than to buy something that promises to do good? The reality is that very little of the amount women spend on the pink products wind up at charitable institutions. An ABC News Report from last October pointed out that Campbell's donated a whopping 3.5 cents for every can of soup it sold. To raise a mere $36 to fight breast cancer from the Yoplait campaign, a person needs to eat three cups of yogurt a day for four months.

Not only is this not especially helpful, but it can be counterproductive. Ironically, "Breast Cancer Awareness Month" came about from AstraZeneca, a pharmaceutical company (see Amanda's BlogHer post from yesterday on how drug companies profit from disease marketing) that also manufactures an herbicide known to cause cancer. As other companies jumped on the bandwagon, eager to sell their wares to women who want to do something they can feel good about, the number of products that have links to cancer that are being sold in the name of cancer awareness or even "cures" are concerning. Two prime examples are Revlon, which sponsors a run/walk for breast cancer research and contains high levels of toxic chemicals in some of its products, and Yoplait, whose ubiquitous pink lids must be sent in order for the company to make a donation and who may use dairy products with potentially cancer-causing hormones in them. If you think about it, the logic of buying a bag of pink M&Ms to help prevent breast cancer makes little sense given that obesity increases the risk of breast cancer. (See Breast Cancer Awareness's Think Before You Pink information for more details on cosmetic companies and breast cancer, as well as lists of products that do not use cancer-causing ingredients.)

Because they know that this is as much about selling a variety of consumer goods as it is about breast cancer, many women who are living with the effects of breast cancer feel exploited by the pink ribbon push. Laurie at Not Just About Cancer, who has a "don't buy pink crap" label for her blog posts, wrote:

My bag now sports a button, courtesy of Jeanne Sather of the Assertive Cancer Patient. It's text reads "Boycott October! Don't buy PINK products. Don't EXPLOIT women with breast cancer."

Speaking of Jeanne Sather of the Assertive Cancer Patient, she writes that in October:

I'll be writing letters to companies that market pink ribbon products--and expect to be rewarded for it with increased sales and profits. I'll post those letters on my blog for those of you who want to copy them.

I'll also be offering suggestions for ways, other than retail therapy, to help women with breast cancer. Meanwhile, DON'T "shop for the cure." It's a lie.

Jeanne's September post seeking a Canadian husband (universal health care) brings up another important point about the fallacy of Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Making women aware of the disease is one step. Many pink ribbon donations are used to provide free mammograms to women with no health insurance because early detection is helpful to surviving the disease. See the problem? If women don't have health insurance and can't afford a mammogram, how the hell are women going to have their cancer treated? This type of program thus effectively saves no lives. My mom was lucky – she detected her cancer early and had the ability to have it treated. That is why she is alive today, and none of these pink ribbon campaigns address that issue, which is a much broader policy issue. Instead, they make money off of women who think that they are helping others.

It's not that there is nothing that the average woman can do to assist in the fight against breast cancer. Check out the amazing resources from the non-profit advocacy group Breast Cancer Awareness's Think Before You Pink counter-campaign. Don't buy products you didn't plan on buying anyway. If M&Ms were on your shopping list, then it can't hurt to buy a pink bag instead of a regular one. That's an extra 14 cents (or however the math works out) that will now go to breast cancer causes that you would have spent anyway. But if M&Ms were not on your list, why not just donate the bag's purchase price directly to a cause you support? Not only will the organization get the full benefit of the $3.25 (or however much a big bag of M&Ms cost), you can also write the amount off of your taxes, fattening your own bottom line (and this was NOT meant to be a pun, although it is certainly applicable in my own life) instead of some corporation's.

Suzanne also blogs at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants and is the author of the article "Breast Cancer for Fun and Profit"