"3 in 4 people attend cervical screening"

Jaysus @foodfiend - they couldn’t even manage, in their panic, the inaccurate-disingenuous “people” so left it at around 1 in 10 are affected by it, which naturally begs the question “1 in 10 what?” Female grey-cheeked mangabeys or rhesus monkeys, perhaps? Admittedly they’re offering NHS treatment so probably not; but the failure to specify they mean persons of the female sex means they might as well be counting in said primates (& the other species who are known to get endo, poor things) frankly.

It’s an absolute embarrassment & a shameful failure in terms of what’s needed from public health messaging. A tiny TINY number of female people are unhappy being referred to as women. The answer is an asterisk leading to a footnote “and trans men”. People who identify as non-binary need to be provided with help to understand that for healthcare purposes, there is no “third option”. At the moment there are people horrified & outraged at being referred to as male/female a man/woman (as applicable) because they consider their non-binary identity moves them completely outside said classifications. That simply cannot, beyond using they/them pronouns, work within healthcare. Cancer doesn’t care how you identify; & it matters which variety of “non binary” you are because the one requires cervical screening & the other doesn’t - but they are at risk of developing testicular cancer & prostate cancer, which their opposite numbers cannot. (But breast cancer for EVERYONE, obviously. Breast cancer is inclusive like that.)

Just to clarify that my posts were about Sainsbury's announcement that 50% of people experience menopause. Yes, 50% of people are women, but they don't use the word women. Personally, from a public health perspective, I would be saying that all women will go through menopause. Not 50% of "people". It is clearer. But we have to pretend that men can also be women. So language has to be mangled.
Sorry for adding confusion to your thread, OP.

1 in 10 are affected by endometriosis in Wales apparently. This is very worrying as everywhere else it's 1 in 10 women.

"We want to ensure you get the treatment you deserve." Only people who already know what endometriosis is deserve treatment, clearly. (If I remember rightly, this was posted on IWD this year, which was particularly annoying.)

3 in 4 people, eh? Must be rather a waste of time for some of them.

Rule number 1 of marketing: Define your market, get it wrong and you will not reach them!

Those older women who are known to be hard-to-reach? This. Is. Not. Going. To. Help.
(Handy 2019 research paper on why said women don’t attend cervical screenings.)

As a bonus, Knowledge of cervical cancer and attendance at cervical cancer screening: a survey of Black women in London.
As the BLACHIR Report explains in detail, health inequality is a painfully real thing - & for some reason the NHS & charities that supposedly focus on women’s health are ok with making it worse not better.

Would be so nice if we could focus on lifesaving healthcare for 51% of the population wouldn’t it? You know, actually, literally, non-hyperbolically lifesaving.

Do thick kids eat more mud?

Not the main point here, but I think they'd also be better to include (or revert to) the term 'smear test'. Short words are more likely to be read and remembered than a multi-syllable term.

[I once had to check whether a health report sentence saying
'Consideration should also be given as to whether the correlation between lower intellectual capacity and overt ingestion of exterior-environment surface contaminants in juveniles might in effect be a reverse correlation as regards cause and effect'
really meant
'Do thick kids eat more mud?'
My boss didn't let it into the final report -- but did grant that that was exactly what they'd meant.]

Remember when the cultural narrative celebrated women and being a woman?

5 years ago:

So because women are people too then it is necessarily true that 150% of people are over 6 foot?

this kind of turning facts into garbage is enraging.

not to mention I believe there are some circumstances where women without a cervix need checking - if they’ve had it removed due to a bad smear or cancer, and something else too.

😂

more than all the women must be attending

I know we've all expanded since lockdown, perhaps we've all grown ourselves by around 33%?

Oh good point, what about children?! These people are so dumb.

A percentage of people will be women, the rest will be men and children.
So if 75 percent are getting smears (and I imagine 100 % of women aren't) , that's a lot of extra men and children.

Well because women are people.

Still doesn't make it true, in the same way it's also not "broadly correct" that "3 out of 4 animals attend cervical screening", or "50% of people are over 5'9"".

That doesn't make it correct!

75% of a much bigger group does not mean 75% of the subset group.

If 75% of people attend, that's three quarters of the entire group of people, and women are only 50% of that group. So more than all the women must be attending to make it true.

It's a ridiculous statement and a waste of money. If they want to target women who don't attend, they need to find out why not - and one of those reasons might be that they don't know they need to, because the language used isn't clear!

Do charities/campaigners honestly think that transmen/non binary people who are biologically female do not realise that they are not immune to female health issues? If you have a cervix, you can get cervical cancer. If you have breasts (both male and female) you can get breast cancer. It you have testicles you can get testicular cancer.

Well because women are people.

PP means technically it’s correct but they’ve purposefully avoided using the word woman.

Are they genuinely asking men to take time off work, strip down and be examined to see if they have a cervix? And now this is complaining that half of men are refusing to turn up to those degrading appointments? Or is it wink wink - you know we mean women not people? Women is just too dirty a word to utter so we said people. God I hate this world.

Seems to me there might be a need for stickers that say 'women' so some of these posters can be corrected.

Wait what? So assuming all women attend, that means 50 percent of men are attending too? What am I missing? Surely we shouldn't be wasting resources by asking men to attend just to see if they have a cervix? I thought the NHS didn't have enough money? What a waste of tax payers money.

Is that why the poster is a nice bright pink all over? To help us guess which people they're talking about so they don't have to say the words?

‘ only women have a cervix’
Not according to some MP’s.

How are they broadly correct?