Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The Pharmaceutical/Health Industry and Women

118 replies

VirgoGrr · 03/01/2012 23:48

I'm just exploring a few thoughts about how medical/health issues that affect women are making money for the pharmaceutical industry.

I've just commented on another thread about my experiences with treatment for abnormal cervical cells. At the time and afterwards, I obviously read up on HPV and what may have led to my problem and I was horrified to learn that by taking the pill, as I'd been recommended, and by choosing a new partner who had had a recent std test, I thought I was practicing safe sex. Obviously not, it's likely that I was exposed to HPV after a serious illness and this led to severely abnormal, precancerous cells. If someone had told me that I was putting my health at risk at that time, there's no way I would have been taking the pill, I would have been insisting on condoms. I had not even heard of HPV before I had an abnormal smear. This is a number of years ago, btw.

Would it be too cynical to suggest that it's beneficial for the industry to not make this simple knowledge more widely available to women because they sell contraceptive pills, the equipment for smear tests, the equipment for treatment and the HPV vaccine?

I'm sure there are lots of examples. What do you think?

OP posts:
Original poster
VirgoGrr · 05/01/2012 01:01

Sorry Civilon, you did, didn't you.
Yes, I'd like to know too. I'm just going to go and google.

OP posts:
Original poster
VirgoGrr · 05/01/2012 01:00

Just going back to the 'pushing' of Cerazette, when my GP recommended it to me, I said I wasn't particularly happy with the likely outcome that my periods would cease. He scoffed at me and said that he didn't know why British women were so hung up on the idea that a monthly bleed was healthy and that it was seen as a positive benefit by women in the US/Australia. I have never felt quite so patronised. Oh, since the last time I had to talk to this medical non-entity. I find it hard to imagine that he came up with that all on his own. It felt like something that came on a handout from the manufacturer on how to handle objections.

Reader, I'm afraid he talked me into it. One of the worst decisions I ever made. Cerazette should be withdrawn from the market, it's dangerous. That's a wild claim, but it's just my opinion. And the opinion of quite a few others.

OP posts:
Civilon · 05/01/2012 00:53

And I found it a thought-provoking thread...and I'd still like to know about Germaine Greer's line on mammograms.

Civilon · 05/01/2012 00:52

I was agreeing with you, too, VirgoGrr...albeit in a roundabout and rambly way...

Original poster
VirgoGrr · 05/01/2012 00:49

Ok, I'll drop the HPV thing now as 1 person has agreed with me and everyone else seems to think I'm a thicko. Thanks LRD. Btw, a friend of mine has an 'abnormal' result on every single smear that she has done. Thats just her being contrary. Wink There's nothing wrong with her.

Mostly, it's an error in the way the test has been done, rather than an 'abnormal you' iykwim. Not enough cells collected or it's contaminated. Just follow it up and I'm sure you'll be fine.

That link is shocking. I'm old enough to have had my first smear at 18. I can't imagine sending a non sexually active 14-16 yr old for a vaginal/rectal exam. That's unnecessary. Sounds like you get your money's worth though. Hmm

I'm of the opinion that 18 is about right, its ridiculous and dangerous to wait until 25 for your first smear. Although, it's the budget that decides.

OP posts:
Civilon · 04/01/2012 18:41

I don't think it's at all fair to berate the OP for not having seen/read media reports about HPV, Bunbaker. Have you really read/seen nothing about the divisions within the medical profession re the advisability of mammograms?

PamBeesly · 04/01/2012 18:31

Thanks Stewie I think I'll have to read up more on US politics to understand it more. I think the Republicans are just anti-life, anti-joy from what I can see. I don't think the alternative is too much better either, its a shame there are no other viable options in the US.

StewieGriffinsMom · 04/01/2012 18:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

StewieGriffinsMom · 04/01/2012 18:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PamBeesly · 04/01/2012 18:24

Are there any vocal campaigns against this practice and are there any campaigns against witholding contraception based on religious beliefs? Surely someones ability to access health supersedes someones right to access their version of god. What human right is therefore more important? Right to religion or right to health/bodily integrity. Sorry Stewie all the questions....sheesh!

StewieGriffinsMom · 04/01/2012 18:14

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PamBeesly · 04/01/2012 18:07

It is a completely different system Stewie and I don't understand it enough. Are Christian pharmacies in Christian areas allowed to withold contraceptives for sale? (How very un-Christian)
Can I also ask how much (on average) a months supply of the Pill is, (its ?3-7 where I live)
I still don't understand the need for invasive exams for young girls and how its justified, is it the large pharamceuticals? To me it just seems like a way to show girls from a young age their body is 'medical' property (I hope I'm not coming across as too thick)

StewieGriffinsMom · 04/01/2012 18:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Victorialucas · 04/01/2012 17:54

www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol27/dixon.php

PamBeesly · 04/01/2012 17:51

Abortion is illegal where I live too Stewie but there is no exams for the pill or visits to discuss birth control. It just seems so unnecessary for young girls to have to have these. In the US is it normal to see a specialist? If I wanted the pill I just go to a my GP or clinic nurse

Victorialucas · 04/01/2012 17:51

That link has made me feel sick. Breast exams too?!
A smear for someone who is sexually active is one thing but all that 'fingers in your genitals stuff' -omg how unnecessary and frankly dangerous. (risk of infection/trauma)

Bunbaker · 04/01/2012 17:48

"It is not just the pharmaceutical industry, at least there is evidence that their products do what they are supposed to. The alternative medicine industry also targets women to make profit, it is the way of capitalism."

I don't think they target just women, they target people

"My point was, why isn't there an awareness campaign about HPV as there is for Chlamydia? If I'd seen information telling me that this innocuous infection was widespread and could lead to cancer, I would have been a lot more careful."

I knew about this. I have read articles in magazines, seen programmes on TV, read posts on the internet. Where were you when these articles were issued/broadcasted?

Can someone explain the issues about mammograms? I wasn't aware there were any.

Incidentally when I first went on the pill in 1978 internal examinations were compulsory (this was in the UK).

StewieGriffinsMom · 04/01/2012 17:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ChunkyPickle · 04/01/2012 17:38

From the horses mouth www.scarleteen.com/article/reproduction/your_first_gynecologist_visit

another article on the same site talks you through getting contraception, and to do that you'll need to go for a gyne exam too.

PamBeesly · 04/01/2012 17:38

'No exam, No Pill' thats awful, talk about disempowerement of girls. Angry

LRDtheFeministDragon · 04/01/2012 17:34

It's ok, I meant I thought yours was a harsh judgment of the situation, not harsh to me personally - so no need to apologize.

I don't think exams sound great, I just wasn't aware exams were part of the practice since my mate never mentioned them. I will now ask her if they're standard but suspect they are given what's been said.

I'm really sad to think it would be 'no exam, no pill' - that just seems awful!

Victorialucas · 04/01/2012 17:29

Sorry for seeming harsh, LRD, I assumed you meant that these exams were a good thing. I agree that a trip to the docs with mum when you are a teen contemplating sex is a good idea, either side of the pond. But as far as I'm aware (mostly from US tv though) that the internals are compulsory in a 'no exam, no pill' way.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 04/01/2012 17:05

Yes, I do feel uncomfortable about a girl under the age of consent having that happen to her. Sad

It seems to me surely if you can't consent to sex, you can't consent to that either? I know it's not at all the same experience, but it is your body and I don't see why it'd be necessary.

My mate's partner is English and her mum and whole family keep telling her she really, really needs to try to be over here if she ever decides to have a baby!

PamBeesly · 04/01/2012 16:59

I wonder why the need?? I'm 33 weeks pregnant and have no rummaging of any sort down there. I wonder what they think they can achieve by 'rummaging' through any 14 year olds bits. I guess like has been repeated the 'training' of women to see their bodies being 'controlled' by the medical profession. And yy to whoever said about giving birth in America (my only knowledge is through the US version of One Born Every Minute, its not personal) they seem to think that childbirth requires at least, an epidural and an audience of family members....and a doctor to 'deliver' the baby...doctors DO NOT deliver babies, the women who have them do.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 04/01/2012 16:55

Cross-posted with chunky - it may be then that she never mentioned an exam because she saw it as routine. Still, I'm not sure I feel convinced it's better than our system.

Swipe left for the next trending thread