Liberating women of their breasts – Tabloids rejoice

From the medical business to the media to idiotic women, they all got on the  Angeina Jolie bandwagon. For whatever  reason she chose breast surgery, plastic or medical – it shouldn’t be our business. But she decided to make it so, so here is my reaction:

A healthy woman is hailed as brave for cutting her breasts because she might get cancer (she still might now, but better odds) I don’t know who came up with the 87% and 5 % numbers and how, but people take them on faith and miss one point: without surgery she might never get cancer. With it, she still could.

Yet the move is praised to high heaven – even elevated at the rank of “a mother’s duty”. NY Times promotes the tweet with the quote about telling her kids they don’t have to fear losing her to cancer. Keep your breasts and you are a bad mommy!

It’s nice how everyone is so cavalier with a woman’s body parts. Waiting for the praise for someone cutting testicles based on an 87% chance.

I have been called ignorant, anti-woman and how do I dare criticize her. I don’t. She wanted to raise awareness, I’m aware and this is what I know:

Genetics is in its infancy – not sure how reliable their cause/effect study is – and is there only one gene involved? The numbers are highly suspicious.

Cancer patients are less and less getting surgery these days. Boosting immunity is the state of the art treatment. With all the early screening, it was noticed that the body takes care of a great number of tumors, through its immune system.

Breasts, ovaries are not just man toys, baby-making organs. They are important parts of our body. Nerves, hormones important to our overall health are there. Lopping them off based on a “maybe” is not bravery in my book.

Oh, and this woman the whole medical science defers to today, used to carry blood vials of her spouse around her neck (they both did, Billy Bob and her) for a strange reason I forgot now.

And a balancing view

Reacting to Angelina Jolie’s Breast Cancer News

Preventive double mastectomies among women in that latter group have shot up by 188 percent since the late-1990s. The steepness of the rise suggests those operations were driven less by medical advice than by women’s exaggerated sense of risk of getting a new cancer in the other breast. According to one study, such women believed that risk to be more than 30 percent over 10 years when it was actually closer to 5 percent. I am concerned that the coverage of Jolie’s decision, if not handled carefully, will add fuel to a culture of fear, to a misunderstanding of risk that could compromise women’s health choices.

.

Bloomberg’s army. attacking Weiner and bikes

Today’s tabloids seem to do what I am sure they got paid for – promote and defend Bloomberg. The Post injects a bit of race baiting in their stop and frisk defense – quite cynical  since I am sure those who will be the subjects will look like the guy on their cover

Metro has Bloomberg defending “his army” against the mean candidates attacking the police

The News is running with the phallic jokes in their relentless attacks on Weiner

while AM NY has the absurd levels of NYMBY, New York style .

Marathon bombers: NYC is #1! OK, maybe 2

There seems to be almost glee that NYC, the navel of the Earth wasn’t lft out of the Tsarnaevs plan for mayhem

blasts AMNY while the Daily News found a way to stick it to the feds (never Obama, mind you, they love HIM)

I for one am happy they didn’t unleash the paranoia here (more than it already went)

The Herald is throwing more red meat on the “Government”

but NY Post, going on a different story of a minor scandal, brings Obam on page one .

More Marathon fallout

Only from Boston papers, in NYC ADD set in

The Boston Globe reveals the FBI screw up

while the Herald throws more red meat ,

Boston aftermath coverage

Best NY cover

and a good one from Boston Herald

Vigils and paranoia in NY

While one of the 2 victims gets all the attention

Boston Globe brings up the forgotten victim.and NY Post plays detective;