Leaders & Breasts: Michigan to wear pink Saturday vs. Illini

Submitted by markusr2007 on October 11th, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Michigan Wolverines to don the color rosita on Saturday for breast cancer awareness...

 

Heard we're wearing pink this weekend in support of breast cancer awareness #GoBlue #LeadersAndBreasts

Comments

Phinaeus Gage

October 12th, 2012 at 12:37 AM ^

Yes, dietary and environmental factors affect breast cancer development, however, to propose the minimal radiation dose used for a mammogram is cancer causing is false. There are multiple modalities that can be used to detect small, non palpable cancers. MRI, ultrasound and mammography all have their roles, with mammography being the most cost effective and efficient for screening. Please cite your reference that proposes screening mammography CAUSES cancer.

As a radiologist, I read thousands of mammograms a year, and the benefits are proven daily.

Farnn

October 12th, 2012 at 1:30 AM ^

Unfortunately N=1 is a terrible study.  You need to look at the broad scope studies that look at data from around the country and analyze that.  I don't know what the research is on the benefits of breast cancer, but I know with the PSA test for prostate cancer, just a harmless blood test actually does more harm than good.  I'm sure there are false positives with mamograms, or non malignant tumors that are detected and removed when they never would have hurt the patient anyway.

Phinaeus Gage

October 12th, 2012 at 7:39 AM ^

I have looked at studies on cost/benefit/risk of mammography. That's my job. My point is: not only do the studies advocate for screening mammography, but I anecdotally see the benefits daily as well (N = 1). Perhaps you should read them too, prior to clumping PSA with screening mammography. Not the same animal.

bigmc6000

October 12th, 2012 at 8:28 AM ^

That whole idea that taking a blood test actually does more harm than good is nothing but a falsehood perpetuated by the people who don't want to pay for it.  The same group of people that said you shouldn't bother with mamograms until you're in your 40's.  The convenient truth they ignore when they say it causes more harm than good is that the guys who do get tested and they catch the cancer early enough live many more years but all they focus on are the few problems that can arise from having surgery.  My dad is still alive today because of that blood test so maybe I'm partial but this whole idea that testing for cancer causes more harm than good screams of a pathetic attempt by insurance companies (the gov't included) in trying to save a buck.  What's next? Yearly phsyicals cause more harm than good because you may find out something it wrong that otherwise you wouldn't have known? What about cholesterol screenings?  The new federal health care plan will only pay for them once every 5 years whereas before most people have them covered once a year - tell me that isn't just some BS about trying to save a buck at the expense of the health of Americans...

 

/end rant

swan flu

October 12th, 2012 at 10:04 AM ^

Anecdotal Evidence from your one experience is not enough for you to make blanket sweeping statements regarding health decisions for everyone.

 

the National Cancer Society (not an insurance company) does not operate based on "what costs the least money." They operate on what is best for everyone, and they do not reccomend that women below the age of 40 get mammograms without good cause. 

mstier

October 12th, 2012 at 1:34 PM ^

You're demonstrating a lead time bias in your analysis.  Take this example:

Day 1 = your first prostate cell turns cancerous

Day 100 = you die from prostate cancer

Scenario A:  you wait until you have symptoms of prostate cancer before you go to the doctor. This occurs on day 75 because the cancer has to get big enough to start interrupting your normal functions.  Your survival is 25 days after diagnosis.

Scenario B:  you have a test done that can identify the cancer before it starts causing symptoms.  You get your diagnosis on day 50.  Your survival is 50 days after diagnosis.

Don't confuse survival time after diagnosis with actual increases in survival.  Both of these scenarios end with the person living 100 days with cancer.  Regarding prostate cancer, two large studies in the US and Europe demonstrate no significant differences in survival for prostate cancer with PSA screening at any age.  

For breast cancer screenings, the data NEVER suggested that these tests be done in your 40s.  The original data sets from the 60s and 70s all said start when you're 50.  It was actually several politicians who had family members who died in their 40s from breast cancer who advocated for the old guidelines.  All the actual data say 50.  

Please consider the data before you start criticizing everything.  Please go check my bank account--us scientists aren't getting paid big bucks to lie to the public.  Also--USPSTF guidelines on screening DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT COSTS.  They are strictly based on benefits vs harm to the patient.  

AMazinBlue

October 11th, 2012 at 11:52 PM ^

are their traditonal home colors of maize and blue, the wristbands, towels and gloves can be what ever color they want.

I'm all for breast cancer awareness, but you DON"T mess with the home uni or the helmet for any reason anytime for any game.  The bull shit of splashy uniforms to attract recruits is crap!  It's bush league, it's beneath Michigan standards.  It's something Sparty does.

USC, Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma haven't done it, don't do it and won't do it and these schools are traditionally if not ALWAYS in the top 5 in recruiting.  If you're good and have a quality program you don't need gimmicks to attract the best players. PERIOD!

Indiana Blue

October 11th, 2012 at 11:58 PM ^

It would be much more helpful if they put donation boxes at the gates on Saturday!  It would easily raise $250,000 or more .... and dollars are much more important than another "awareness" reminder in fighting this dreaded disease.

Go Blue!

FrankMurphy

October 12th, 2012 at 12:57 AM ^

Ugh. Is it politically incorrect to say that I'm sick of all this boobie love? Why don't other diseases get as much attention? Isn't heart disease the leading cause of death for both men and women?

On a related note, if only the NFL cared as much about concussions as they pretended to care about breast cancer.

michgoblue

October 12th, 2012 at 9:23 AM ^

This is actually a huge pet peeve of my wife. Sure, breast cancer is a killer of many, many women. But there are a ton of other diseases out there, many of which have virtually no current treatment, that do not get nearly as much exposure. Take ALS (Lou gherig'sdisease). there is no treatment, zero survival rate and those afflicted die horribly. Same goes for Many other neuro diseases, as well as pancreatic an other cancers. Yet breast cancer gets disproportionately more attention.

Not saying that this is not a hold cause - it is - bit you raise a great point.

Farnn

October 12th, 2012 at 1:32 AM ^

Wouldn't they raise more money by simply giving the money that they spend on pink wrist bands to charity?  Everyone knows about breast cancer, the only people whose awareness you are raising are too young to have any money to give to medical research.

michgoblue

October 12th, 2012 at 9:14 AM ^

Sort of. Breast cancer has the highest occurrence rate in women of all cancers - i.e. more women get breast cancer than any other cancer. However, more women die of lung cancer in absolute numbers. The reason for this is the while more women get breast cancer, it has a higher survival rate (whereas lung cancer has a lower survival rate).

Pancreatic cancer has one of the worst survival rates, but because it affects far fewer people, it is not as prevalent of a killer of women.

Sinsemillaplease

October 12th, 2012 at 4:28 AM ^

it's kind of funny that the NFL has been doing breast cancer awareness for years while trying their hardest to pretend they aren't aware of any link between pro football and traumatic brain injuries?

Njia

October 12th, 2012 at 3:44 PM ^

Johnnie Walker black?

In all seriousness, why not just an embroidered pink ribbon this weekend? I get the sense that these corporate citizenship/social responsibility moves are more about good marketing benefiting the wearer more than the cancer survivor, recovering alcoholic, etc.

MGoRyan

October 12th, 2012 at 9:22 AM ^

I seriously can't watch another football game with pink uniforms.  It makes me feel like i'm going color blind or something.  Every woman knows about breast cancer now.  Get checked already. Awareness month promotions are ridiculous.  There are so many diseases out there, and breast cancer is not even the leading killer of woman.  I'm done with this.

Purkinje

October 12th, 2012 at 10:44 AM ^

Today's reason why Michigan is better than all other schools / programs: this scientific / philosophic debate can take place on a football blog, all while staying light with interspersed with boob jokes. Well done, gents.