Subject: (Weiner) breast cancer doublespeak (fwd)
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 135450 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------
........Another "George Orwellian-ism" -- what bothers me, Bob, is how
blithely an O.R. of 1.8 is being dismissed (below) as not a significant
association.... If "they" are going to establish that loose a standard --
then ALL the evidence against second hand smoke would have to be
overlooked. In the past, it has been reported that NONE of it has an O.R.
above 1.6......
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)......
rbeavers@llion.org.......
.....It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
EMF-L web-site can be found at:
EMF-L archives can be found at:
..................PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS..................
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 13:03:55 -0500
From: Bob Weiner
To: "Roy L. Beavers"
Subject: breast cancer doublespeak
Hi Roy,
Yesterday's Dallas Morning News (6/9/99, 6A) ran a story with a bold
headline, "Study says hormone use after menopause doesn't increase risk
of breast cancer."
The first sentence of the story (Associated Press) read, "A study of
37,000 women found that taking hormones after menopause does not
increase the risk of breast cancer, except for some uncommon forms of
the disease that are slow-growing and highly treatable."
The last two paragraphs of the story read,
"Women who took hormones and women who didn't had no difference in their
risk of getting the fast-growing, life-threatening tumors that make up
85 percent to 90 percent of all cases of breast cancer."
"Women who used hormones for five years or less were 1.8 times more
likely to have slow- growing, highly curable tumors than women who never
took hormones. Those who had used hormones for more than five years
were 2.6 times more likely to have the least-threatening tumors."
This is the same media treatment that the Linet study received. If you
don't like the results of the findings, make up your own headline which
isn't true! Hopefully, no one will bother to read the whole story,
especially the last paragraph which reveals findings contradictory to
the headline. Look at the euphemisms for the 1.8 and 2.6 times
increased risk of breast cancer in women taking hormones after menopause
(presumably estrogen, but the article does not state specifically what
drugs were taken)- "slow growing, highly curable tumors" and
"least-threatening tumors" which account for 10 to 15 percent of all
breast cancer cases.
Can we expect the same "bragging" from cell phone manufactures - "Our
cell phones only cause slow growing, highly curable tumors, as opposed
to our competitors' phones. If you use it, you'll get a fast-growing
life-threatening tumor"...?
Regards,
Bob
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html