|
6189. wabbit - 7/1/2004 9:21:12 PM Hey msgreer, nice to see you! 6190. msgreer - 7/1/2004 9:41:07 PM Hey wabbit I was just in your neck of the woods. My daughter is doing so well. After a very difficult year she seems to have come out of it with such strength and a strong feeling of self-esteem. You will get a good laugh with this one...she won an award this year at Family Day...best self-advocate of the year! She is her mother's daughter. I am thrilled for her. I know there will always be difficult times for her but to see her get this award was thrilling. Also she did the 20 miles Hyannis Port Challenge race a few weeks back and was the first tandem bike rider(s) over the finish line. Then she attended a BBQ at the Kennedy home in Hyannis, got a great massage, a goodie bag from Special Olympics (which is not no goodie bag I have ever gotten) and a night at a local hotel with a hot tub for her aching muscles and a heated pool. Tuesday night she was in town to see MammieMia..did I spell that correctly? She and a staff took the T in for the play and had what she described as a "fantastic dinner". Chinese..one of her favorites. She also has tickets to Lion King..lucky girl. 6191. msgreer - 7/1/2004 9:42:40 PM CORRECTION!..the goodie bag was not like any goodie bag I ever got for a charity walk! 6192. KuligintheHooligan - 7/2/2004 10:44:56 AM "Historically, the practice of medicine has been based on an understanding of male anatomy. Women's health was an early, pressing concern of the feminist movement, and in the past decade, lesbians have organized to focus attention on their own specific health needs. Lesbians are less likely to seek health care (especially gynecological exams) than other women, and they are at higher risk for breast, cervical and ovarian cancers because they are less likely to have children by age 30. A 1999 study by the National Academy of Science concluded that extensive research into lesbian health is still desperately needed."
I didn't know this. Why would the various cancers found in women be higher if they haven't borne children yet by age 30? 6193. alistairConnor - 7/4/2004 7:50:21 PM Obvious. It's punishment for not having children like god intended. 6194. KuligintheHooligan - 7/5/2004 4:47:51 AM Sarcasm aside, alistair, my question still remains a medical question. 6195. Absensia - 7/5/2004 6:58:06 AM Kulligan, do you have a site for the material you quoted? 6196. alistairConnor - 7/5/2004 10:07:02 PM I'm not being entirely sarcastic. A woman's body has a number of major design compromises, from a physiological point of view, to enable childbearing. I guess it's the same from a biochemical standpoint. The process involves huge fluxes of hormones, for example, and it seems plausible to me that the absence of such by age 30 could provoke problems in the reproductive apparatus. 6197. thoughtful - 7/5/2004 10:38:00 PM One argument I've seen is that a woman's breast tissue will continue to grow until she's completed a pregnancy. As such, it puts women who have not had children at a greater risk for breast cancer. I've not heard the same for cervical or ovarian cancer.
There was a study a saw a couple of years ago that suggested that historically, women did not go through monthly cycles anywhere near as much as they do today for various reasons: poor nutrition meant later onset of fecundity; lack of contraception meant more frequent pregnancies; breast feeding delayed return to fecundity; shorter lifespan in general. Therefore the lack of pregnancy and the monthly flood of hormones, especially the presence of estrogen which fosters cellular growth, may put more strain on the system leading to greater incidence of cancer.
Those are just some possibilities. 6198. thoughtful - 7/5/2004 10:39:30 PM If so, that would suggest those women's health issues are not just those of lesbians, but would also be true of nuns and other celibates as well as straight women who have never had children. 6199. thoughtful - 7/6/2004 4:59:36 AM Sarcasm aside, alistair, my question still remains a medical question.
That would seem so, if it weren't for all the other posts scattered about all these threads where you are so determined to prove that all things gay are evil.
Me thinks thee dost protest too much.....
6200. Magoseph - 7/9/2004 12:38:58 AM Health Versus Wealth
First, the Kerry plan raises the maximum incomes under which both children and parents are eligible to receive benefits from Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. This would extend coverage to many working-class families, who often fall into a painful gap: they earn too much money to qualify for government help, but not enough to pay for health insurance. As a result, the Kerry plan would probably end a national scandal, the large number of uninsured American children.
Second, the Kerry plan would provide "reinsurance" for private health plans, picking up 75 percent of the medical bills exceeding $50,000 a year. Although catastrophic medical expenses strike only a tiny fraction of Americans each year, they account for a sizeable fraction of health care costs.
By relieving insurance companies and H.M.O.'s of this risk, the government would drive down premiums by 10 percent or more.
(continued)
6201. Ulgine Barrows - 7/9/2004 5:25:28 PM Sarcasm aside, alistair, my question still remains a medical question.
It's true, a woman's body changes with pregnancy, and most medical studies don't want to deal with that. It's too HARD.
Lesbians wanting special studies doesn't sound so daft in that light. 6202. arkymalarky - 7/14/2004 9:37:06 AM Hey MsGreer! I hate I was on vacation when you popped in.
Congrats to your daughter! What an exciting award! 6203. Wombat - 7/14/2004 11:07:08 AM I read somewhere that because women in modern societies menstruate much more often now than they have in the past (good nutrition, good health care, less pregnancies, longer lives) that their bodies are exposed to more hormones than in the past, which may trigger increases in certain types of cancer. 6204. thoughtful - 7/15/2004 12:46:22 AM wombat? did you see my #6197 above? 6205. Wombat - 7/15/2004 2:31:53 AM Thoughtful:
Apparently not. 6206. arkymalarky - 7/15/2004 3:21:47 AM There was a study on nuns and ovarian cancer some years ago which suggested the same thing. 6207. thoughtful - 7/20/2004 3:22:07 AM See? Mom was right. Eat your vegetables!
Vegetables Rich in Anti-oxidants May Help Protect Against Alzheimer’s
6208. wonkers2 - 7/20/2004 9:26:36 AM "Do You Remember Me? A Father, a Daughter and a Search for the Self by Judith Levine
Heard a mostly depressing interview with Judith Levine about her book which recounts her relationship with her father as a child, an adult and, more recently, since he developed Alzheimer's. According to her recent claims of Aracept?'s benefits for Alzheimer's are bogus. According to her the benefits flow from defining Alzheimer's down to early stages, not from help for people with Alzheimers. Besides that the drug is expensive and the benefits, if any, are small. According to her the only thing to do about Alzheimer's is to try to continue the patient's social relationships as long as possible. A cheery caller from a hospice group called and pointed out that hospice care can be helpful in late stage Alzheimers. Levine's father requires 24-hour care in his NYC apartment (care givers paid $7/hour and do a heroic job) and can't even go to the bathroom by himself, let alone do any cooking. Depressing thought. Remind me to get a friendly doctor to provide me with an effective pill in case I have the courage to end it before my mind is completely gone. I think I am already since the program this morning beginning to have some of the early symptoms she described! (I had to google to get her name for this post, and for a while today I thought it was Wednesday, not Tuesday.)
|
