Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom

Thank you for the links, metmom. I read both with interest. I think the big issue is "the unknown", as well as bias on both sides. Frustrating since it seems every researcher has an agenda of sorts. Hard to get the real truth. Anyway, I appreciate your efforts in giving me more information.


62 posted on 05/22/2006 11:26:19 AM PDT by coop71 (Being a redhead means never having to say you're sorry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]


To: coop71
That's the problem with any kind of study concerning health issues.

On the one hand, the companies promoting their products stand to lose a lot of money, and it wouldn't be the first time a company put their pocketbook above consumer welfare.

On the other hand, the people warning everybody don't have a stake in the issue, so you would think that their motivations are more sincere. And it's not like the groups opposed are some kind of whacked out fringe types. They appear to have impressive credentials.

My ob-gyn even told me there was a slightly increased risk with on of the types of breast cancer (the easier to treat one fortunately) and I'm an adult who has had three kids, so I would imagine that there could be genuine concern for younger women.

I know that this thread is not about breast cancer prevention, but as long as the subject came up, I suppose it wouldn't be a bad time to mention that breast-feeding is supposed to be very protective agianst that. Any breast-feeding support group will tell you that, but otherwise, you don't hear much.

64 posted on 05/22/2006 1:35:39 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson