Pink washing

Posted on October 9, 2013 by Fred Stiening

This captures most of why I ignore pink ribbons

Read on

This entry was posted in Totally random stuff. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Pink washing

  1. Parrott says:
    October 9, 2013 at 7:59 am

    Yeah, I’m with you Art, and my wife too. I think the first red flags went up is when they fired that lady that was against abortion.
    On the lighter side, don’t get me wrong, I am a total supporter of Breast examination and observation. : )
    Women ‘want’ us to look. That’s why they display them, and that’s ok !
    Best regards
    Parrott

  2. CC1s121LrBGT says:
    October 9, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    Good posting, Art. I am disappointed but not surprised. Always check out any organization before donating money.

    One of my complaints with the organization is that they make it seem that only women get breast cancer. The vast majority of breast cancer victims are women, but I would bet that most men don’t even know they can get breast cancer.

    • Nidster says:
      October 9, 2013 at 10:07 pm

      My Rule #1: Never buy anything that is associated with, or tied to a popular, mainstream cause AS SEEN ON TV. Besides, when is the 1st or last time a big deal has been made against prostrate cancer? just sayin!

    • Art Stone says:
      October 10, 2013 at 1:29 am

      Yes – and because of that, the mortality rate in men is much higher. The pink ribbon stuff started invading the wirkplace with the women most likely to file sex discrimination lawsuits getting in your face demanding money.

      There is no similar campaign to deal with prostate cancer which is a major disease in men (albeit seriously over treated as almost all men get it and the average time until you die from it is 20 years). It would be a valid point that women probably for the most part don’t get aroused by them, and at the gym men don’t check out each other’s prostate in the shower.

  3. briand75 says:
    October 10, 2013 at 6:49 am

    Having lost a wife to breast cancer, I can tell you how poor the Komen organization is. The American Cancer Society (likely higher administration fees) was at least able to provide travel assistance and information. Komen? “Make a donation – we understand your situation”. The best place to put your money? Directly into companies researching molecular mapping of tumors. I can continue on how to fight cancer for some time, but if you haven’t been affected, it won’t mean much.

    • Art Stone says:
      October 10, 2013 at 7:22 am

      The linked article makes a point that I’ve made before. Mammograms cause cancer. Someone else did the math – general X-ray exposure is not the right metric because the X-Ray is focused on a small area – their estimate is each mammogram caused about a 1% increase that the woman will develop breast cancer. People who don’t understand science and probably keep pushing low risk women to have mammograms every year “just to be safe”, not realizing they are increasing the risk. They’ve also realized lately that early detection has much less effect on the ultimate outcome than was originally thought.

    • Parrott says:
      October 10, 2013 at 9:14 am

      I am sorry for your loss Briand75. True life experience always trumps general opinion. Komen organization may have morphed into a marketing organization.
      I’ll leave it at that,
      Condolences and best wishes Briand75.
      parrott

    • CC1s121LrBGT says:
      October 10, 2013 at 12:35 pm

      My condolences on your loss, briand75.

    • Art Stone says:
      October 10, 2013 at 8:31 pm

      So I’m trying to figure out which point you’re making

      Being able to see JavaScript code is not abnormal. On a scale of sophistication, finding JavaScript code is not hard. You can see the code that I use to update the time and display “only nnn days, hrs, mins until [something] happens.

      I think the larger point is JavaScript code runs in the browser, and as such is very insecure – I could make a copy of their JavaScript, modify it, and cause the browser to load the bogus JavaScript. An important system should not be built around having input validation in Javascript code.

      • CC1s121LrBGT says:
        October 10, 2013 at 11:11 pm

        I hadn’t analyzed it deeply, but it seems like a large blob of linear code. I would expect to see some structure, either through inheritance of through subroutines. … then again, what we see could be the product of an automated code generator.

        Yes, security is an issue- I would expect to see more code on the back end and the font end acting mainly to trigger it. … but what do I know, I have never seen code costing $1/2 billion before looking at this. 😉

    • Art Stone says:
      October 10, 2013 at 8:22 pm

      The one thing he hasn’t figured out yet is the root cause being that at the end of the process, there is only one “option” – Blue Cross/Shield and I’m not sure even they are ready in the states where they agreed to write coverage, and there may be states where there are no Federal options.

      • Nidster says:
        October 11, 2013 at 10:12 am

        Now there is a question begging to be answered, “there may be states where there are no Federal options.”

        • Art Stone says:
          October 11, 2013 at 10:36 am

          That would take some research – it would be states where Blue Cross/Shield doesn’t have a provider network. The OPM Mandate to sign up 2 federal providers uses the term “multi-state” rather than national. They’re only required to offer insurance in a fraction of the country (I think it may be 70%).

          Blue Cross is really more like a franchise because insurance (until now) has been regulated state by state, so each state has a legally separate affiliate. I don’t know if the umbrella organization even has the legal power to coerce the local affiliates to join the federal exchange.

Leave a Reply