gcvsa
gcvsa:

blackenedbutterfly:

koolyogagirl1:

This is why I use paraben free deodorant.

0 sources???

akshewully…i rarely bother with antiperspirant, since the magic that is cross-sex transition-related hormone replacement therapy has removed most of my need for the stuff. BONUS!

Some people have all the luck. :P

This “parabens are correlated with cause basically the same thing amirite? breast cancer” thing traces back to a 2004 study by UK molecular biologist Philippa Darbre. This study in no means settled the question:


  Darbre’s research did not look at the concentrations of parabens in other areas of the breast or body tissues and Harvey [an editor of the journal that published the study] cautions that the significance of the chemicals in tumour tissue should not be over-interpreted.


Furthermore, the study only involved forty women with breast cancer—none without; and some who said they had never used antiperspirant or deodorant also had traces of paraben.

The reason parabens are associated with breast cancer is that, because of their chemical structure, they kind of act like estrogen does and estrogen levels are linked to breast cancer risk.

There are two questions we need to ask: how much are we exposed to compared to other estrogen-mimicking chemicals, and how powerful are parabens’ estrogenic activity? Well, this 1998 study (on rats) found that parabens are at least 100,000 times weaker than estradiol. A 2005 review of the literature, with a focus on studies done on humans, concluded that even in the worst-case scenario, exposure to parabens is much lower than exposure to the estrogen-mimicking chemicals (like phytoestrogens) that occur naturally in our food. This 2008 review also found that there is no evidence that parabens (or aluminum salts, the active ingredient in antiperspirants) are linked to breast cancer.

Here is a thorough overview of the research and the media alarmism.

tl:dr;

No.

P. S. Y’know what would really prevent—if not cancer, then people dying from cancer? Access to free, non-racist, non-fatphobic health care. But it’s a lot harder to do than just avoiding deodorant.

gcvsa:

blackenedbutterfly:

koolyogagirl1:

This is why I use paraben free deodorant.

0 sources???

akshewully…i rarely bother with antiperspirant, since the magic that is cross-sex transition-related hormone replacement therapy has removed most of my need for the stuff. BONUS!

Some people have all the luck. :P

This “parabens are correlated with cause basically the same thing amirite? breast cancer” thing traces back to a 2004 study by UK molecular biologist Philippa Darbre. This study in no means settled the question:

Darbre’s research did not look at the concentrations of parabens in other areas of the breast or body tissues and Harvey [an editor of the journal that published the study] cautions that the significance of the chemicals in tumour tissue should not be over-interpreted.

Furthermore, the study only involved forty women with breast cancer—none without; and some who said they had never used antiperspirant or deodorant also had traces of paraben.

The reason parabens are associated with breast cancer is that, because of their chemical structure, they kind of act like estrogen does and estrogen levels are linked to breast cancer risk.

There are two questions we need to ask: how much are we exposed to compared to other estrogen-mimicking chemicals, and how powerful are parabens’ estrogenic activity? Well, this 1998 study (on rats) found that parabens are at least 100,000 times weaker than estradiol. A 2005 review of the literature, with a focus on studies done on humans, concluded that even in the worst-case scenario, exposure to parabens is much lower than exposure to the estrogen-mimicking chemicals (like phytoestrogens) that occur naturally in our food. This 2008 review also found that there is no evidence that parabens (or aluminum salts, the active ingredient in antiperspirants) are linked to breast cancer.

Here is a thorough overview of the research and the media alarmism.

tl:dr;

No.

P. S. Y’know what would really prevent—if not cancer, then people dying from cancer? Access to free, non-racist, non-fatphobic health care. But it’s a lot harder to do than just avoiding deodorant.

karnythia

thinkspeakstress:

jewishramblings:

domains: so-treu: blackmagickvoodoopussy: how to be Nola Darling (deux): if…

so-treu:

blackmagickvoodoopussy:

how to be Nola Darling (deux): if black women are unhealthy (rant)

howtobeterrell:

then we need to think about why that is (by we I mean black women and sometimes black men who have checked their misogyny at the fucking door)..instead of blaming…

Ok, so, any sources that show a direct link between racism and all of this shit? Or is it just more Freudian theories backed up by weekly correlating data and a bow tie to try and pull everything together?

It’s not so much a racial issue as it is a socio-economic one. I find that the people trying to make everything out to be a racial issue are often cherry picking and making sure their results support their pre-conceived notions, because more often than not, there’s no real causation.

Also “Perceived Racism” and actual racism are two very different things.

I find it interesting that you think that racial issues and socio-economic issues are mutually exclusive. Are you just totally ignorant of the many studies that have been done to show the vast economic disparities between Black people and other racial groups? Or are you just playing ignorant because you thought it necessary to come into a post and insert your unsolicited, privileged opinions over the rest of us silly Black folks? No, I will not provide links on the socio-economic disparities. You can find them yourself, rather than demanding that every PoC here spoon feeds you an education.

I’ll play nice and give you a few links about the things you asked about, though. So. Let’s talk about Black women and health, shall we? Let’s talk about how unfounded, inaccurate racial stereotypes are taken as fact in the medical world, and how Black people have to be sicker than white people in order to get the same diagnosis for a condition. I know I said I wouldn’t give links, but, I changed my mind, so let’s talk about socio-econimic disparities in racial minorities and the effects of said disparities on physical and psychological health”; while we’re at it, let’s talk about how racism has a direct effect on heart conditions as well as a direct effect on mental health.

Let’s talk about how areas with higher PoC populations have less medical centers,and the fact that Black people are more likely to require treatment but less likely to receive said treatment. Shall we also get into how due to socio-economic status, and the placement of medical centers, many Black people can’t walk to these centers (some aren’t in good enough health to, either) and can’t afford the transportation it would take, nor can they afford the insurance that would cover said testing/treatment to begin with? Shall we get into how socioeconomic status and its relationship to dietary options. In fact, let’s linger on that one for a bit. Let’s discuss how low socioeconomic status not only has an effect on how Black people (and other PoC) navigate the health care system.

Funny enough, one of the articles states, “In fact, clinical trials are the only way to get white America to believe that racism causes trauma in the lives of African Americans.” You actually proved this point. Funny how that works, is it not? No, I won’t tell you which article it came from. You’ll have to read them all yourself and find out.

Let’s talk about one more thing, yeah? (No, I’m not done with you yet.) Let’s talk about how long it took me to find all of those articles. It took me less than two minutes to pull these articles up. No, that’s not an exaggeration. Less than two. Minutes. In fact, if you want to be approximate, it took me exactly one minute and 48 seconds. I timed it for your benefit. It’s amazing what Google can do, isn’t it? An yet, you found it easier to come and insist that we all provide proof for you. Well, here you have it. All the resources you could imagine. But the funny thing is that you’re still going to insist that race has nothing to do with it, aren’t you? Because you weren’t looking for answers. You just wanted to lord your unwanted opinions over what the rest of us know and recognize to be fact not only through statistics—-we don’t need them—but through live and shared experience. This is our lives. We don’t need fancy numbers calculated by white people to tell us Black folk what we already knew about our own community.

Actually, I lied. Let’s talk about one more thing. Your “perceived racism remark.” Ha! Because the millions of us on this planet are just living the same incorrect, irrational, made up fantasy, right? Has it ever occurred to you that we perceive racism because it’s there? And that you might not see it because it doesn’t affect you? I already know it hasn’t; you’ve said the same exact thing that thousands of white people before you have said. An none of them were able to comprehend that our lives are different from theirs either. But hey, now you know! So you don’t get to use that excuse.

OH! ONE MORE THING. Last thing, I promise. The nerve of you, coming into a discussion to demand proof. Well guess what? You got many links. And instead of demanding more, you should be saying “Thank you for taking the time out of your day to educate me on matters that I— rather than derailing a conversation on a problem within a community that isn’t my own and passive aggressively demanding an education—could’ve looked up myself.” And you owe everyone here an apology.

Take the rest of the night and read everything carefully, and do some research of your own, and don’t come back. Instead of asking for us to give you proof, why don’t you take a minute and LOOK IT UP YOURSELF? I changed my mind about discussing things with you. Let’s not discuss anything. Instead, you take those articles—take your condescending, derailing bullshit too—and hit the road.

Nobody asked for your thoughts on our very real problems. Pack up an ship out. Nobody invited you.

What I wrote to jewishramblings: 'Oh, hon. You have not experienced anti-black racism. You don't *get* to be the expert on what counts as anti-black racism. Start taking POC at their word, 'cause right now you're just a shande far di goyim.'

dangercupcakemurdericing

windatyourfeels:

biyuti:

The author is a Black woman, and she totally challenges the disgusting level of biological racism in this study. 

Fuck you white scientist. 

Science: This author is doing it right.

Ahhh, nothing like waking up to a good takedown of bad science.

moniquill
A New England Journal of Medicine article from May 2009 reported geographic clusters of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children, including several areas where the rate of non-medical exemptions are higher than 10 percent.

Lewis said while most of the time the children will be safe, there are serious risks to not vaccinating children, particularly with outbreaks of measles and pertussis. Those diseases can cause pneumonia, blindness and brain infection, she said.

Unvaccinated children also threaten children who can’t get immunized for health reasons like cancer. “People who can’t get vaccinated because of a medical reason really rely on everyone else to protect them,” Ernst said. “You hate to tell people what to do, but I am worried about misinformation out there on the Web …

“Vaccines have been the single most effective public health intervention. They have saved countless lives globally. It’s sad to see people not scared of diseases anymore.

On vaccinations, some parents fear ‘wrong things’ (via whenrobotsreproduce)

Yeah, you know how you read up on history and how the average expectancy was some bullshit number like 30 or whatever?* It’s not like someone hits 30 and keels over of old age. It’s lots of people dying in childhood dragging that number down. Guess what they died of? ALL THAT SHIT THEY HAVE VACCINES FOR NOW.

——
* Guess how long it took for the average global lifespan to get above 30? *Jeopardy music* LIKE TEN A HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS (cite) (I am an ignoramus and forgot how long ago the Paleolithic was). Note that if you made it out of childhood your life expectancy went up quite a bit.

fylatinamericanhistory

fyeahblackhistory:

Mary Jane Seacole (1805 – 14 May 1881)

A woman who succeeded despite the racial prejudice of influential sections of Victorian society’.

Mary Jane Seacole (1805 – 14 May 1881), sometimes known as Mother Seacole or Mary Grant, was a Jamaican nurse best known for her involvement in the Crimean War. She set up and operated boarding houses in Panama and the Crimea to assist in her desire to treat the sick. Seacole was taught herbal remedies and folk medicine by her mother, who kept a boarding house for disabled European soldiers and sailors.

Confident that her knowledge of tropical medicine could be useful, and after hearing of poor medical provisions for wounded soldiers during the Crimean War, she travelled to London to volunteer as a nurse. Relying on her experience in the Caribbean, she applied to the War Office and asked to be sent as an army assistant to the Crimea. She was refused, mainly because of prejudice against women’s involvement in medicine at the time.

The British Government later decided to permit women to travel to the affected area, but she was not included in the party of 38 nurses chosen by Florence Nightingale. Instead, she borrowed money to make the 4,000-mile (about 6500 km) journey by herself. She distinguished herself treating battlefield wounded, often nursing wounded soldiers from both sides while under fire. When the conflict ended in 1856 she found herself stranded and almost destitute, and was only saved from adversity by friends from the Crimean War who organised a benefit concert. In later years, she expressed a desire to work in India after the Indian Rebellion of 1857, but was unable to raise the necessary funds.

Seacole was honoured in her lifetime, alongside Florence Nightingale, but after her death she was forgotten for almost a century. Today, she is noted for her bravery and medical skills and as “a woman who succeeded despite the racial prejudice of influential sections of Victorian society”.Her autobiography, Wonderful Adventures of Mrs. Seacole in Many Lands (1857), is a vivid account of her experiences, and is one of the earliest autobiographies of a mixed-race woman.

reinventionoftheprintingpress-d

reinventionoftheprintingpress:

everythingsplinters:

Dead Ringers (dir: David Cronenberg 1988)

For my fellow body horror lovin’ mutant women on here since I cannot figure out how to respond to replies on posts due to technical incompetence. But yes, Dead Ringers is also my favorite of Cronenberg’s films.

The blood-red scrubs! “There’s nothing the matter with the instrument! It’s the body! The woman’s body is all wrong!” … “I…I’m not familiar with these instruments, Doctor.” “I’ve just had them made.” I love this movie so much it’s creepy.

karnythia

karnythia:

blind-magma:

fuchsimeon:

sarahtodannyboy:

I hate Joan with burning passion.

If I was that actress I would apologize after every take. 8lx´D;

Okay, you know what? Just because she said that, that doesn’t make her a racist. That’s the way things were then. Martha wouldn’t have been allowed to be a doctor. 

Joan was cool and John Smith loved her.

So fuck all you guys.

The way things were then (and now) is that white people were racist. Hence the whole push to have slaves & keep people of Martha’s color from having access to education, wealth, or power. Really, if you’re going to comment? Pick up a history book & then read it. Also, there had been black doctors in Canada & the US for almost 50 years at this point, & there were licensed doctors of color in the UK by 1894. In fact one of the first doctors of color was a black woman by the name of Dr. Rebecca Lee Crumpler. She graduated from med school in 1864 so Joan was wrong & racist. Martha is amazing in every time period. Now go spout your bigoted bullshit somewhere else.

speculativefictionsocieties-dea

medical practice as body modification

speculativefictionsexualities:

we often forget that we’re already practicing a form of transhumanism — it has simply been obscured with medical discourses about health and repair and defining what it means to be human by projecting an ideal body-state. every time you take a pill or get a medical procedure, you are practicing body modification. we are already “enhancing” abilities, altering our emotional states through technological intervention. and these transformations are rarely as neutral as a personal choice: some normalization of bodies is almost always required to gain entry to basic services, when these indirectly enforced alterations to the self are ubiquitous/affordable enough to be accessed at all.

if we begin to view all medical intervention as body modification, we open up possibilities for bodies that are not subject to guidelines of health and normalcy which too easily become boundaries to be maintained and policed instead of freely chosen or rejected modifications based on the desire of the individual to prolong their life or change their experience of/ability to act within the world.

rather than the right to medical care being predicated on a rhetoric of dysfunction and the patient’s financial resources, body self-determination can become the basis of our ethical position for providing assistance.

/embarrassing myself with words