Equality for men!!

[Gob]

In most parts of the world, health outcomes among boys and men continue to be substantially worse than among girls and women, yet this gender-based disparity in health has received little national, regional or global acknowledgement or attention from health policy-makers or health-care providers. Including both women and men in efforts to reduce gender inequalities in health as part of the post-2015 sustainable development agenda would improve everyone’s health and well-being.

http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/92/8/13-132795/en/

[MajGenl.Meade]

I'm looking forward to all the USian sports teams wearing blue all month in September next year to promote funding for prostate cancer research. Yeah - that'll happen

[BoSoxGal]

Oh pshaw! All the focus in medical research for years until quite recently has been on men; women and children were assumed to be just smaller versions of men.

There is plenty of focus on men in healthcare; but you can't lead a jackass to water and years of studies have shown that men avoid the doctor like the plague unless a GF, wife or mother badgers them into going.

Bunch of scaredy-cat whingers.

[rubato]

Actually, and surprisingly, that isn't true. 20 years ago they looked into whether research into women's diseases were under-funded and found that when compared to mortality and morbidity they were funded at a much higher level than men's. For one example there are similar numbers of deaths from breast cancer and prostate cancer but the funding for the latter is far less.

According to estimates from the National Institutes of Health, in the United States in 2010, 207,090 women and 1,970 men will get new cases of breast cancer, while 39,840 women and 390 men will likely die from the disease. The estimated new cases of prostate cancer this year — all affecting men — is 217,730, while it is predicted 32,050 will die from the disease.

Dan Zenka, the Prostate Cancer Foundation’s vice president of communications, says the similarity in numbers is hard to ignore. “Prostate cancer is to men what breast cancer is to women,” he told The Daily Caller.

Breast cancer awareness advocates have done an inspired job getting out word and excitement for their cause. Despite their success, prostate cancer has been left in the dust — both in terms of awareness and federal funding. Case in point, prostate cancer research receives less than half of the funding breast cancer does.

In fiscal year 2009, breast cancer research received $872 million worth of federal funding, while prostate cancer received $390 million. It is estimated that fiscal year 2010 will end similarly, with breast cancer research getting $891 million and prostate cancer research receiving $399 million.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/05/breas ... f-victims/

yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

Indeed, women are the only gender which has their own medical specialty and departments in medical schools, etc.; men don't.

unless a GF, wife or mother badgers them into going.

I'm sure that does wonders for their high blood pressure.

[BoSoxGal]

Well why don't you boys gets off your butts and start a campaign to bring visibility and funding to prostate cancer? Politicians and doctors/medical establishment didn't do that - women victims of breast cancer and their loved ones did.

Most major hospitals have men's health departments. I don't see that women should be blamed because doctors specialize in their reproductive systems issues and/or in obstetrics, which doesn't apply to men directly.

An increase in funding for women's healthcare issues is very recent, rubato, as I'm sure you know. Prior to the past couple of decades, almost all medical studies used males as subjects and applied the findings to women and children without specific studies of those populations.

[MajGenl.Meade]

My idea for the high school football team to support Colorectal cancer research foundered on the difficult of finding brown ribbons. Unfortunately, boobs are far more photogenic and sexy than intestines and urethras.

Some things are just better for marketing. Malaria vs. diarrhea is another example.

[Sue U]

Some things are just better for marketing. Malaria vs. diarrhea is another example.

Well, it's certainly hard to compete with a Nobel prize winner, but all things considered, I'd rather have diarrhea.

[MajGenl.Meade]

[TPFKA@W]

It takes ages to die from prostate cancer. It's one of those cancers that you would pick, if you could.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Oh yeah, dying for ages. That's the ticket!

[Scooter]

It takes ages to die from prostate cancer. It's one of those cancers that you would pick, if you could.

If there is any discrepancy in funding, this is surely one of the reasons. Most men get prostate cancer in later life and the overwhelming majority of those that get it die of something else.

[rubato]

Some don't deserve more funding, like COPD and Emphysema, which we know how to prevent.


yrs,
rubato

[oldr_n_wsr]

Some don't deserve more funding, like COPD and Emphysema, which we know how to prevent.

And everyone who contracts those diseases was a smoker? I know more than a few first responders at 9/11 who have those diseases and never smoked.

[Crackpot]

But it's thier own fault for exposing themselves too such danger not to mention all those who live in areas with poor air quality. If any of them had any sense they would have moved before the decades of exposure caused problems....

[Joe Guy]

Some don't deserve more funding, like COPD and Emphysema, which we know how to prevent.

Are you suggesting that anyone who gets COPD or Emphysema should not receive medical treatment?

[Jarlaxle]

Probably. Rube's sociopathy is not news.

[MajGenl.Meade]

...or more simply, there is less need to spend RESEARCH money on some conditions for which we ALREADY know the causes and treatments.

No matter whether or not rube's an arse from time to time (or even by the minute), in this case he may be less of an arse.

[BoSoxGal]

We know what causes COPD and emphysema, but we shouldn't stop looking for better treatments and cures. Not everybody who gets those diseases 'deserves' them (assuming anyone accepts that position), and even if someone's behavioral choices led to the illness, society still benefits if better treatments/cures are found, as that would reduce long term treatment costs and lost productivity from illness and early death.