Sexist Healthcare?

[NeonLightChild]

I'm just looking for some opinions on this, especially among the boys and men on the forum.

The only rule: Do not mention the healthcare reform plan from the current administration. This is not what this thread is about, and whether you agree with it or not, do not bring it up. Thank you.

Everywhere, you can see notices for breast cancer...between the massive overdose of PINK, the Breast Cancer Awareness stuff, and the Race for the Cure, I think pretty much everyone has seen at least something pertaining to saving the boobs from excision and their owners from death. There's also a massive awareness and push for women to get yearly pap smears, so any abnormalities can be detected ASAP. And now the most recent thing is to put up massive women's health centers next to those even more-massive heart health hospitals that have recently been popping up like nipples on a cold day.

Sooooo why isn't there some kind of push for a men's center? Someone in chat mentioned how we see ads for mens' vitamins and Lance Armstrong's whole testicular cancer thing all over the place, but I don't see so much of that as I do concern for the womens' problems. Prostate exams, as nasty as they can be, are probably just as necessary as pap smears, but I don't see a big push for those (or am I just not looking in the right place?).

My big question is if anyone else has noticed how feminist healthcare has become? Or have you just noticed any kind of healthcare trend in general?

[Klark]

Perhaps that sexist cancer centers are because of the attitudes of men and women against their diseases. Men are more likely to shrug it off, continue on with the day to day stuff whereas women typically seek support. I'm not saying that some men don't seek support, but there are fewer men than women who do.

I think that perhaps there does need to be a push to get a center for mens diseases. It could be the first step toward really getting more awareness out there of the signs and symptoms of testicular and prostate cancers. Too few men know even how to check themselves for testicular cancer, or know that around age 40 it's time to bend over for the doctor.

[Chiron Jackal]

Talking about boobs is way more popular than talking about prostates.

Though phrased somewhat comically I really do think that's a big part of it. If you or a loved one survives breast cancer you have a great story of perseverance that you'd like to tell. You can go walk for the cure and wear the official shirt and run under their banner and it's great and it's fun and you feel good for helping out.

I've experimented with this; if you say "prostate" a lot of men clam up and don't seem quite as comfortable.

Women as a whole just seem a little more comfortable talking about breast lumps and screenings for cervical cancer than men do talking about testicular cancer or swollen prostates. As a result a lot of those adds would kind of fall on deaf ears and there wouldn't be as good a turn out for the walk to cure prostate cancer.

[Tempest]

I agree with Klark about the attitudes of men and women. Once my dad cut his leg with a chainsaw (it was pretty deep, but not down to the bone or anything), and still didn't go the the hospital, even when it was infected. It's like a macho thing to see how long you can hold out before going to the hospital, at least that's what I've gathered. This might be a part of the push towards Pap-smears rather than prostate exams.

Another possible explanation is that prostate and testicular cancer have a favorable prognosis compared to breast cancer. Prostate cancer also progresses very slowly, and quite a few undiagnosed men die of natural causes. I think this might be a bigger aspect of the apparent feminist health care movement because I've seen ads for ED and BPH drugs.

Just as a side note though, men can get breast cancer and the prognosis is the same for women. :p

Edit - A former professor of mine used to be a nurse, and she said it was pretty common for men to refuse prostatectomies (surgical removal of the prostate) because there's a chance it will cause impotence. If that's not exemplar of how much men value their health, I don't know what is.

[Klark]

Edit - A former professor of mine used to be a nurse, and she said it was pretty common for men to refuse prostatectomies (surgical removal of the prostate) because there's a chance it will cause impotence. If that's not exemplar of how much men value their health, I don't know what is.

Much like erectile dysfunction, men who can no longer "get it up" don't feel like men anymore, and when faced with that prospect would rather die than choose to be impotent, unless there are things he values more greatly in his life.

In some aspects it is comical, but sadly, it's also true.

[Tempest]

Much like erectile dysfunction, men who can no longer "get it up" don't feel like men anymore, and when faced with that prospect would rather die than choose to be impotent, unless there are things he values more greatly in his life.

In some aspects it is comical, but sadly, it's also true.

It's a relatively small chance depending on the procedure used, though. I've never heard of a woman opting not to get a mastectomy because she'd feel less of a woman. I suppose you could argue that women can get breast implants, but there are drugs for impotence, too. I don't think I'll ever understand why someone would rather die than risk impotence, especially if it's treatable.

[LV426]

So basically I've had this conversation before and it basically boils down to when women are sick they rally the troops to make sure that someone else won't suffer the same way.

Men just compare battle scars and put duct tape on it.

[metatron]

Well, I read the first post and didn't read any replies, mostly cause I think "health care" is the biggest scam going... Why is it there hasn't been a Cure for anything since Polio, but yet there is a treatment for just about everything?

Why are they always treating the symptom and not the ailment?

Why is it a person goes in for a foot ache and discovers prostate cancer?

My answer and the obvious response: money and greed. There is a pill for just about anything, which by the way, may come with a side effect that left untreated could lead to irreversible health complications or even death...

I guess it goes along with the original question of this post... Generally speaking, women care more about their look and health then men do.

Example: Man cuts finger while working in the yard, he sucks on the cut, wraps it with a rag and keeps working.

Woman cuts finger in the kitchen, she pulls out the Neosporen, wraps the cut in a Bandaide and sets up an appointment for a doctor visit and Tetanus shot. $$$

[Raid]

Why is it a person goes in for a foot ache and discovers prostate cancer?

Because he went to a good doctor, would be my guess. Assuming the diagnosis is legit of course, which I realise is what you're questioning.

I agree with what's been said already. What it comes down to is the difference between men and women when it comes to responding to an injury or the possibility of a serious ailment. Speaking in a general sense.

I know I don't go to the hospital unless something broke, the pain is preventing me from sitting at my computer, or blood is gushing out of a large wound.

[Chiron Jackal]

Why are they always treating the symptom and not the ailment?
Because people suck.

Why is it a person goes in for a foot ache and discovers prostate cancer?
Because he has prostate cancer.

[NeonLightChild]

Why is it there hasn't been a Cure for anything since Polio, but yet there is a treatment for just about everything?
Um, maybe because a treatment LEADS to a cure if there is there one? Or would you like to tell some of our patients "I'm sorry, but those eye drops for your glaucoma aren't going to cure it, so maybe you should just not use them"?

Why are they always treating the symptom and not the ailment?
What the hell kind of doctor do you go to who doesn't look for a CAUSE in your discomfort? Isn't that why most of them are in practice? I'm sure putting a band-aid on a fracture is a great idea, but perhaps surgery to fix it is even better?

Why is it a person goes in for a foot ache and discovers prostate cancer?
You might be interested in how certain physiological and pathological processes can affect parts of the body completely not associated with the targeted organ. By the way, that example you pulled out of your ass was just fantastic.

Talk to any doctor and they will remind you that medicine is NOT an exact science. Unintentional mistakes DO happen, false positives and negatives are not unheard of in diagnostic tests, and second opinions are encouraged if the patient thinks the diagnosis is wrong. It is YOUR health and your doctor should be neither dictator nor slave in that relationship.

Please also be reminded that this discussion is not about how corrupted healthcare is. We all know that, and as someone who's been involved since a young age with the practice of medicine, it angers me even more because I know what constitutes a good doctor and what sets them apart from the corrupt ones, and I'm hoping many here do too.

You don't seem like one of those.

[Vendetta]

I'm sure putting a band-aid on a fracture is a great idea, but perhaps surgery to fix it is even better?
And in the meantime you probably want something to treat the incredible PAIN.

I'm sorry metatron, that science and medicine doesn't live up to your expectation of perfection, that everyone should be instantly cured of all their ailments.

Also you are pretty dumb if you think the Polio vaccine was the last cure medical science has come up with. Since then we have had cures/vaccines for: Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Hepatitis A & B, chicken pox, menigitis, Lyme disease, HPV, rotavirus, and the literally dozens of influenza vaccines. And that's not counting the over 90 new anti-biotics that have been developed since then as well. :rolleyes:

[Tempest]

Metatron, you shouldn't place so much blame on doctors. A good doctor will encourage you to cure yourself without medicine or surgery if it's possible (e.g. exercise and reduce salt intake to cure high blood pressure) or, even better, will emphasize prevention.

Yes there are bad doctors out there, but I think a big problem is the drug industry. I see more and more prescription drug ads and it's getting a little ridiculous. A good doctor will tell you when you need to go on medicine, but these ads make people think, "OMG I NEED THAT PILL!!!" The commercials say, "Talk to your doctor about ____". When a patient comes to the doctor asking about a specific drug, s/he may feel pressured to prescribe it even if the patient doesn't actually need it. We've become a very drug happy culture which is pretty sad. Gaining weight? Take a pill! High blood pressure? Take a pill! Eyelashes not long enough! Take a pill! (Seriously, I just saw a commercial for that)

So you can't really point the finger at doctors when our entire society is becoming fixated on medicinal cures and treatments rather than prevention. Wouldn't every doctor love to have every patient comply with his/her orders to help prevent or treat diseases without medicine? Too bad that's not how our society works.

And no offense but you probably picked the worst example ever. If I went in for a foot problem and discovered I had breast cancer, I'd feel pretty damn lucky that my doctor found it early. And oh no, a woman would try to prevent infection and encourage healing when she wounded herself?! Where's the logic in that?!