Prev
Next

Breast is beating bowel in the battle of the cancers

Tory Shepherd

by Tory Shepherd

06 Apr 06:00am

Must Reads

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge - this is a caption

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

38

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread? - this is a caption

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

92

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref - this is a caption

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

71

Filed under: Awareness, Bowel Cancer, Breast Cancer, Colorectal Cancer, Fundraising

116 comments

People are dying because breast cancer awareness has eclipsed the dangers of bowel cancer, and other ‘less sexy’ cancers.

What would be the bowel cancer equivalent? Picture: Dean Martin

If that sounds melodramatic, consider this: A national Cancer Council study released today confirms most people think that breast cancer is Australia’s biggest killer. It also found the awareness of breast cancer screening is double that for bowel cancer, although both yield similarly life-saving results.

They have highlighted bowel cancer’s ‘tragic anonymity’ despite it being more common and more deadly than breast cancer. Compare this then, to the ‘hyper awareness’ around breast cancer.

Breast cancer has benefitted from one of the biggest and most successful public relations exercises ever seen.

A tide of pink rolls across Australia for a whole month - longer, even. There are famous faces and pink-lit places. Walks and runs and jogs and rides.

A huge industry has sprung up around it – with specialised breast cancer clinics scaring the crap out of young women by perhaps over-emphasising the risk they are at… while charging them to set their minds at ease.

‘Pinkwashing’  - where the pink label on a product makes a consumer feel good about buying a product although the end benefits are dubious – is rife.

Ultimately the lobbyists have done a great job; awareness is well and truly raised.

Which is fabulous. Except it means that bowel cancer is the poorer cousin who gets forgotten about. The poorer, forgotten cousin who is more likely to kill you.

The breast cancer lobby has done a brilliant job. And individually they are not responsible for the overall effect – which is that far too many women are overly worried about breast cancer, and far too few men and women are worried about bowel cancer.

According to the Cancer Council, breast cancer is Australia’s fourth biggest cancer killer after lung, bowel, and prostate cancer. (And if you’re convinced that bowel cancer is overlooked on the PR circuit, think about lung cancer, which kills more than twice as many Australians as breast cancer).

This is a fatal image problem. Compounded by the media, by celebrities, by the government.

Less awareness means less life-saving testing. It also means less pressure all the way up the food chain to get the disease the attention it deserves.

The media is at fault because it shies away from the ‘ick’ factor. I know of a men’s magazine that wouldn’t print a piece on bowel cancer – my source said they ‘pooh-poohed’ the idea. And that’s reflected throughout mainstream media.

Conversely, pretty ladies in pink get great coverage.

Celebrities are at fault because while surely more have suffered, or had a bowel cancer scare, they’re not out there talking about it and normalising – at least not at the levels of other cancer lobbyists.

Governments are at fault because despite their most ardent protestations they fall prey to public pressure – so sexier projects are more likely to get funded.

And while it seems unfair if not insensitive to pin some of the blame on breast cancer advocates, there is a finite research and funding pie, and it seems to me that the pink mafia are taking more than their fair share.

Prostate cancer suffered a similar problem, but thanks to Movember and a television campaign built around making a joke out of the test has been able to start building a solid profile.

Colorectal cancer, on the other hand, has no Movember, or coloured ribbon – although I did find a mention on line of a brown ribbon, I’m not sure that’s kocher.

There’s no easy answer here, but a bloody good place to start would be for the Government to sort out the shemozzle around bowel cancer screening and fund a proper program. And someone needs to come up with a fantastic PR campaign to help get bowel cancer the recognition it deserves.

Most commented

427Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
375There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
304Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
262Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

116 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Erick says:

      06:18am | 06/04/11

      The predominance of the breast cancer campaign is not just because breasts are sexy. It’s also because men don’t have them, and 99% of breast cancer is suffered by women. So the pink ribbon is a handy way for feminists to guide money into research that maximises benefits to women while minimising benefits to men.

      How ironic that this funneling now appears to be endangering women as well, by taking resources away from diseases that actually kill more females.

      Reply

    • ZSRenn says:

      09:12am | 06/04/11

      Erick I would have argued against you in this matter up until last November. For years I have been contributing to Pink Ribbon day either by giving money or participating in sporting events.

      However, a friend suggested last year suggested we run an event in research of prostate cancer in the Movember program. My father suffers from the disease and having been so active in the past with Pink Ribbon I contacted all those that new I had helped before and others, most of whom new my fathers situation.

      Amount raised by me $0.00 except for my own contribution and some from a function in China we ran for a local man who was suffering.

      One big Pink Ribbon supporter wrote to me telling me how raising money for such charities gave away our rights to be able allocate funds to proper research as the money donated never really went to where it was needed,

      My point is at the next Pink Ribbon day good luck girls please do ask for my assistance again. I have often heard and sometimes felt what Tory is saying here today but to have it so rubbed in my face like that was the last straw.

    • AliceC says:

      11:16am | 06/04/11

      Yes, the rise of breast cancer awareness was a feminist plot to try and kill off men…... (note sarcasm)

    • Anne71 says:

      12:39pm | 06/04/11

      AliceC - it’s okay, Erick likes to blame every single problem in the world on them evil feminists. I don’t think he’s managed to link the recent floods, cyclones and earthquakes to them yet, but I’m sure he’s working on it.

    • Pete says:

      12:47pm | 06/04/11

      Actually, Eric is possibly on the right track, the breastscreening lobby is very powerful, there is also cervical screening. It all boils down to how much emotive noise you can generate to heighten awareness both with the public and political leaders.  I’m not saying it’s a female plot to kill off men, but other lobby groups could certainly get a few pointers from breastscreening. you speak of a lack of efficient bowel screening programs, it affects both genders, yet there is no effective screening program. the same can be said of a prostatic screening program. So yes all the emotional buttons are effectively pushed by breastscreening to ensure heightened awareness as well as ongoing screening support.

    • Kika says:

      01:14pm | 06/04/11

      Oh Erick you make me laugh!!! Must you turn everything that mentions females in the article into an anti-feminist rant?

      Seriously, who wants to go out there and glamourise the fact they had blood and mucus in their stools? Not as comfortable as talking about bumps in your lady lumps.

    • mike j says:

      03:07pm | 06/04/11

      Of course it’s not a feminist plot to eradicate men. Feminists aren’t that organised. It’s just more organic evidence of the utter selfishness of women, their inability to understand the concept of equality (despite constantly banging on about it), and their opportunistic leveraging of the stoicism/apathy of men and the principles of so-called ‘positive discrimination’.

      Women already receive two thirds of national health funding and live years longer. These are the very same women who will tell you to ‘man up’ about your ‘man flu’, or point out how hideous and sleazy you look during Movember.

      And, of course, the only reason we’re hearing about this from Tory is because the hysteria over breast cancer is obscuring another danger to women. The fact that bowel cancer is also a danger to men is purely incidental.

    • Matthew says:

      04:24pm | 06/04/11

      Erick is somewhat right.  Cervical cancer, breast cancer and lung cancer get by far the most air time.  Prostate is getting more, but usually only around movember time.  Bowel gets none.

      You also have to remember, lung cancer is almost 100% in the form of anti-smoking campaigns which is the largest cause of lung cancer but definitely not the only.

      At the end of the day, women related cancers do get a disproportionately large amount of funding in the cancer research field (men can get breast cancer too, but it’s a low chance).  Is it because of feminists? Probably not, I think it’s just the breast cancer council that’s got the best marketing strategy but they’ve definitely milked the female thing a bit since getting big.

      Upon saying that, I’d donate to breast cancer research because I’ve lost one aunt to it and both my mother and her sister have had the pre-cancerous stages of breast cancer (before it breaks through the cell walls and officially becomes cancer).  I also had one aunt die to lung cancer but she smoked for all but 12 years of her life.

    • Lilly says:

      05:56pm | 06/04/11

      Well here’s an idea. Get off The Punch, quit complaining about how women are the spawn of satan and DO SOME FUNDRAISING YOURSELF! I raise money for Aids awareness, do I have aids? No. But it suffers the same fate and stigmatism as bowel cancer but instead of complaining about it I’m doing something about it.

    • Critic says:

      06:20pm | 06/04/11

      Lilly,

      An hysterical response, that we could only expect from a female.

    • mel says:

      07:22pm | 06/04/11

      Critic, I didn’t notice the sarcasm/irony marker that usually comes with a comment like that. Please tell us that you forgot to include them, please, otherwise I’m speechless!

    • Deborah Robins says:

      08:00pm | 06/04/11

      And for irony, how about a disorder that kills one in every 3,300 males in Australia and around the world? If you think Bowel Cancer is eclipsed or marginalized, try having Duchenne muscular dystrophy? If you are under 30yrs of age it is three times the incidence of breast cancer and still it is invisible. Why? Because it is rare to live to 30yrs or beyond if you have Duchenne - there is no recovery rate - it is a death sentence. My mother had Breast Cancer in her 50’s so I’ve also been touched by it, but she recovered and lived another 20 yrs.  Last month I knew of 2 sixteen yr olds and a 13yr old who succumbed to Duchenne.  My son affected by Duchenne is 23yrs old and there is very little investment in Australia in Duchenne research (lumped in with all the other rare late-onset muscle disorders under a misnomer called “muscular dystrophy”). By comparison, there simply aren’t enough projects to spend all the monies raised for the popular lifestyle diseases, yet we have to watch our young men weaken and die in obscurity.  Why? Maybe because it is “genetic” and we are inferior?  Think again, the incidence hasn’t dropped and most new cases are spontaneous mutations. It can happen to anybody’s son, nephew, grandson.  Maybe it is because our stoic young men never make a fuss- they are blokes and want at least to be perceived as strong in their character. They also never want to cause their families more pain and so to advocate for themselves would be to share more pain with their grieving families. They won’t do that either.  Youths with Duchenne can’t even be acknowledged as a male disorder because older men who have had the chance to work jobs and rear families with Testicular and Prostate Cancer do not acknowledge the biggest genetic killer of males - only risky behaviours like “dangerous driving” or “depression” - both of which can be actioned by any gender.  Don’t talk to me about the sexy high profile disorders ! Visit http://www.duchennefoundation.org.au and read some of our stories.  A mother.

    • William Smith says:

      08:49pm | 06/04/11

      Erick is exactly right. Australian women enjoy among the longest lives in human history, a full 5 years longer than Australian men. Given this, you’d expect medical research in Australia to focus on men’s health, but unbelievably medical research here focuses more on women than men.

      In 2009-2010 the National Health and Medical Research Council provided the following funding for research into these gender-specific cancers:

      Breast: $20 million
      Ovarian: $7 million
      Uterine/Endometrial: $2 million
      Cervical: $1 million

      Prostate: $11 million
      Testicular: $1 million

      Total for women: $30 million
      Total for men: $12 million

      That’s quite a discrepancy. Research into colorectal and bowel cancer received $12 million.

      Broadening the focus beyond cancer, in 2009-2010 the National Health and Medical Research Council provided a total of $21 million for research into all men’s health-related issues. The equivalent figure for research into all women’s health-related issues: $80 million!

      Did I mention that men in Australia die 5 years earlier than women?

      See:

      http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/dataset/issues/men.php
      http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/dataset/issues/women.php
      http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/dataset/disease/cancer.php

    • Lilly says:

      12:44am | 07/04/11

      Critic a hysterical response would be screaming about how breast cancer kills millions. Suggesting you actually do something instead of just complaining on the internet is called using my brain. You should try it.

    • Greg says:

      12:57pm | 07/04/11

      Maybe men should start demanding equality funding quotas from the government?

      Better yet, maybe prostate cancer research funding should get some ‘affirmative action’ to compensate for past discrimination, and receive higher government funding for the next few decades (or at least unti the fatility rate is lower than for breast cancer).

      And also fund some mandatory ‘sensitivity and awareness training’ for those over privileged and sexist women who don’t agree with the proposal.

    • Erick says:

      06:25am | 06/04/11

      P.S. In reply to the question posed by the photo caption: “What would be the bowel cancer equivalent?”

      I would suggest delicious goatse cookies.

      Reply

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      08:41am | 06/04/11

      I nearly didn’t click on that, being old enough to remember goatse ...

    • PaulB says:

      03:51pm | 06/04/11

      Oh Erick!!  As a health worker though it does look….

    • Chris L says:

      06:09pm | 06/04/11

      Thank you Erick, I laughed out loud! I think chocolate mouse would be another obvious choice.

    • Kathy says:

      07:38pm | 06/04/11

      Erick…definitely the smartest person in the room.  It’s scary how often I agree with him.

    • Verity says:

      06:58am | 06/04/11

      It seems to be all the rage to flash your boobs in the name of breast cancer awareness. Maybe we could have an ad campaign where people flash their bums for bowel cancer? I think just about every bloke in the country would be hapy to oblige, judging by the pervasiveness of bum-flashing in bars, nightclubs, at the footy, on the streets, out of car windows etc. Just give ‘em a few beers and we’ve got ourselves an awareness campaign.

      Reply

    • VVS says:

      10:07am | 06/04/11

      I don’t even need a few beers…

      Any chance to photobomb in the far background of a shot and my pants seem to fall down by themselves.

    • Lilly says:

      05:57pm | 06/04/11

      This is actually a really good idea. You could make a hilarious internet awareness campaign using this idea!

    • Gladys says:

      07:42am | 06/04/11

      I was at an ovarian cancer awareness breakfast once. An executive from the breast cancer awareness group stood up and hijacked one of the speakers and turned the thing into a breast cancer discussion.

      Ever since, I’ve boycotted buying anything pink or associated with breast cancer and given it to everyone else.

      Reply

    • Sarah says:

      09:05am | 06/04/11

      Completely agree.  I refuse to buy anything with those pink ribbons on it, attend fundraisers or listen to their propaganda.  If they partnered with other cancers, sure, maybe then.  But they’re a cancer on other fundraising efforts, taking more than their fair share, and I’m actively supporting others now.

    • David says:

      07:43am | 06/04/11

      Hate to say it but I really think this is a marketing issue for other cancers, and perhaps for the broader cancer disease.

      What breast cancer has achieved in terms of awareness is fantastic and the result of a great strategy.  It’s a goal that’s available to any awareness and or lobby group and I - for one - would like to see a little more strategic thought and daring being put to play for some of the other killer cancers.

      It may also be worth noting that there’s very little shock value used in the visual identity or executions of breast cancer (pink is hardly a colour associated with shock, and I can’t recall an ad where hacking up blood is a feature)....

      Reply

    • Adam says:

      07:46am | 06/04/11

      Whilst bowel and prostate cancers fade into the pink haze, surely research and knowledged about any one type of cancer can in some way be applied to many cancers? Surely any knowledge is better than none/
      Also, celebrities/people publicly talking about breast cancer is not surprising. Over half the population loves boobs. Not that many of us feel the same about our bowels

      Reply

    • Kelvin says:

      11:46am | 06/04/11

      There are over 100 different types of cancer and over 120 different cancer treatment regimes and most will not affect other cancers.

      At least that is why my oncologist told me (and he would know.)

      Let me tell you - you will care about your bowel if you have to have a large part of it removed and then undergo chemotherapy in the hope of curing your colon cancer. As someone who knew nothing about bowel cancer until last November, I now have a certain level of understanding of the issue.

    • Matthew says:

      04:27pm | 06/04/11

      Adam, how come the cervical cancer vaccine works for cervical cancer but none of the others?  Yes, some of the research affects all, but not much.

    • Markus says:

      04:54pm | 06/04/11

      The first I heard of the cervical cancer vaccine was that it was actually being released as a vaccine to the HPV virus, primarily to prevent male or female from contracting genital warts.
      Whatever happened to this angle of the treatment?

    • Angel says:

      05:08pm | 06/04/11

      Markus I would say they’ve focused on the cervical cancer aspect of it because cervical cancer is the worst side effect. Genital warts are easily treated, cancer is better prevented than warts in my opinion.

    • bella starkey says:

      09:33pm | 06/04/11

      The vaccine prevents the types of HPV which cause cervical cancer. There are dozens of strains of the virus, not all of which cause physical symptoms (a bit like non-symptomatic herpes which can be passed on but doesnt cause sores)

      Gardisil could mean the erradication of Cervical cancer in a generation. Of course it would be prudent to give it to young men also it is a bit of a cost benefit thing. If I was a parent I would get my son to have it.

      Unfortunately, I was a little old for it and have tested positive for precancerous cervical cells. which means the fun fun fun of yearly rather than biyearly pap smears.

      Warm up the specculum doctor! I’m coming on friday!!!

    • Eliz52 says:

      10:42pm | 09/04/11

      Angel, HPV related oral and head cancer occurs more frequently than cervical cancer and gets very little air time. More lives could have been saved focusing on that cancer. Cervical cancer has always been rare and was in decline before screening started and there are no random controlled trials - so we’ll never know just how many are helped by testing. We do know it can’t be more than 0.45% and other factors are also contributing to the decline (but never mentioned by Papscreen) - more hysterectomies, fewer women smoking, better condoms since AIDS and Dr Welch suggests in his book, “Over-diagnosed” - better hygiene and less STD. The serious downside to cervical screening rarely mentioned to women - HUGE over-detection and potentially harmful over-treatment. 77% of Aussie women are referred at some stage for colposcopy (Kavanagh & Others, “Lifetime risk of colposcopy in cervical screening”) and usually some sort of biopsy to help “possibly” 0.45% of women. Some of these women are left with psych issues and cervical damage - cervical stenosis (infections, endometriosis) infertility, cervical incompetence - miscarriages, premature babies and more c-sections….not to mention fear, pain, stress etc.
      Our doctors are even paid to reach screening targets for pap tests (undisclosed to women….surely a conflict of interest - Financial Incentives Legislation)
      It’s the same with mammograms - no real information and the risks of testing are downplayed or omitted from brochures. Thankfully the Nordic Cochrane Institute have produced a paper warning women of the risks of over-diagnosis & false positives. “The Risks and Benefits of Mammograms” is at their website. Most women won’t see it.
      I regard these programs as dishonest, disrespectful and unethical…women are entitled to the truth and should have a chance to assess their risk profile. We’re all entitled to protect our healthy bodies from harm…
      Dr Joel Sherman’s medical privacy forum under womens’ privacy issues is a great source of medical journal references - see research by Dr Raffle, DeMay and Prof Baum.

    • Richard Palmer says:

      08:14am | 06/04/11

      Been patiently waiting for someone to have a crack at this.  A number of other cancers claim more victims but don’t get anywhere near the dough.  While of course breast cancer is a terrible form form of cancer and every effort should be made to fight it, it has been a marketing tool drawing in what I think is an unfair share of charity money.

      Reply

    • Anne71 says:

      12:44pm | 06/04/11

      I completely agree, Richard. And this is why I donate to The Cancer Council rather than Pink Ribbon Month, Movember or what have you.  I have faith in them to direct the money raised to several areas of research, rather than just focusing on one.

    • iansand says:

      08:41am | 06/04/11

      Can I suggest that your opening sentence would be more accurate if it said “People are dying because they have cancer”?

      Reply

    • Davido says:

      01:07pm | 06/04/11

      Well said, thought the same myself.

    • fairsfair says:

      08:50am | 06/04/11

      There is a lot of talk about everyone loving baps, but why don’t men love their prostate the same if not more? If you have to have it removed you can kiss goodbye your sexual function and various other things. Why does this fear not get men campaigning like the breast cancer women? Is it because getting it checked involves a finger up your bum or is it the “if I don’t think about it, it won’t happen to me” factor? I can understand both, but I can only assume a mamogram hurts more than a prostate check. Plus, you don’t have to make awkward eye contact while the procedure is underway!

      I have to agree, I have pink fatigue and I doubt I will donate another cent to their cause because I think their MO pushy. Like Gladys I look elsewhere, like the cancer council and the leukaemia foundation for an overall approach to “finding a cure”. I don’t think my attitude to the marketing driven campaign good though. Why should women with breast cancer suffer because I am just sick of making pink cup cakes, wearing pink ribbons, having the footy umpire wear pink socks, pink, pink, pink?

      It is such a strange thing to resent people for wanting to raise money for cancer.

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      05:20pm | 06/04/11

      Yeah I agree. Women go through a lot of regular checkups which are pretty awkward (pap smear tests to name just one). A lot of men I know would prefer to stick their heads in the sand about their health. Perhaps it’s because women are more proactive about their health and are comfortable about talking about it? Maybe?

    • Chris L says:

      06:16pm | 06/04/11

      You’ll probably find more men will be comfortable with these checks in later generations as our phobia over all things that sound remotely homosexual subsides.

      Paying someone to stick their finger up your bum is very personal and makes a man feel extremely vulnerable. Even when an attractive woman performs the procedure the stress of being secretly photographed is replaced by the fear of farting in her face.

    • More to it than a finger says:

      10:47am | 07/04/11

      As a victim I can tell you that if it was only a blood test and finger in the bum it would not be much of an issue.
      Its a bit embarasing but yeah whatever, I’m sure most people (women included) would feel a bit intimidated about having something stuck in their bum, homophobia has nothing to do with it.
      For prostate diagnosis, if a docotor feels anything suspicious after a blood test raises suspicion its off for a biopsy, which involves up to 21 needles through the side wall of your anus. The pain on the toilet for the next week or so is indescribable. The other side effect is blood in your urine and semen for up to 2 months, this is a bit distressing, and uncomfortable.
      A recent article I read indicates that the biopsy procedure kills more men p.a than the cancer (through scepsus).
      If this is accurate, money targeted towards a better way of more accurately diagnosing whether a lumpy prostate, is a cancer and whether it needs treatment, will save lives and maybe make detection campaigns more successfull , even if it is not put towards a cure.
      I have no problem with fundraisers for any cause per se, its just that there are some causes that are more sexy (to the media at least) than others, as many here have written, it would be nice if there was a more even distribution of the media’s attention and the resulting effect on peoples time and charity. But hey no one can see you prostate or your bowel.
      PS Prostate cancer at 47, which would have killed me.

    • AFR says:

      08:51am | 06/04/11

      I put it down to 2 things:
      1. Women are more motivated to do something about breast cancer.
      2. Men like breasts.

      Reply

    • Tim says:

      09:52am | 06/04/11

      3. Men really really like breasts.

    • philip says:

      10:47am | 06/04/11

      tim thats an understatement raspberry

    • fairsfair says:

      12:53pm | 06/04/11

      I won’t lie to you - women love them too.

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      04:49pm | 06/04/11

      1. Women are selfish.
      2. Women have breasts and suffer breast cancer.
      3. Men put up with whatever women do because deep down they pity them.

    • Chris L says:

      06:18pm | 06/04/11

      ...and we like breasts.

    • fairsfair says:

      07:41pm | 06/04/11

      SSR - where the fire truck did that come from? Ploise explain?

    • Sad Sad Reality says:

      10:51am | 07/04/11

      1. Women are inherently selfish and seldom question their motivations
      2. Breast cancer is a problem for women
      3. Women demand and receive a disproportionate amount of attention and money for a problem that is exclusively theirs
      4. Men, knowing that women are inherently selfish, provide the disproportionate support requested out of pity while never expecting the support to be returned on issues exclusively affecting men.
      5. Women never return mens’ support.
      6. Men wait for the next shrill, shallow, selfish, inconsiderate demand from women and sneer internally at the female conception of equality.

    • fairsfair says:

      01:42pm | 07/04/11

      you need to hang around different women

    • Risk Rarius says:

      09:01am | 06/04/11

      I quite often do not agree with you Tory.  On this topic, no it’s an issue, you are spot on! Excellent work!

      Reply

    • Dan says:

      09:04am | 06/04/11

      It’s pretty sad that individuals still have to raise money for cancer research when there is so much wastage in government spending. Bureaucrats, spin doctors etc, waste, waste, waste.
      Ewing’s sarcoma (one of the “unimportant” cancers) claimed my mum, RIP mum.

      Reply

    • Sparky says:

      04:18pm | 06/04/11

      And a recently leaked treasury document suggests a further $400 million over 4 years will be cut from the Medical Research budget. I know this because I work for a cancer research organisation (I collect clinical data on coloractal cancer actually) and there is a bit of panic in the industry about this.

      Pete 12:47pm
      There is actually a very good screening test for Bowel cancer, it’s called the Faecal Occult Blood Test and I’ve seen in my work, many people who had no symptoms picked up as having a colorectal cancer using this test which was sent out to people when they turned 50. It is a simple, do at home test and was distributed as part of a national screening program. This was stopped at the start of the year when funding was halted. Early stage asymptomatic colon cancers can often be removed with no need for chemotherapy which of course saves a lot of money as well as angst. This generally won’t happen if the cancer gets to the point of causing symptoms.

      And, if the federal government does cut medical research funding, these kind of tests will take a lot longer to discover if at all. Yes I have a vested interest but I think it’s important people kow these things.

    • BL says:

      09:09am | 06/04/11

      Its frightening that we need to “market” cancers like a product for people to be aware of them. But then you will have the health freaks (where are you Sad Sad Reality and Randy Marsh aka /b/ grade trolls) come in here and say people only have themselves to blame for bowel cancer because generally it comes down to diet and lifestyle.

      Reply

    • Gregg says:

      09:15am | 06/04/11

      It’s a tough one ain’t it for despite the likes of the good Doctor Nitschke and others who will hopefully help us on our way when the time is right or help us to help ourselves, none of us really want to have the big C catch up with us and yet it is also claimed there will be too many of us wither greyer hairs and ancient bods about as time goes on.

      So disregarding whether we need more older people about or not if Lung Cancer is still top of the list, that still says something it would seem about smoking and/or asbestos etc. and it along with other cancers are worth doing as much as we can about them and there may be better ways to die young, hopefully.

      Though if to some extent Lung and Bowel can occur as a result of what we ingest, it is still the old tale of horse and water he will drink when he’s ready but only take them to the trough every so often and they’ll likely drink.
      Should we be such a regulated society where regular health examinations and various screenings are mandatory rather than optional.
      And then the enforcing!

      That a large majority of us may a healthy enough lifestyle we may not have the misfortune to hear a grim reaper a kocking, it also becomes a question of what is overkill?

      If we want a good campaign, why not tack on to the successful pinkish glow
      With a picture of the cleavage of a good heaithy pair, it could be something like
      ” Ladies, and gentlemen too, as much as your lady friend is at peace knowing her breasts are healthy , do you give a thought to the healthy pinkish glow where you cannot see it “
      ” Why save the breasts only to have cancer ravage you elsewhere ?”
      Get Glen McGrath on board with it.

      You could go on and present the facts and surely the breasty people and all areas of the health profession and government should be taking a hollistic approach to cancer and other ailments.
      We’ll have plenty of them as our society has more and more problems from obesity.

      Reply

    • Shane says:

      09:15am | 06/04/11

      Agree totally with this article. Something like 90% of women diagnosed with breast cancer survive. This awesome statistic can be put down to awareness and screening programs that, let’s face it, have done their job. Now they need to put it into cruise control and stop accelerating! Bowel cancer kills more people, and has a 60% survival rate. It’s a no brainer.

      “Prostate cancer suffered a similar problem, but thanks to Movember and a television campaign built around making a joke out of the test has been able to start building a solid profile.”

      Unfortunately prostate screening is actually doing more harm than good, as many thousands of men are undergoing unecessary surgery and treatment for slow-growing cancer that would never have killed them. Men are better off talking with their doctor than simply assuming they need a test at 45. Movember is raising awareness well, but is channeling it poorly.

      Reply

    • nankypoo says:

      04:25pm | 06/04/11

      I had prostate cancer fairly recently at the ripe old age of 55. I thought I was merely suffering from Erectile Dysfunction (Viagra here I come), but the tests proved otherwise. I had probably been a sufferer for a few years before that (hence the ED). Radiation treatment killed it, but while my Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) blood tests are coming up as minimal, it will be a few years before I am officially in remission. My doctor and my oncologist both said that normally they are wary of operating because sufferers will “normally die of something else before the cancer kills them”. Older men will find it hard to get something done about it for this very reason. YOUNGER men, however have more time for the cancer to become life threatening, and therefore should be tested - and cured - early. They WILL lose sexual function, but the cancer will do that anyway, with or without treatment.

    • Blind Freddy says:

      09:39am | 06/04/11

      Th anti-breast cancer movement is just one business making a living off the ‘fear of death’ industry. How much of our advertising on television these days is focussed on scaring people about a specific form of death? One thing in life (taxes are only unavoidable if poor) is certain and that’s death- so why don’t we get some advertising telling us how we should die? All forms of death have been pathologised and made ‘unnatural’.

      Reply

    • Sparky says:

      04:23pm | 06/04/11

      I’ve never heard of this cancer movement that is against breasts and as a lady and and a breast fan I must say I object!! Sorry, couldn’t help myself; and I totally agree with your point smile

    • Photoman says:

      09:44am | 06/04/11

      It’s about time some of the billions went into cancer PREVENTION.  There are lots of ways to adjust you life so you don’t get cancer. But once the drug companies get their hands on the billions, they won’t spend a cent on PREVENTION. Why would they want to destroy their own market? Just ask yourself: wouldn’t it be better NOT to get the cancer in the first place?

      Reply

    • mw says:

      10:07am | 06/04/11

      Everyone likes breasts. No one likes arseholes….

      Reply

    • Blind Freddy says:

      02:55pm | 06/04/11

      Liberal voters . . .?

    • JohnB says:

      10:09am | 06/04/11

      Just more of the same. Women reap stuff at the expence of men.

      Divorce, men suffer
      child care, men suffer
      AVO’s, men suffer
      jobs, men suffer
      cancer, men suffer

      Reply

    • AliceC says:

      11:20am | 06/04/11

      Please elaborate further, I’m confused. Women don’t suffer?

    • Gladys says:

      11:49am | 06/04/11

      He’s having a bad year.

    • Luce says:

      11:52am | 06/04/11

      Childbirth, women suffer.
      Accidental pregnancy / man runs away, women suffer.
      Sexual harassment in the work place, women suffer.
      AVOs, women suffer (they’re taken out on some men for a very good reason).
      Cancer - everyone bloody suffers. This isn’t a gender specific problem.

      And I’m very curious to know how men suffer due to child care, then most of the time it is the woman looking after the child..

    • Geoff - Brisbane says:

      01:43pm | 06/04/11

      @ Luce

      Child birth - MEN invented drugs to ease that

      Pregnancy - Abortion (her body her choice right), men don’t get a choice.

      Sexual Harassment - Abused by women to the tune of $37 million and unreportable for men

      AVO’s - Has been abused, woman slaps man, throws pan at him and takes an AVO out

      Cancer - Well it seems to be gender spercific, breat cancer, cervical cancer, ovarian cancer.

      To drive the point home we even have “wear red for womens heart disease day”. As if men don’t get heart disease.

    • Gregg says:

      03:21pm | 06/04/11

      @JohnB
      I think Geoff is looking for a fella life mate.
      Can you Can Do Brisbane and Queensland?
      Just watch out for the skin cancer for Geoff will not want you suffering.

    • Matthew says:

      04:36pm | 06/04/11

      @Luce, “Accidental pregnancy / man runs away, women suffer.” you mean like that women asking for $1800/week for her kids clothing?  Women don’t suffer in this case, they get ‘child’ support.
      AVOs, the victim suffers, but it’s more likely to be taken out against a man (even if the woman is the perpetrator).

      Child Birth is optional, has been since about the 1800s when condoms were invented.  It’s usually the women that wants the child when a male doesn’t rather than the other way around.

    • Luce says:

      04:55pm | 06/04/11

      Geoff, MEN invented most of the drugs because women generally weren’t allowed to do things like scientific research or have a job back in the day. They were simply baby making machines.

      It’s only fair that if a man has a choice to leave a woman with a baby, she should have the right not to have it in the first place. Goes both ways. Everyone has the possibility of getting screwed.

      Kristy Fraser-Kirk was never paid $37m. And male sexual harassment is reported, its just not publicized so heavily in the media, partly because it happens so much less.

      re AVOs: you don’t seriously believe the majority of women who take out an AVO are the ones doing the abusing, do you? I’m sure it happens, but most are genuine cases, and the police and law courts have processes to make sure they are genuine.

      Cancer - breast cancer can affect men. As does bowel, lung, skin, brain, pancreatic, liver, kidney and every other organ that both men and women share..

      Diseases for women may get promoted more, probably because women are more proactive than men over these issues. I’m not making a judgement, just an observation.

      If, as a man, you’re worried about your health and what diseases you have, don’t wait for a campaign to come out, just go to the doctor. If you’re afraid of the doctor, then grow a spine.

    • Luce says:

      05:05pm | 06/04/11

      @ Matthew, child support is calculated case by case and is dependent on the incomes of both parents. And if a man is going to run off, he should shoulder some responsibility for the person he helped bring into the world. Child support isn’t meant to cover the entire cost, its a share of the cost.

      Additionally, I’d like to see you be a single parent, having to hold down a job AND raise a child alone, which is a full time job in itself, having a limited social life or time to yourself and try tell me thats just a life of luxury compared to the absent parent who can sleep full nights and have a life, date and enjoy themselves. Come on, seriously.

      Sure child birth is optional. But if both the man and the woman want the child, its the woman that does the hard yards to get there.

      re AVOs, its more likely to be taken out against a man because the man is more likely to be the perpetrator. Simple matter of numbers.

    • Rover of North Cooma says:

      10:25am | 06/04/11

      This is a subject of much discussion in cancer circles. While it is great to get the message out, the sea of pink is swamping other cancers and can also be traumatising to women who have survived breast cancer.

      One of my friends had non-Hodgkins lymphoma. Because she is female, when her hair fell out, strangers assumed she had breast cancer. She said it was incredibly frustrating to be in a support group and be dominated by breast cancer survivors.

      She also said many of those breast cancer survivors actually felt intimidated by the wall of pink. It was as if they were never able to forget about their cancer, even when buying a bottle of water or watching the footy.

      Maybe it’s time to merge the breast cancer movement into the Cancer Council.

      And I love the idea of a Brown Ribbon Day.

      Reply

    • erint says:

      10:51am | 06/04/11

      I just looked up some recent Australian statistics on two types of cancer - Breast and Bowel. Given that it was stated in the article above that breast cancer rates 4th in incidence I find it interesting that 13,000 new cases of breat cancer are diagnosed each year in WOMEN, (that statistic does not include the number of men diagnosed, just women), while only 12,500 people, both male and female, are diagnosed with bowel cancer. So 500 less, and representing both sexes. Sounds to me like if men had breasts the incidence would be a lot higher than it currently is, and all this crap about breast cancer being sexy would be dropped. Take it from me (and my husband) - I’ve had it and there is nothing sexy about it at all. There’s actually nothing sexy about any form of cancer, or any other type of disease either. Good on the people who came up with the “Pink” campaign to raise awareness - it’s got people talking about it, and contributing to research and support. Shame on the others who whinge that breats cancer is sexy and gets more support, get off your bums and work a bit harder to raise awareness and support for your type of cancer, the way women with breast cancer have. And stop talking about “sexy” cancers - they simply don’t exist

      Reply

    • Shane says:

      12:52pm | 06/04/11

      Actually the most recent figures available are 2007 figures:

      Breast Cancer: 12670 people (male and female) diagnosed.
      Bowel Cancer: 14234 people diagnosed.
      Source: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare

      These figures are not an anomoly: bowel cancer has been more common than breast cancer for years… Combine that stat with the 5-year survival stats (88% for breast cancer, only 63% for bowel cancer) and you can see why the amount of funding pumped into bowel cancer is disproportionately low. More people diagnosed, more people die.

      The “pink steamroller” might have been necessary years ago, but at this point you’d need to be living under a rock not to be “aware” of breast cancer. The same, unfortunately, cannot be said about bowel cancer screening and symptoms. But today we have seven zillion breast cancer charities and only a handful of bowel cancer charities.

      Breast cancer is serious, absolutely, but from a population level it doesn’t come close to being as serious as bowel cancer…

    • erint says:

      01:13pm | 06/04/11

      Actually Shane the figures I used came from 2011 articles, so they’re more recent than yours. Regardless you missed the point. No cancer is sexy, and if there is not the awareness of the importance of bowel screening, it’s not the fault of the breast cancer organisations. I repeat get off your bums and raise awareness, and get lobbying for increased funding which is what the BC organisations had to do in the past. They are now able to enjoy the fruits of their labour, that’s what the campaign has been about. It would be stupid to let it slide now.

    • Rossco says:

      01:13pm | 06/04/11

      I think you got lost on the sexy cancers point…

    • Shane says:

      04:08pm | 06/04/11

      Actually erint any stats you have are estimates, not stats. AIHW stats are based on GP, oncologist and hospital figures. They’re complex to accumulate, so they run a few years late. They are the only official national statistics on cancer incidence. 2007 are the most recent figures available.

      I reiterate that at this stage breast cancer organisations would be serving the community better if they took their foot off the campaign accellerator and let someone else get a word in edge-wise. Much more deadly cancers are out there fighting for media coverage, but they can’t get it as long as celebrities line up to wear pink and get a photo taken standing alongside glenn mcgrath.

    • Luce says:

      11:02am | 06/04/11

      As someone who is more at risk of breast, bowl, lung and all other familial cancers than the rest of the population, how about a campaign to highlight the risk of all cancers? Why not educate people to not just be aware of breast cancer, but to recognize which risks apply more to them, and so which tests are best to go for, and which signs they need to look out for?

      Reply

    • notSue says:

      11:26am | 06/04/11

      I’d refute your claim, Tory, that colorectal cancer “is more likey to kill you” than breast cancer. All cancers are deadly, if undiagnosed, but it is a fact that early detection of breast cancer is easier than early detection of bowel cancer…and early detection is what determines the outcome, in most cases. Breast cancer left untreated will kill you just as surely as untreated bowel cancer. The effect of the “pink ” campaigns is that women in particular are more aware and educated, so the detection rate is high. Agreed, not so with bowel cancer, which is one the most treatable carcinomas if caught early, that’s the tragedy.

      However, when I first started nursing back in the days of horse -drawn buggies, ha! most of the terminal female patients i nursed were breast cancer sufferes and most of the others were bowel and prostate cancers in men. Five year survival rates were not high for the women. I’m incredibly gratified to see that things have changed in that regard. Now, to tackle the other big two, just as determinedly.

      Reply

    • Kelvin says:

      12:17pm | 06/04/11

      Statistically, today Tory is 100% correct about the mortality rates related to the major cancer killers.

      You are completely correct that early detection is the key. Breast cancer has an ongoing screening program funded by Government (as it should.)

      Bowel cancer had a screening program in place for 18 months until the government cancelled it with no clear intentions for the future. It by their own admission would save thousands of lives - so why have they canned it?

      Without it the Cancer Council predicts that the incidence of bowel cancer will increase by 50% in the next decade.

    • notSue says:

      01:00pm | 06/04/11

      Kelvin, in an (as yet)  unpublished repy to Tory I realised she was talking in statistical, not virulence terms.

    • notSue says:

      03:17pm | 06/04/11

      @ Kelvin.  I understand that a glitch in the program methodology caused a temporary cessation of the screening program in 09, but now the funds have been withdrawn from the reinstated roll-out.
      Could the funds dry-up have anything at all to do with a further issue? I ask this in good faith, since I am very much a supporter of the program continuing.

      Here’s the Government website.. http://www.cancerscreening.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/bowel-about

    • Kelvin says:

      04:34pm | 06/04/11

      notSue. You’re right about the ‘09 problems. They solved them and the program continued but was terminated in December 2010.

      The government is mute about the whole program. Nicola Roxon seemingly publicly doesn’t want to know about it. They will not make any comments as far as I know about whether or not it will continue. When they came to power last year they were advised as a ‘hot issue’ that it would take a minimum of 10 months to reinstate the program once it ceased in December.

      At the best if they decide to immediately implement a new screening program in this year’s budget - at least a couple of thousand people will die needlessly because the government terminated to ‘08-‘10 program.

      It is a vital program. The only further issue that could get in its way would be the overwhelmingly stupid idea that the government has to return the budget to surplus by 2012 and seemingly they may be prepared to cut any vital (but challenging) programs to do it.

    • notSue says:

      05:04pm | 06/04/11

      Thanks for the rep, Kelvin. It seems ludicrous that a simple, early-detection program which will save lives and ultimately cost the system less in prolonged care has been shelved.
      I hope the government sees sense on this issue.
      Where’s the petition to sign?

    • Kelvin O'Reilly says:

      11:36am | 06/04/11

      FANTASTIC ARTICLE TORY! (Now get it into the mainstream press.)

      The breast cancer people have done a great job, but as you correctly point out the mortality rate from breast cancer pales into insignificance when compared to Lung and Colon cancer in particular. The breast cancer lobby have been very successful in hijacking the whole cancer agenda - so well done to them even if it is to the detriment of other more lethal cancers.

      The Federal Government acknowledge that Bowel Cancer is a major public health problem in Australia. Around 80 Australians die each week from the disease (that is over 4000 people annually folks). It is the most commonly occurring internal cancer and the second most common cause of cancer related death, after lung cancer. * Department of Health And Ageing web site.

      There are about 13,000 new cases each year.

      At the outset for the uninformed - the cause of bowel cancer is not particularly clear however how it develops is well known. The risk is greater for people who:
      •  are aged 50 years and over - risk increases with age;
      •  have a significant family history of bowel cancer or polyps;
      •  have had an inflammatory bowel disease such as Crohn’s disease or
      •  have previously had special types of polyps, called adenomas, in the bowel.

      It affects men and women almost equally.

      Bowel cancer can develop with few, if any, early warning symptoms. Most won’t even know that they have it until it is too late.

      Bowel cancer can be treated successfully if detected in its early stages, but currently fewer than 40 per cent of bowel cancers are detected early. If detected early it is the most treatable of all internal cancers but to most of us because the bowels are a taboo subject not many know of the symptoms.

      The Federal Government recognises that Bowel cancer is a major public health problem in Australia. It introduced the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program on 1 July 2008 and offered testing to people turning 50 years of age between January 2008 and December 2010, and those turning 55 or 65 between July 2008 and December 2010.

      They let the program lapse last year.

      Now for the real issue.

      WHY HAS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALLOWED THE NATIONAL BOWEL CANCER SCREENING PROGRAM TO LAPSE (OR TO BE BRUTALLY FRANK - TERMINATED A CRUCIAL NATIONAL HEALTH SCREENING INITIATIVE THAT ACTUALLY SAVES MANY LIVES) AFTER JUST 2 YEARS OF PARTIAL IMPLEMENTATION?????

      The Department of Health and Ageing’s own web site says this:
      “Completing a FOBT (the screening test provided) every two years, can reduce the risk of dying from bowel cancer by up to one third. The aim of screening is to find cancer early when it is easier to treat and cure. Regular screening is important because bowel cancer can develop without any early warning symptoms. Screening tests can help prevent bowel cancer deaths by finding polyps and cancers early, when treatment works best. Currently fewer than 40 per cent of bowel cancers in Australia are detected early. Regular screening, using a FOBT can reduce the number of Australians who die each year from bowel cancer.”

      The Federal Government should have no where to hide on this issue - it will have bi-partisan support in the parliament so why have they terminated it?

      Is it because it is easier to launch many advertising campaigns or create more web sites than it is to provide real health benefit programs for the nation that will actually save, by their own admission thousands of lives each year.

      If you don’t believe me just have a look at the Government’s own web site.
      http://www.cancerscreening.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/Content/bw-facts

      Reply

    • Angel says:

      11:37am | 06/04/11

      Women are usually far more proactive about their health - I can’t even bribe my husband with money to visit his doctor, I can’t imagine him ever lining up to have a prostate check wheras most women have their 2 yearly invasive pap tests with minimal fuss.

      The thing that annoys me the most about the “pink” campaign, well, one they use the dreadful so-called girl colour pink on everything and they don’t actually tell us any of the FACTS, i.e. to lead a healthy lifestyle, avoid underwire bras, avoid aluminium in deodorant, check your breasts monthly. You have to really search for this information but the pink is everywhere and it’s not about saving women’s lives - it’s about saving breasts.

      I think we all need information about how to check for, how to lessen our chances and how to deal with cancer. We don’t need to see mass amounts of the colour pink. That teaches us nothing but stereotypes.

      Reply

    • Angel says:

      04:45pm | 06/04/11

      That’s funny Shane considering they are the same ones who gave me my “body crystal” to avoid aluminium deodorant! Sure, the studies aren’t conclusive, but they’re pretty convincing and I’d rather be safe than sorry to be honest. I don’t know how they conclude that it’s a “myth” considering they’re the ones selling body crystals!

    • Chrissy says:

      12:10pm | 06/04/11

      I like the idea that Luce and others above have,of merging cancer foundations. Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to go to one place and get free information on all that could apply to you? Prevention and diet information, health services, standard ages for testing, listings of support services for families etc - all in the one place, no matter what kind of cancer you or your loved one has. And the best bit - reduced administration costs (i.e. more “bang for your charity buck”) for just one facility, instead of supporting 3 for prostate cancer, 15 for breast cancer, another one or two for others….

      Reply

    • Tyler says:

      01:39pm | 06/04/11

      It already exists - it’s called the cancer council and there’s one in every state. I donate to them every christmas because they don’t just do wishy-washy “awareness” but actually fund research, prevention campaigns (quit, sunsmart, diet campaigns) and support on their hotline. Their overheards are not nearly as bad as others.

    • stephen says:

      12:37pm | 06/04/11

      People contribute to breast cancer appeals because babies need breasts.
      Things come out of colons, and it’s not milk.
      (Seems white-man is Romantic after all, but I could have picked a better way to invoke cupid).

      Reply

    • Muttley says:

      02:06pm | 06/04/11

      ahh, you kind of need your colon as well. If you want to live anyway.

    • Kim says:

      12:58pm | 06/04/11

      My dad had bowel cancer at 31. I’ve been genetically tested and have the same defective gene which makes me likely to also fall victim to this cancer. He’s still here, fit and healthy, but it’s definitely a cancer that needs more attention. Even if it’s the gross factor! How about a brown ribbon day? It will get people talking! Tagline - Bowel Cancer - It’s not pretty, and neither is this ribbon!

      Reply

    • Davido says:

      01:02pm | 06/04/11

      Similar complaints have been raised against the AIDS lobby. For a while no other diseases seemed to exist.

      I see the problem as twofold:

      1. charities can take a cut of what they raise. And they do not pay any tax on it. They often use volunteers or people who are paid on a commission only basis. This inevitably leads to the rise of an “industry”. I know my local op-shop has a sales target of $10,000 a week.

      People should be cynical, there are people in the charity field earning multi-million dollar salaries. Just remember, that donation you make is just as likely to be going to a fat cat’s Beach-house payment as it is to a cause.

      2. People seem unable to hold more than a few things in their mental mind space at one time.

      Reply

    • Sydney-sider says:

      01:21pm | 06/04/11

      Here is a solution to generate some of the funds that government needs to tackle the cancers: Scrap the requirement of having to provide a sick note from the doctor. Lot of time they are false and doctor charges to medicare for every one of these. Rough estimation: about 10 million working X 6 sick notes per year X 1 consultation fee (Which can be anything from $36 to $ 46 -depending on what the doctor claims) = amounts to atleast 2 Billion. Will AMA agree for this?

      Reply

    • Kika says:

      01:23pm | 06/04/11

      I really think people need to get over the ick factor. Seriously, who cares. Even the queen defecates. We all do it. I strongly believe that most bowel cancers are ignored until it’s too late hence the high mortality rate. My Nana ignored her symptoms for an entire year (her doctors insistence that her constant bleeding was piles and nothing else) until she finally told my Grandad. He insisted she get a second opinion. He was right and she was sent that afternoon to the hospital for a biopsy. Cancer. They treated the cancer and she was given the all clear. Until a few months later they discovered the cancer had spread to her liver and it was too late to do anything.

      Message of the story = get over it. Get a colonoscopy. If you have family history do it earlier. And if you suspect something is odd get a gluten check too. Lots of people have gluten intolerance and don’t know because sometimes it’s asymptomatic.

      Reply

    • Trish says:

      03:23pm | 06/04/11

      Agreed !! Well said Kika….we all defecate - my father died of bowel cancer that spread to his liver as well….I now have a colonoscopy on a regular basis and will continue to do so.
      the Government should stop spending money on crap and reinstate their testing and screening IMMEDIATELY !

    • Elizabeth says:

      01:41pm | 06/04/11

      Congratulations to all the Breast Cancer fundraisers and awareness campaigners.  They have done a fantastic job - but as someone touched by breast cancer i can assure everyone there is much more that needs to be done.  I dont think its fair to critisice these hard workers for doing such a great job.

      My hope is that findings of significance in breast cancer can be translated to other cancers.  My other great hope is that campaigners and fundraisers for other types of cancer will do as great a job for there particular cancer cause and reap similar results.

      Cancer is an ugly disease and the more awareness, fundraising and break throughs the better - no matter which cancer it is for.

      Reply

    • Tyler says:

      04:15pm | 06/04/11

      “there is much more that needs to be done.”

      What else is there to be done on breast cancer? We have a world-leading cancer screening program free to all Australian women. There isn’t a woman over 30 who doesn’t know they need to self-examine. Pink ribbons abound all through October, so we’re all “aware: of breast cancer. Breast cancer research is rolling in cash, meaning that treatment options are stellar in comparison to other cancers, resulting in 88% survival, the highest of any serious cancer. We have hundreds of fundraising campaigns, unconditional support from parliament, nurses dedicated to breast cancer and breast cancer alone, a dozen organisations offering support groups, call-in hotlines and celebrity ambassadors.

      What else is there?

      Bowel cancer has no celebrities, a handful of small organisations, a poor survival rate, half-hearted support from parliament, and more people dying from it!

      That’s the gripe I, and many others, have. We’re all touched by cancer,  but some of us still keep our eyes on the big picture.

    • Pete says:

      01:56pm | 06/04/11

      maybe they shut down bowel screening because it’s cheaper to let the boomers die than to stay alive longer

      Reply

    • Get a Grip Cancer Strikes Everywhere says:

      02:08pm | 06/04/11

      Cancer is cancer in any form.  I can’t believe there is a contest on which is the most deadly.  As I have said before on this issue a few months ago.
      Diagnosis, denial, anger, tears either surgery, chemotheray, radiotherapy (or both) either survival or death, and the worry hanging over yourself, friends and family for the rest of your life as to when it will raise its ugly head again.  I am absolutely stunned that you are fighting over this.  It is apalling.  We would be better off with one week awareness of cancer week and stop isolating it.  It’s like men comparing scars they have on there bodies when they are tanked.

      Reply

    • Karen says:

      05:04pm | 06/04/11

      Ive thought this for a long while. I have often wondered why they always promote breast cancer awareness on the football (NRL) and the ref’s wear pink for that reason ( as opposed to the old green). Would it not be more sensible to promote say prostate cancer awareness, but then I suppose thats not “PC” enough and they dont need to win over the blokes, just the girls and this is their way of saying “hey we support you”, well how about supporting prosate cancer, men need much more prompting to see a Dr than women. Just my opinion.

      Reply

    • Saz says:

      06:23pm | 06/04/11

      To NotSue:

      A petition does exist. It was started by the Cancer Councils and is adequately titled ‘Get Behind Bowel Screening’. You can visit their campaign website at http://www.getbehindbowelscreening.com.au where you can send an email to your local MP telling them to get behind bowel screening.

      According to their website over 22,000 emails have been sent to MPs.

      Reply

    • notSue says:

      07:00pm | 06/04/11

      Thanks Saz. smile I hope many others join me.

      Reply

    • amanda says:

      12:36am | 07/04/11

      Has anyone made the connection that less people die from breast cancer AS A RESULT of the the awareness and research? either way, cancer is cancer, but lets not slam the breast cancer campaign for being successful.
      I was diagnosed at 31 with invasive breast cancer. It killed 5 members of my family, but 11 of us have survived, mainly due to early treatement and greater options for treatement. I lost my breasts but have been cancer free for 2 years now. I raise money every year (10k) through runs and sponsorship for breast cancer because I’m so grateful for my chance and I want us to find answers. More advances in the understanding of ANY cancer benefits all cancers

      Reply

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      05:38am | 07/04/11

      Hi Tory,

      I do not think that it is less sexy, however it has to do with which sex we all belong to!!  Breast cancer just like any other form of cancer seriously affect and alters lives.  Just think for a second “where would we be without our mothers” ?  I had family friends suffering from such cancers such as uterine and breast cancer, and they were at their most productive age, around 35-45 and some of them with young families. 

      Just imagine mothers young and old, too busy to care for their families, but somehow they all seem to have no time for check ups and routine tests.  I personally find it very sad that anything to do with male disorders and illnesses are getting the spotlight right now!!  I wonder why??

      Most of all,  we need more awareness and research into all kinds of cancer of course!!  However, I find in particular, since breast and uterine cancers affect as well as change our lives very dramatically & directly, as women we should take them very seriously as well.  Wasting time putting of tests and check ups, are not some luxury we can all afford as women.

      I personally that think “talk is cheap”, enough about funding into research!!  I would like to see cancer rates going down and under control, before we all start believing that it is our society’s forgotten illness and nothing else!!  And for the rest of the male population, it has nothing to do with feminism or wanting attention at all.  Best regards to your editors.

      Reply

    • Christine says:

      09:40am | 07/04/11

      Instead of this negative harping alleging subterranean feminist pink plots to funnel money about from bowel cancer to breast cancer, how about the bowel cancer supporters getting creative and engaging the community - like the breast cancer supporter did? There is a pathetic mentality at the foundation of this article, which is assuming donated monies are a fixed amount. This is wrong. People can donate to more than one cause. I recommend a brown ribbon day for a start, and lots of creative bum jokes to inject humour into the fund raising. There is so much scope for citizens who care and who don’t want to take this carping, blaming, uncreative, whinging approach to fund raising.

      Reply

    • Kelvin says:

      11:57am | 07/04/11

      The essence of Tory’s piece is really encapsulated in the last two paragraphs.

      Firstly the Government need to commit to a national bowel cancer screening program that, for their own unexplained reasons they have terminated after just 18 months. This is despite their own health committees stating that it is both economically and health wise responsible to do. Not to mention the 1300 lives that it will save annually.

      They do it for breast cancer and cervical cancer where the mortality rates are significantly lower than from colon cancer so why not follow through with what they started in 2008.

      The second is that what has been done by the breast cancer groups needs to be emulated for Colon Cancer. Please everyone - get out of the brown ribbon mentality - it sends all of the wrong messages and perpetuates the ‘ick factor’ that is currently attached to the disease and that seemingly holds back awareness programs.

      As someone who is currently fighting colon cancer and the rigors of chemotherapy, I can assure you that creative bum jokes don’t really cut it for me as there is nothing funny about the disease, the 13000+ people who will be diagnosed with it this year and the 4000+ people who will die from it this year.

    • Paul Roberts says:

      09:48am | 07/04/11

      Isn’t the real problem the whole “system” we have for tackling our nation’s health issues? Governments don’t come close to adequately funding most medical research and prevention efforts against the major health issues facing Australians today. Researchers have to spend as much time worrying about and seeking funding as they do researching. Lobby groups get formed and compete to grab a share of a small amount of government funding and a huge amount of energy is invested in fundraising. We have loads of information on disease/morbidity and the impact of particular diseases on people’s quality of life. We should be using that to inform and properly fund programs via the tax system, instead of relying on a system that has developed in the absence of a proper one and which chooses winners and losers on the basis of who has the loudest voice or sexiest condition or can raise the most money.

      Reply

    • hot tub political machine says:

      10:06am | 07/04/11

      Tory, in Victoria square in Adelaide today there is a gold coin donation sausage sizzle for men’s health research. So there is a growing movement to get more funding for some less well funded health areas. I’ll be going (gold coin donation lunch, how can I not?)

      Reply
    • Tory Shepherd

      Tory Shepherd says:

      10:23am | 07/04/11

      Ah, hot tub! If I was there I would so be there. But I’m in Sidderney having a long overdue catch up with the other Punchers. Have a snag for me!

    • Bree says:

      05:15pm | 07/04/11

      Last year I was having some bowel issues and was referred to a gastroenterologist who told me I had to have a colonoscopy to pinpoint the problem. I was 23. The colonoscopy was not nearly so bad as I was led to believe- the prep was the worst part and even that was tolerable.  After the procedure I was told I had six colonic polyps removed. Polyps are caused by either a high fat diet, a sedentary lifestyle, genetics, or a combination of all of them. My problem is genetics. I was informed by my doctor that the previous week she had removed colonic polyps from a boy of 12. Sadly these instances are going to increase along with the proportion of the population which are overweight. And how often are they going to be detected in young people?

      My bowel problems impacted on my job, which led to many embarrassing conversations, and my home life (my partner knows far too much about my bowels now). I don’t really understand why we have made this such a taboo subject! The lack of funding and awareness of bowel cancer, particularly among young people, is frightening.

      Reply

    • Fizzer says:

      08:33pm | 08/04/11

      I worked for gastroenterologists for quite a few years and I have seen first hand the lack of awareness of this horrible cancer, I’ve seen several 17-25 year olds with bowel cancer, including females.  We couldn’t even raise money for research, because their is no specific Bowel Cancer fund to donate too.

      I’m also in the other group,  as a young woman, I have had cancer, last year, a virtually unrecognized one that most people probably aren’t aware of.  I had thyroid cancer, with virtually no awareness, no support, no funding whatsoever.  I found it quite upsetting like my cancer just wasn’t up to par, or it wasn’t as serious, and I think other people suffering other cancers may feel the same.

      I hate that I don’t want to donate to Breast cancer awareness, but I think it’s really unfair the amount of attention it gets when other cancers are just forgotten about.  Especially leukemia’s and lymphomas in our young children.

      Reply

    • Deb Robins says:

      11:20pm | 08/04/11

      So many grocery items too - I would love to buy something that isn’t pink, that supports a marginalized cruel disease badly in need of funding with potentially efficacious projects begging for funding. 

      And…it’s about to get a hell of a lot harder to save our loved ones from common disorders that are disorders of childhood, manhood - rare disorders too!
      See http://goo.gl/Yvo4K
      Sign the petition to stop the government cutting medical research funding:  http://goo.gl/BNrIY
      Vote on GetUp to stop them: http://goo.gl/z0dic
      More suggestions:  http://www.discoveriesneeddollars.org/get_involved

      Reply

    • Elizabeth says:

      12:39pm | 03/06/11

      I don’t think cancer screening is a must-have and that coming from a woman is totally unacceptable in most countries. It shouldn’t be…
      I’ve never understood why our cancer screening is so emotive, dishonest, irrational and political - and loaded with vested interests.
      Informed consent is a joke in our cancer screening - we get a happy screening story and then virtually ordered into screening with numbers/targets being the only focus - meeting govt-set targets. Risk information is suppressed, scare campaigns are used and even undisclosed target payments are made to GP’s for pap tests. (Financial Incentives Legislation) Screening is “done” to women, few women are active participants in screening. Even the women who think they’re informed have usually been misled - either victims of false positives and over-treatment who “think” the screening test saved their lives or those who’ve just “accepted” the screening “information” which IMO, amounts to propaganda - VERY light on facts.

      The cervical screening program harms FAR more than it helps…and it can’t help more than 0.45% even assuming there are no other factors working on the incidence and death rates…and we know there are…things like more hysterectomies, better condoms and hygiene, less STD, fewer women smoking….
      Dishonesty is the cornerstone in women’s cancer screening and unethical practices are encouraged - don’t tell women the risks, ambush them in an unrelated consult and offer to do the test now, don’t mention false positives and over-treatment. It’s scandalous….
      Thankfully I got to the truth very early and have always refused cervical screening - almost all of my friends have been down the ugly false positive path - even my younger sister had a cone biopsy after a false positive - her specialist told her more than 50 are performed for every one that turns out to be necessary…now the lifetime risk of cc is 0.65%

      So to possibly help fewer than 0.45% of women, we send 77% at some stage for follow-up - all the worry and harm this causes healthy women - and over-treatment can mean on-going health and obstetric issues after cervical damage caused by LEEP and cone biopsies. (premature babies, cervical stenosis, cervical incompetence, infertility, miscarriages etc)

      This is the way we treat healthy women - the more than 99% who’ll never have an issue with cervical cancer…zero respect for informed consent and our health. We also continue to screen women under 30 when no country in the world has shown a benefit, but all have seen evidence of harm from false positives and over-treatment. We continue to test 2 yearly, knowing it’s over-screening which means more false positives, for no additional benefit.
      No screening program should ever be released onto healthy populations without randomized controlled trials - there are no RCTs for pap testing.

      I’ve also declined mammograms - once again, women are being treated with dishonesty and paternalistic disrespect….a numbers game. Take a look at, “The risks and benefits of mammograms” at the Nordic Cochrane Institute website and listen to the lecture on line at the Medphyzz site by Prof Michael Baum, “Breast cancer screening” the inconvenient truths”. Some doctors care and are attempting to inform women.
      My advice: be cautious with cancer screening and don’t believe a word they say….their track record speaks for itself.
      Dr Joel Sherman’s patient privacy forum under women’s privacy concerns has some great references in the side bar - the truth is out there, but sadly, you won’t find it in the screening brochures - well, not the ones aimed at women anyway….

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 24 May 12 09:56PM

RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 24 May 12 09:17PM

@loupascale if the survey made you sad, probably skip the comments...

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf”

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

by Tony Burke

38

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

by Tory Shepherd

92

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

by Anthony Sharwood

71

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed