forwomenseyesonly

Discussion Forum (Unnecessary Pap Smears: Part Two)

This post has been created to provide an additional forum for discussion.

Thank you Alex for suggesting the addition of an open forum devoted to discussion on this blog.

3,978 comments

  1. “A few weeks before our wedding my partner broke down and told me she wasn’t ready for marriage. She had been to a doctor and told she’d need VERY INVASIVE exams before she could get pills. A visual inspection of her genitals and a rectovaginal exam. She was told the bimanual and smear could wait until 3 months after our wedding. She was still a virgin at this time. I’m pleased to say my girl walked out of the doctors rooms. I went to the Medical Society and spoke to a couple of people who told me doctors could make anything a requirement for the Pill, but that NONE of these things were medically required for the Pills. So, why are women DENIED scripts until they have these exams? This sets every woman up for abuse. I accompanied my partner to three doctors and found a doctor who agreed these requirements were unethical and gave her the script and an assurance no demands will be made later. We’re currently researching smears ; 2 virgins here. Wedding in May
    —Guest Scott”

    Saw this on a forum.
    Hopefully, their research makes clear pap tests are a waste of time for 2 virgins, (and risk the woman’s health) although that information is hard to find. You often see things like: you’re at risk if you’ve had sex, even once, but they conveniently omit that’s only the case if your partner is HPV+ (and the risk is very small anyway)
    Anyway, nice to see a supportive partner, together they have a better chance of avoiding medical excess and abuse. It reminded me though how many happy occasions (or should be) are ruined for women because of medical mandates. This woman almost deferred her marriage because of the threat of medical abuse.

    • And you know what’s sick? These women might get made out to be immature for avoiding an attack because it’s an unconventional method of abuse. If this guy she was marrying was getting dictatorial like that & she decided to not marry him that would get seen as perfectly valid!

      I’m sure someone would probably tell this woman “Oh, that’s no reason to not get married” or “Yeah, it’s a problem- but you can’t let that stop you from living your life.” Of course, she’s not “living her life” if other people are arranging what is done in that life. She’s somehow letting other people push her around by not letting them push her around. It’s like they’re completely ignorant of coercion as a concept!

  2. Studies published that found 1/3 to 50% of all men over 50 years old had some degree of prostate cancer found in autopsies. All had died of other causes.

    Somehow I think that most womens cancer could be the same. How many women could live comfortably with a breast tumor, cervical dysplasia or uterine growths that are just causing mild or no symptoms?

    If I have cancer and it is not causing me a problem and it is not likely to kill me in the next couple of decades, please leave me alone. I do not need cancer screening to make me become a cancer patient. I would refuse conventional treatments anyway. Cut, burn and poison are not living to me. Even early detection so I could start natural alternative therapies really does not appeal much to me. I cannot see living on vegetable juice, cutting out sugar etc.

    The argument I get from the doctor is that I am going to die of cancer if I do not get screened. The screening tests do not prevent cancer. I think the treatments are terrible which they do not mention. They push the screening as preventative medicine when it is not. They should be discussing lifestyle (other than drinking and smoking) and diet (what do MDs know about nutrition? Very little). They just ask if you eat so many fruit or vegetable per day, how many eggs not what to eat or how to get better food if you cannot afford it. Strange but we have a drug plan not a meal plan.

    • In Dr Margaret McCartney’s book “The Patient Paradox: why sexed up medicine is bad for your health” on page 57 she gives some examples of cancers found in bodies after they had died of something else.
      In the US a study of post mortem examinations found that 7% of bodies had got an unsuspected cancer in them, when these people had died of something else.
      “In the journal Human Pathology, in 1994, Swedish pathologists described how, in a series of just over 3,000 postmortems, around one in 20 people had an undiagnosed and unsuspected cancer.”

  3. I read somewhere for those over 50, a fair % will have cancer somewhere, but in most cases, they’ll die WITH the cancer, not FROM it. Previously we didn’t know about it or look for it so were blissfully unaware.

    Moo, we certainly don’t need treatment for most dysplasia, although if you’re HPV+ and aged 30 to 60 and have an abnormal pap test (CIN 3) I can understand being treated, of course, that doesn’t currently happen, HUGE numbers have treatment for dysplasia, and sadly, often very young women.

    Fibroids, unless you’re symptomatic and they’re bothering you, forget about them, but in the States with all the annual poking around, it seems to me many women end up having procedures or hysterectomies to get rid of them. Also, ovulation is normal, yet American women have been trained to fear cysts on their ovaries – there is even that “doctor” on the net who convinced a young woman to keep having annual well-woman exams because he found a harmless cyst.
    So he did an unnecessary exam, found “something”, did some further diagnostic procedures and what a relief…nothing to worry about, but the young woman then says, “I didn’t even know it was there, it might have been something serious”. Now convinced to keep having her exams.
    This is medical dishonesty, pretending you’ve saved someone’s life: it’s a huge problem in the States.

    If it’s not broken, leave it the hell alone is my motto, don’t go looking for trouble.
    I’m pleased they’re thinking of renaming some conditions, removing carcinoma from DCIS and lobular carcinoma. Once we hear carcinoma we think, Cancer! These conditions are not usually life-threatening, it’s pre-cancer that usually stays that way. Hopefully, fewer women will agree to damaging treatments if the word Cancer is removed…hope so.
    It can be hard to get our heads around the fact that even invasive cancer might not be a problem, it might not progress, or it might regress.
    We need to re-think our views on cancer so the very word doesn’t send us into a blind panic….cut it out! Take a breath and do our research and ask lots of questions, and a great starting point, don’t go poking around looking for problems, with technology becoming ever more sophisticated, you’re bound to find something “wrong”.
    Taking the fear out of cancer will not be easy after decades of scare-mongering.

  6. I know I have not posted in a while, and this is way off topic from everything, but why is screening considered a life-saving procedure? I’ve mentioned this before, but all it does is, at best, detect abnormalities. For example, with all of this discussion lately about mammograms being harmful, the general consensus is that they’re worth all the harm caused as long as a few are helped. The same tends to ring true to paps/pelvic exams. Whenever I mention choosing not to have them, the response is always that yes it is my body, but I must be prepared to deal with the consequences of not screening. The pressure is starting to wear on me, honestly. It’s basically as though you have two choices: invasive and inaccurate screening methods or death. While I know that it isn’t true (I’ve read the statistics and done my research), I can’t help but worry about it sometimes. It doesn’t even make sense, either. I’m not concerned about lung cancer or brain cancer or anything else. Then the argument falls into place that they don’t have screening programs for those types of cancer, and it’s important to take advantage of the screening programs we have in place to be as preventative as possible and protect our bodies (which usually end up causing awful side effects more often than helping people). Then, you have to understand that it’s incredibly odd that we only have screening programs for intimate body parts and not only that, but doctors are paid by pharmaceutical companies to push chemotherapy and radiation. So if they’re actively screening people, that would create more opportunity to sell it. It’s all just so terrible and most days I feel like I really have no one to talk to about all of this. Anyway, I just needed to get this all off my chest. It’s nice to have a place where I can vent all my frustrations.

    • One of the huge problems with the Pap test nonsense is that cells produced during pregnancy mimic cancer cells. Often they cannot be told apart by technicians processing the slides because they are processing too many slides or a machine is used which the techs admit make too many mistakes. The doctors are paranoid. Women are treated for cancer when they were just pregnant and had an early miscarriage. Some women refuse a d&c and the fetal remains will naturally come out but it can take months. So if a women never knew she was pregnant the first place (irregular or very light flow one or two months especially using tampons). So no birth control method is 100% effective. Every wonder why too so much infertility and IVF in western countries.

      Cancer is not 100% due to genetics. It can be caused by toxins I the environment but also by toxins produced by microorganisms in the body. One Italian doctor claimed all cancers were white and that they were caused by a fungus. He uses baking soda to kill cancer tumors. Other methods use various diet and body cleansing regimens that do work for some people. I hear about too many people dying of chemo and radiation and it’s effects that weakness the body and the immune system. Someone has chemo for cancer but they die from a viral ling infection etc. A huge amount of lying going on and denial of the truth or just. It wanting to change anything.

      Even in veterinary studies they have better treatments and knowledge because they are not corrupted by big pharma and greed. Farmers cannot afford it so the traditional knowledge is melted in with the new.

      You can refuse all cancer screening or you could choose to screen but the only use natural or alternative therapies to cure. Or you could change your lifestyle to prevent cancers. Or you could just accept that most people will get cancer and live with it and maybe die from it eventually.

      I do not buy that some cancer screening test is going to save my life. Some women beat themselves up about they missed their pap one year. Or they thank God they did not need chemo or radiation (the tumor was not cancer then) .

    • Hi Ro, I worry about these things too, but then I look at all the evidence again and again, and I still think I’m doing the right thing by not having cervical screening or mammograms. The cervical screening test is only 80% accurate at best, so I could just go to my doc now and ask for one, but one test on it’s own isn’t going to give very much information, and is still no guarantee that I’m not going to get cancer.

      As I understand it, this is because the cervical screening test is more like a “tracking device”, which assesses and monitors cell changes over a period of years, which may eventually lead to cancer. This is why it has to be done so frequently and at regular intervals for it to make any sense, and why they are so keen to keep women locked into their system of recalls. A single test on it’s own, will either come back normal (result=do nothing for the next few years) or abnormal (result=wait and see, 95% chance of doing nothing for the next few years). I’d rather live my life without these tests, and have excellent, respectful and prompt medical care, when I do feel that something is wrong.

      • Adawells – I’ve heard that it’s only 80% accurate at best, as well. At worst, I believe it’s only 67% accurate which isn’t that fantastic. Who’s to know what percentage of inaccuracy you’re at risk for? It’s unpredictable. Furthermore, with HPV testing having a minimum accuracy of about 91%/92% all the way up to 98%, that certainly seems like the absolute best option if one is interested in screening.

        That’s an excellent point you made about CC screening being more of a tracking device. Because of its inaccuracy and different things that can cause false positives or negatives, they have to make sure the results from the prior test were actually accurate and telling. I agree with you on your last statement entirely. I’ve come to the conclusion that at this point in my life, I’m more happy to just eat healthy (try to eat organic as much as possible and avoid GMOs), and exercise daily. Also, try to minimize stress as much as possible since it can cause a multitude of ailments. As Alex and several others have mentioned before, quality of life is often forgotten in medical situations. Sure, some people who don’t screen might have shorter lives, but their lives may be of better quality. They might experience less pain, stress, worry, and other sicknesses/problems as a result of particular treatments. So I think I’d do well to keep that in mind, too. For me, personally, quality of life is very important. I think the most difficult thing is that everyone around me seems to rely so heavily on doctors (even those who are completely healthy and symptom-free) so at times I feel as though I MUST have some sort of health problem and that it just hasn’t been diagnosed yet. I know that’s a terrible way to think, but as I’ve mentioned before, everyone I know is on medication for something-or-another. I’m in my early 20s, so considering that in the past the general consensus was that most people this age are healthy, it’s thrown me through a bit of a loop. I don’t know if it’s that way in the UK, but here there seems to be a trend of turning healthy people into patients.

  7. Oh, another thing I forgot to mention, I saw a campaign the other day encouraging women to love their bodies (not the physical appearance, but to love their reproductive organs). The caption was “what are you scared of?” and it was a woman wearing a bra and underwear that had illustrations of the reproductive organs on the outside. My first thought was that women are scared of those organs because we’re taught they’re going to kill us. Perhaps that was the point, though? It would be great if that was, in fact, the intention behind it; that women shouldn’t fear their own bodies. But I don’t think that was the idea behind it.

    • Ro- There’s no way for you to say something so someone else can’t lie or twist your words. Same goes for someone being able to keep arguing in spite of whatever you’ve said. Especially if that someone thinks agreement is defeat, they probably keep arguing & arguing. I don’t know who these people are, but sometimes this comes up with complete strangers.

      I’d just explain things like how we talk about on this site- particularly the thing about how properties don’t change by designation. I remember you thought “a situation is what it consists of” hit things right on the head & what happens IS what occurs. Imagine someone saying “But still” in a group argument about these things after saying that?

      Simple accusations can put things in sharp relief, too. “So you’re against bodily autonomy & think it’s what someone else says goes?” When they say “No, of course not” you could maybe follow up with “Well, do you think reality takes a coffee break for doctors?” They most likely won’t answer in the affirmative. How can they argue that it’s something that’s high risk, low utility, and invasive- but yet ISN’T any of those things & thus isn’t a problem on those levels, all of which would be serious individually (never mind in combination like it is here).

      I realize that this has been a big problem for you for a while & it’s not always so easy to shrug things off when someone else keeps acting like it’s true. There is a bit of a presumed honesty & accuracy with people & just realizing that that’s not a 100% trustable situation might make things easier. Maybe at some point in the argument you could say how you don’t appreciate them trying to undermine you. They might not try to argue anymore, but if they do this whole argument can come up (or come up again).

      • Alex – I took your advice and explained it in that matter to someone I was talking with – that things are exactly what they consist of, regardless of how it is presented. Rather than arguments, I found support. That statement definitely helped them to see things from my point of view and understand where I was coming from.

        I honestly think the biggest thing is that they constantly push it as something that will save the life of everyone who participates. Even if that isn’t what’s directly being said, that’s how it sounds. As always, you’ve raised some very good points. I should make note cards and keep them with me LOL.

      • Thanks, Ro. I’m glad it was helpful to you.

        It IS as though these tests saves everyone’s life that gets them & that implies that there’s a pre-existing life-threatening condition (because it would have to be this way for what they’re acting like to be true– “implicit reasoning” I guess would be the word). There’s also the concept of the “road not taken.” Somoene might very well get themselves paranoid because they think the “road” they’re on might just lead into a dangerous place & they don’t foresee it. Same thing applies to the other road, though.

        Maybe it also has to do with the fact that acceptance of mortality comes off more like approval or eagerness to die than awareness or the fact that they’re going to die at some point. One needn’t become suicidal in order to notice that one day they’ll die, but it kind of feels like an accomodation, not just being AWARE of the situation.

      • Alex – I think it does tend to come off that way. Then the emotional argument always gets brought into place, “well don’t you want to do this or this or be there for your kids or your parents, etc.?” So I think that’s a big part of it as well. However, anything could happen to anyone at any time. It’s a sad truth but a truth nonetheless. Death is as much a part of life as living and I do think that recently there has been more of an obsession with living forever. A lot of people, when questioned why they’re fans of the vampire films/movies/books that are popular right now, say it’s because of the immortality aspect. Another thing I noticed that sort of correlates with that is that some people place doctors and scientists at the same place as they would God. I have stated before I do believe in God and once again this isn’t meant to start a theological debate. However, that being said, I’ve heard several people say that doctors and scientists will save their lives, not God. Even if someone does not believe in God, to place a human being on such a pedestal is wrong. I would think most people would agree on that, regardless of their beliefs. Doctors and scientists are humans and thus can make mistakes. They don’t have a cure for everything. Every time I hear something along those lines, it just really rubs me the wrong way and I can’t help but cringe. Doctors and scientists are viewed as super humans when in fact they are simply normal people gifted with great intelligence. Unfortunately, that gift can be abused, but it is a gift. It’s no more than that. It’s the same way that there are great artists and poets, great astronomers and philosophers, etc. So I think that there’s a possible correlation between this and decrease of religious practice/beliefs throughout the world. People are beginning to think that technology and doctors and science are perfect and free of fault. I know this isn’t anywhere near everyone who believes this, but my generation in particular seems to place technology, science, and the medical field very highly.

        Sorry for that rant, that definitely went a bit off topic but it was an observation I made recently. Anyway, this generation likes to think that we can live forever on earth and there will be some miracle treatment to make us live hundreds, thousands, or even an infinite number of years. So you certainly hit the nail on the head with that one.

      • You know what that traces back to (at least historically)? It mostly seems to come from philosophy from the 1700s. The church had been saying whatever they wanted was real because of whatever mystery reasons they came up with & then the belief that there has to be a physical, tangible substance for something to be real came up. It seems to have been started by Francis Bacon (and I believe Renee Descartes was involved in all that, too). This all sounds good at first, but it’s ultimately inaccurate- if two people are doing something, that action is NOT a substance. This doesn’t even get into the point about what religious beliefs people have or whether the church used religion as something of a counterfeit trademark on their various bullshit.

        Another point is that this merely switched the situation from the priests to the scientists. Same properties, different methods. There’s also a bit of an unsung belief that scientists never lie, are never wrong, and never have pre-existing biases which is not true at all. The belief that there’s a definite ground floor conclusion reached with science is another thing that comes up. That belief thattheir conclusion is what was found at the “end of the road” is very common.

        Sometimes people feel like they have control over a situation because they mentally encompass it. That’s something you see in martial arts sometimes: A person will learn a technique (an “answer” to a particular problem) & feel like they have control over that situation. This would be like someone thinking that they can control whether or not they get shot because they know how a gun works!

        Something that seems to connect to that is that in science, what’s maintained is sometimes maintain in spite of it not being true. They’ll edit the report to match the claim, instead of the situation. It’s as if they think something is or is not real simply because they certify it as such. “Nothing’s real until we get there.”

        I guess maybe that excites that “reality is what I say it is” feeling? That false sense of discretion over reality works exactly like a drug addiction. I’d go with morphine as a comparison.

        I believe in God, too. I also have a “Good & Bad WOLF” style of ethics- which sometimes clashes with various religious beliefs. I also believe in the afterlife, especially since the concept of one came before getting paid for it. There’s a bit of a belief that religious people are dictatorial & that’s sometimes true, but someone isn’t being less dictatorial by being less religious.

      • I’m arguing with someone on Happier Abroad right now about dictatorial practices in medicine & other things. If you all want to look at it it’s in the Why Are Flu Shot Free In America? thread.

        The guy is HouseMD & it might be useful to take a look at how he sizes things up & argues about things. I wouldn’t suggest directing him to this site (since he seems liable to start shit & obviously isn’t simply mistaken about things), but if any of you’d like to chime in be my guest. Just to mention it ahead of time- some of the guys on the site are a bit woman-bashing, but there’s a lot of threads & posters.

        There’s also a women’s section. Might be useful to post things about medical situation & cultural differences there?

      • Alex – I knew some about philosophy and how those ideals came about, but not to that extent. You know what’s interesting? That so many people take one person’s viewpoint as being the ultimate answer/solution/explanation rather than looking further or seeing if anything else is a possibility. It’s just shocking I suppose that the ideas of one or two men changed and shaped things so drastically.

        Another interesting thing I found out in regards to spirituality/the afterlife and the medical industry is that a pagan god is associated with the medical industry in the US. You know how there are snakes or just one snake printed on all medical logos? The snake is called Asclepius and it was thought to be the god that carried people into the afterlife. Interesting that prior to the idea of pagan gods, the snake or serpent was considered to represent evil. I just find it incredibly interesting that it isn’t okay for companies to align themselves with Christian beliefs or Muslim beliefs or Jewish beliefs, but it’s perfectly fine for an entire field of work to be represented by pagan beliefs. I thought there was supposed to be neutrality for public businesses?

        Also, I read some of the commentary on the Happier Abroad forum. Sometimes you can’t argue with people. Love how he used the old, “you’re the one sexualizing it so obviously there’s something wrong with you,” argument. Hypothetically speaking, even if intimate exams were not sexual for the doctor or patient, it would still involve sexual organs thus making it sexual in nature (even if there were no impure thoughts or attraction taking place). There doesn’t need to be any sort of attraction for something to be considered sexual. For Pete’s sake, in my high school health text book, they referred to gynecologist visits as “protecting your sexual health.” While these exams are potentially always sexual, I have to hope that in severe, emergency situations where they are the best option, it is not sexual in any way. I know that with ultrasound technology and the like, that isn’t necessarily so true any more but if that ever were to be the case, then I’d just hope that it’s approached with grace and the patient is given respect and treated in a dignified fashion.

      • You’re right about that, but I think it had a lot to do with “striking while the iron is hot.” The public was sick of the church’s bullshit & someone said something nuts in a very convincing way. The situation seems to have had a theme of “maybe anything is true” because they were more open to possibilities.

        I guess the fact that someone can keep arguing even after being wrong might get someone to doubt themselves. Like the idea of “the good guy always wins because he’s the good guy” or “if you tell the truth, it’ll be believed to be the truth.” These are urges, but not necessarily what happens. Someone “withstanding” an argument might get seen as evidence that it’s not true. Doesn’t make sense, though- since not all things are making a presumption or a prediction. It’s not always a bet.

    • I think loving your body means protecting it from harm and that includes rejecting non-evidence based screening tests or exams or anything that doesn’t pass our risk v benefit assessment.
      If we listen to our bodies, instead of the screening enthusiasts, it usually tells us when something is wrong – symptoms, and we also, get a feeling when something doesn’t sound right. On a health forum a young American woman decided not to have a cone biopsy, “my body told me not to let them do it”. I think she was right to listen to that inner voice. (she had “persistent low grade dysplasia” and was only 23)
      I think women need to re-connect with their bodies, to respect, trust and listen. Having bits scraped, poked, removed etc. is not something I’d allow unless I was satisfied it was absolutely necessary.
      I’m not scared of my body, we work together, but for many women control has been handed to others, they’re in the driver’s seat but someone else has the controls. No wonder these women are consumed by fear.

  8. It’s hardly surprising the pressure gets to some women, the entire system is set up, not to inform women and promote informed choice, but to pressure, scare and mislead, even coerce.

    “Whenever I mention choosing not to have them, the response is always that yes it is my body, but I must be prepared to deal with the consequences of not screening”

    Equally, you have to be prepared for the consequences OF screening, this risk is rarely mentioned to women. If we’re looking at the odds, the chance of benefiting from a pap test is less than 0.45%, (0.65% is the lifetime risk minus the false negative cases – and that ignores natural decline) here the lifetime risk of an “abnormal” pap test, colposcopy, biopsy and/or treatment is a whopping 77%, the US would be similar, (if not higher) the UK a bit less…they don’t screen before age 25.
    Angela Raffle, UK screening expert, said that women who would be unhappy to have a colposcopy and biopsy might choose not to have screening. IMO, that’s an acknowledgement that these things are a significant risk, whereas cervical cancer is rare and your chance of benefit very small. So it’s a question of weighing up the risks and benefits, the answer will depend on our perception of risk. (among other things)
    NOW we know only 5% of women have any chance of benefiting from a pap test, those aged 30+ who are HPV+…if you’re worried about this cancer and want to test, you could protect yourself from the risks with pap testing by sourcing and using a HPV self-test. That might put my mind to rest.
    Routine pelvic and breast exams, well, I think doing some research there helps a lot, they are not recommended in many countries for very good reasons, they’re of poor clinical value and carry risk, even unnecessary surgery.
    American women are pelvic-examined to death and have poorer health outcomes. Where is the benefit? (to women)

    That leaves mammograms…the NCI summary helped me a lot. If I were unlucky enough to get breast cancer I’d have no regrets about my decision not to screen. I’ve made an informed decision, the best decision based on all of the available evidence. I’m satisfied the risks with breast screening exceed any benefit, that’s enough for me.

    I don’t worry about my decisions, but women who do, they stand the best chance if they follow the evidence – seek out HPV primary testing or HPV self-testing, and use it properly, never add it to a pap test, don’t use it too often and not before age 30. If pap testing is all that’s available and you want to test, the Finnish program provides a decent balance, 5 yearly from 30 to 60, 7 tests in total. It might take some doing to find a doctor prepared to work with you, but it’s worth the trouble, your health and life depends on it.

    • Elizabeth – Thank you for your replies! They are much appreciated. You bring up some very good points – that there are great risks that come along with screening. Funny that you mention the UK! I was reading articles from medical journals and doctors in the UK after I posted here yesterday to find specific statistics, as theirs seem to be the most blunt and honest. One site actually admitted that they needed 80% of the population to screen in order for it to be effective! That alone proves that it is not as common as they would have us to believe. Another thing, I think I’ve mentioned this before, but their guidelines are much more lenient than those in the US, Australia, Germany, etc,. A little over half their population screens (and less than half of the population of London) compared to nearly 86% – 90% in the US. I know whether or not that’s the actual statistic has been debated before, but that’s the only one I could find.

      If I’m concerned about it in 9 years or so, I think I’ll go for the HPV self-testing like you suggested. I just looked up the statistics for cases of CC and it is most common in women 30 to 45. The website suggested this may have something to do with childbirth, and that CC is most common for women in that age range who have had multiple children. Considering all of the possible cell changes that could take place during and/or after childbirth, I have to wonder if it is actually cancer or something that would appear to be cancer-like? I suppose we’ll never know for sure since we aren’t oncologists and haven’t studied that sort of thing. Anyway, it is very, very rare in women under 25 and still fairly uncommon in women under 30. In my opinion, Finland and the Netherlands still have the most honest programs. Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t they have the highest success rates as well? Perhaps there’s something to be said for that.

      Thank you for posting that article again! It’s greatly reassuring. Once again, one of my favorite quotes on the matter, “You are not being irresponsible or reckless. You are making a serious, thoroughly well-informed choice and I would like to extend that choice to all women.”

  9. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2003/may/22/genderissues.publichealth

    “In fact, in 15 years, I don’t remember ever being given any information about cervical screening, the accuracy of the test, the possible results I could receive, or having any explanation of the results when they come through in the post, months after the test. Just pop your knickers off and get up on the couch.

    There could be a reason for this. Raffle says that the screeners realised in the 1980s that they needed to screen and treat enormous numbers of women in order to make an impact on mortality figures. Most would not have gone on to get cancer – but a very small number would, and it was these women they wanted to catch. If women realised how unlikely it was that they would personally benefit from screening, the screeners might not have got the numbers they needed to reduce cervical cancer deaths.” and:
    “Some women would say: ‘I loathe hospitals and I’m very confident in my own health. If I had to go to colposcopy I would regret it.’ Those women are best not coming for screening,” she admits.”

    Of course, the risks are greatly reduced now there is HPV primary testing and HPV self-testing, it’s just that many countries still choose to ignore the evidence, self-interest comes before women…so we stay with outdated population pap testing that worries and harms so many and misses too many of these rare cancers.

  10. That article is a beauty actually, we have someone from Cancer Research UK saying, “”If somebody suggested in 2003 we [should] introduce cervical cytology, no randomised trial would ever show it was worthwhile,” admits Dr Anne Szarewski, clinical consultant for Cancer Research UK. “However, it is impossible to turn the clock back. We haven’t got anything to replace it with.” (yes, we do these days, HPV primary and HPV self-testing)
    AND of course, the amazing Professor Baum, I recall the day I read these words and my heart jumped, “So it comes down to the level of risk with which we are happy to live. And now that I know my likelihood of an abnormal smear is so much higher than ever having cervical cancer, I think I’ll take my chances until the test improves. What does Michael Baum think of my decision?

    “You are not being irresponsible or reckless. You are making a serious, thoroughly well-informed choice and I would like to extend that choice to all women,” he says. I wonder how long it will take the rest of the medical profession to come round to his point of view.” (Indeed…)
    Sorry Sue, I’ve pretty much quoted the whole article, but it’s a good one. Unique for those of us living in Australia or the States.

  11. Screening rates are about 20% lower in London than they are elsewhere in the UK, because London has such a diverse population: mega rich at one end down to immigrant residents who hardly know any English. It has been a difficult nut for them to crack. I have to say that elsewhere in the UK, particularly in middle-class areas the “good girls” always run along to their smear tests, quite oblivious as to why they are really doing it, and these rates elsewhere are hovering around the 80% mark. It’s the London figure which brings the national total down to about 76%, and it is still falling gradually. As more women are finding out that they can delay, and miss a few, this is bringing the totals down, but getting off the screening programme is still very difficult. You need to avoid them for about 10 years before they will phone you/counsel you, and only the central screening body can issue you with your disclaimer letter to return. No other disclaimer letters are permissable. It was a very happy day for me when I finally got mine and returned it.

    In the 25-30 age group the screening levels are less than 30%. I think Scotland currently still screens at age 20 onwards and these girls are now the first cohort who have also been vaccinated with Gardasil at school, so it remains to be seen whether they will cave in to the pressure or stick to their guns.

    I do feel that it has been realised (by some) that the roll out of our cervical screening call/recall programme during the 1990’s is now regarded as in breach of our human rights, and the scale of the threats and coercion that was put upon British women in those years is starting to come out into the open. We are now in middle age and are questioning how much of it all was really necessary. Women who thought they were alone in this fight are finding many other women who have suffered as a result of this draconian screening programme. The NHS has definitely changed it’s tune, but whether pestering GP’s will change bad habits is another matter.

    • I just have to ask what is this disclaimer letter that asks women to return to the programme? What does it say?

      Whatever harassment I am getting is just generated by my family physician in Canada. I opted out of receiving correspondence from the “registry” years ago. I cannot get my information deleted. Probably I am still on the lists they send my doctor otherwise he would not bother me.

      • Hi Moo,
        That is the big question here in the UK. I’ve noticed women on Mumsnet asking how they can get hold of the disclaimer letter. I’ve searched very hard on the web, and I am sure it is deliberately not available or loads of women would be printing them off. I am sure some women have made up their own, and some women are saying that your GP’s surgery has them, when it would appear from this document called “Cervical Screening Factsheet v2”, which I found online, that GP’s surgeries do not hold them either. The call/recall system in the UK is based somewhere in the UK, (it’s called Open Exeter, but that doesn’t mean it is placed in Exeter, that’s another secret) and only they will send you a disclaimer letter, once you have been through all the process below. It took me quite a few years of refusing (and refusing to see a GP about anything else in the meantime), when I was telephoned out of the blue by a woman from the call/recall centre. It certainly wasn’t anyone I recognised from my surgery. After a brief conversation, during which I made it quite clear, the telephone conversation came to an end, and to my surprise the disclaimer letter appeared in the post a few days later. This must have been about 2004. I can’t remember the wording of the letter at all, only my absolute joy at having received it. Both my children were home births and I had to sign a disclaimer letter for these too. I think they basically say that if something goes wrong, you cannot claim damages against them.
        Here’s a section of the text from this document:

        Women who PERMANENTLY refuse cervical screening
        • If a woman permanently refuses cervical screening and becomes upset and angry when she receives invitations of this nature, she may be removed permanently from the National Screening Programme.
        • She MUST be given one to one counselling explaining the benefits of cervical screening and the implications of not having them.
        • Inform Call/Recall in writing, confirming that one to one counselling has been given & clearly instruct Call/Recall to send the “official” disclaimer letter.
        • Call/Recall will send the woman the letter which if signed and returned allows her to be permanently removed from the National Screening Programme.
        • Call/Recall will send a copy of the signed disclaimer to the practice for it to be entered in her medical records. Practice ‘in-house’ forms WILL NOT be accepted.
        Or
        • Primary care retain the official disclaimer and GP practice complete form in surgery when the woman has received one to one counselling of the benefits of cervical screening.

        • Once a woman is ceased from recall she will never be called for again by Call/Recall. THESE WOMEN ARE NOT EXCLUDED FROM YOUR ELIGIBLE POPULATION.

      • Adawells- I wonder what makes them think they can just take liberties with people’s time, and order women about to go the one to one counselling (bullying?). MUST? Excuse me..? If someone has never opted in, why should they opt out? I remember receiving a few of these letters, and I just chucked them in the dustbin, unread. I haven’t seen my GP in many years, and moved houses since then, so I guess the letters are coming, but to my old address. I guess if a GP would try to pester me, how it is all my own good, etc., I would just tell them, that my civil rights are more important to me, and being serious about them is more for my own good, than some pathologists looking at cells scraped off from my cervix to help them meet some fat target bonus.

      • Yeah, Karen. It’s like “Well, you have to give us a chance to overrule you.” That this interaction between the two is decided by them. It’s up to you who you are exposed to & how that interaction goes.

        They go & schedule something in your place (with a few things, apparently) to make it a confrontational situation & making it harder to counter. They launch an endeavor on their own & act like it’s you attacking them to counteract it.

  12. My guess is we’ll get a call and recall system after the completion of the current review. Our program coverts your coverage rates. It’s a system that corners women showing absolute contempt for consent/informed consent. I think many of these tests amount to assaults. Every visit to the GP means pressure to screen and some GPs sack, threaten, insult, intimidate, scare or mislead women who continue to refuse testing.
    Can you imagine men being treated that way? Yet so many think this is not only acceptable, it’s a good idea. It shows how little regard they have for women.
    Of course, if you’re informed, that helps with the dynamic in the consult room or when the receptionist chases you up. Sadly, doctors and the govt are rarely sued by women harmed by this testing, even when they were coerced into testing.
    Adawells, have you read the thread on practice nursing.com where UK nurses are slamming Dr McCartney? It explains a lot, a sort of stormtrooper mentality, “chasing” and ambushing women, the arrogance, ignorance and disrespect some of these women share is concerning. Who trained these women? How could anyone suggest these are appropriate attitudes in the practice of elective cancer screening?
    We should challenge these attitudes at every opportunity. Name and shame. Point the finger. Complain. These people are rarely challenged so it can have a big impact and make them stop and think about their actions and attitudes. It’s a good thing too that more wornen are admitting they don’t screen, so women and others understand it’s a choice. (Dr McCartney does not have pap smears and will decline breast screening when she turns 50) What is so shocking about a woman choosing not to have cancer screening? We don’t see this sort of intake of breath and judgement when a woman declines bowel screening, which says to me this is more about propaganda, bowel cancer is far more likely. The bizarre reaction to the rejection of cervical and breast screening says a lot about society, govt, some women’s groups and the medical profession and the way they view women. We have a long way to go…

    • Elizabeth, that is the part that is so maddening – the fact that women are continually thrown under the bus, “disposable” organs and breasts and all. I certainly cannot imagine men being treated in the same way. Why oh why is this allowed to continue? Women should not be, as you say, threatened, sacked, insulted, intimidated, scared or misled. This seems to be the norm rather than the exception, and I fail to understand why it is accepted.

      Here is something encouraging from a comment on a cytology job site: “FS Brooklyn : The field is in decline and badly so . Ten years ago our volume was ~ 66,000 paps a year , by the end of 2013 we barely cleared 41,000 . Some nearby labs saw larger drops” http://www.indeed.com/forum/job/cytotechnologist/Cytology-Jobs/t74998/p49 If you scroll down you will see in the last comment that the FDA is scheduled to decide on whether or not HPV screening will become the primary screening method. It makes you wonder just how many women are opting out of screening. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was hugely more than they are letting on.

      • Sue – I hope the FDA decides that HPV screening should be the primary method (it’s more accurate and has the potential to be completely non-invasive). A non-invasive test or self-test would be best, of course. We can hope that, that is the future for the industry. It would allow women to make informed decisions and do less harm to the overall population. I wonder how many women are opting out, as well. I don’t know where you are, but I’m in the US. They promote that 86% – 90% screen regularly. I wonder if that’s taken from a particular age group and if it is dropping rapidly here?

    • That’s a big part of why I look at birth control availability as a bit of an indicator. If they’re like that, chances are they’ll try backing her into corners with that. Not the only thing to go off of, of course- but it might be a bit of a clue.

      A lot of times this kind of thing is defended as a non-issue. It’s like things don’t “count.” Don’t really know when someone tends to first hear that, but it seems to cause a problem. It’s almost like a sleight-of-hand trick: if they’re looking to do something, the HOW of it is out of focus. The dynamics of that methodology (or any methodology, it seems) gets dubbed innocent sometimes- a means to an end is presented to never be a problem, in itself. I don’t get that, since the components of a methodology don’t cease to exist in their own right.

      I know I keep saying it, but a situation is what it consists of. Someone makes no sense to say that “what happens ISN’T what occurs,” but that is sometimes what gets implied. It’s not directly stated, but it would have to be true in order for the point that someone’s maintaining to be true. Maybe that’s part of why it keeps going & going- the logic is never brought right out & that makes there not be a solid platform for argument. Someone that’s looking to do these things probably won’t give you that as an opening, but it’s fairly easy to bring it up in a debate.

    • Hi Elizabeth, can you provide a link to the practice nursing website where nurses are attacking Dr McCartney? I’ve been trying to find it, but sites I’ve looked at need a password.

      I know of a couple of people who are nurses and believe me, I wouldn’t want to be their patient. The practice nurse at my local GP surgery once tried to talk me into smear testing during the 1990’s. It went like this:
      Nurse: You are due for a smear test.
      Me: I don’t want one, thank you, I’ve made a personal decision not to have them.
      Nurse: So you want to die, do you? How do you think your children will feel about that?
      Me: I’m not planning on dying, I’m in a low risk group, there has only been my husband, and I have made my decision.
      Nurse: Look, I’m the same. I’m true to my husband and I know my husband is true to me. I totally trust him, yet I still have my smear tests.
      Me: Then you don’t really trust him do you?

      She gave me a look that wished me all the cancer in the world and went away.

      • Hi Adawells
        Sorry, I should have included the link.
        I was alerted to the thread in April 2012, it’s in forum discussion and thread 15845.
        But, I can’t seem to retrieve anything older than 12 months old. I’ve sent them an email, the site says members can access material going back to 1998.
        I’ll post the link when it arrives…yes, I’m a member, registration was straightforward. (from memory)
        I’ve found it helpful, listening in on their conversations, for too long these attitudes/practices and the screening story were never challenged. It always comes as a shock when I post because they’re rarely challenged and are ALWAYS in the right, fonts of all wisdom and knowledge. When challenged, well, it can be interesting. I’ve been booted off a couple of “support” forums for informing women that dysplasia is not cancer and that most pre-cancer never becomes invasive cancer, how irresponsible of me!
        Many of these sites don’t like the evidence getting in the way of a great screening story.
        “I survived dysplasia”…

        They actually offer up the propaganda as proof the pap test is fabulous, risk-free etc. Some of the most vocal and aggressive people wouldn’t recognize the evidence if it bit them on the backside, I consider them medical bullies. Ignorance, power and confidence is a nasty mix.
        It annoys me too that women feel they have to disclose very private information to refuse something that should be elective. (I’ve only been with my husband etc.)

        With this particular group I posted and ran, but I understand many of the responses were not too bad. I haven’t actually read the entire thread, got side tracked and never went back there.
        I thought a link appeared on this site, I’ll check that as well.
        http://www.practicenursing.co.uk/default.aspx

        The comment made by Karen (I think) is spot-on, this is a mandated STI check for women.

  13. You can never trust them with figures, declaring a high % of women screen might make an unscreened woman more concerned about being in the minority. Everything is about manipulating and deceiving women, lying is not a problem for these people, it’s almost a game.
    Moving to HPV as the primary test would be a good thing IF it’s done properly; that’s unlikely in countries that currently seriously over-screen women and have never followed the evidence.

    The Dutch program will offer a 5 yearly pap test to a woman who tests HPV+, (until she clears the virus) but other countries will immediately refer the woman for colposcopy and biopsy. (if she’s HPV+ could you trust a normal pap test is the thinking)
    Also, if it’s used before age 30, well, 40% will test HPV+ and risk having unnecessary interventions when almost all would have cleared the virus by age 30.
    Improvements are only positives if they’re used properly…so we’ll see.
    The situation is so absurd here we only test women for HPV AFTER treatments, sounds like they’re protecting over-treatment to me, not women.

  14. You hear some amazing things, when I do, I look for a reason. It’s always there…
    You’ll often hear people arguing against HPV primary testing because it would result in too many false positives. What? The doctors go on to explain that most women who test HPV+ will never develop cervical cancer so HPV testing would causes unnecessary worry. Are you kidding me?
    They claim to be worried about the 5% who actually test HPV+ but have zero concern for the 95% having unnecessary pap tests, biopsies and treatments. It says to me they know if HPV testing is used properly their business will plummet…far fewer women having pap tests, biopsies etc. So vested interests would be terrified of the new Dutch program.

    They argue young women (under 30) would be HPV+ in great numbers, (true, 40%) so it wouldn’t work here, ummm, we shouldn’t be testing these women anyway with the pap or HPV test so we use our excess to deny all women the option of HPV primary and HPV self-testing. Worrying and harming our young women is so profitable they’ll keep them in the program until they’re forced to release them, usually when they can no longer deny the evidence “safely”, legal action hovers…
    America embraced the HPV test, but only because they’ve added it to the excess, this leads to even more over-investigation. A win:win for vested interests, a disaster for women.

    I’ve also, heard the argument it’s awful to label women HPV+ because it’s an STI…that should mean an education program, not dragging all not-at-risk women into testing and treatments. These comments IMO, are always based on ignorance or self-interest.

    Another old chestnut: we didn’t want to change a very successful pap testing program.
    Yeah sure, one that condemns 77% to colposcopy/biopsy (and often a “treatment”) for a cancer with a 0.65% lifetime risk. Hugely successful for whom?
    Better results could have been achieved with far less testing as the Finns have shown over the decades.
    Also, you hear HPV testing does not help, you need pap testing regardless of the result: rubbish.

    HPV testing is more expensive than pap testing – only if it’s used to increase risk, used properly it takes 95% of women aged 30 to 60 out of pap testing, so far fewer women having biopsies etc. fewer premature babies, c-sections etc. Used properly HPV primary testing would save a fortune and more lives. (and see colposcopy, over-treatment and excess biopsy rates plummet)

    If women want smarter testing, used the right way, they have to sort it out themselves, unless they happen to be Dutch.
    A good point was made on another thread: you need about 80% of the target population to test regularly to stand a chance of bringing down the already small incidence and death rate. As more and more women choose not to test, they become aware: of the evidence, that the pap test is not a clinical requirement for the Pill, you can get the Pill on-line or a HPV self-test kit etc. pressure on the program mounts and eventually, will force change. When you’re spending millions to screen for a rare cancer you need runs on the board…eventually, someone will ask the hard questions. It’s already started: why are fewer women having regular pap tests?
    I think it’s always a shock when an informed women fires back a response, they so rely on our ignorance and compliance.

  15. Fewer women are getting Pap tests but it is not due to being informed I fear. It is about being able to get birth control without getting a Pap test.

    Myself, I never really knew the stats and truth about Pap tests until doing some research and also finding this websites. I had bad experiences with pelvic exams from the start over thirty years ago. You had to get them for birth control. I just assumed that the pill caused the cancer or made it worse. No fuss about HPV then because they did not yet associate the virus with cervical cancer. After I did not need the pill so I skipped the exams and Pap test for over a decade.

    I got a new doctor and wondered why the pressure. I just refused and the started to ask myself why. I found out about the quotas, the doctor bonuses, the stas and just more about cervical cancer and cancer screening. The doctors never gave info about the test other than you had to have it or it was for cancer. I know a few women who were sent to colposcopy without much info and their reports of it were horrific. Although some seemed grateful their unnecessary and painful biopsy showed they did not have cancer.

    I have not had much support from other women about my choice to not test. I have also questioned mammograms and colonoscopies. (FOBT) is pathetically inaccurate.

    The downside is that I actually feel in ever want to go to the doctor when I am sick because of the harassment for paps. I might not seek help for problems down there etc. I also feel I cannot trust my doctor because he just sees my body as meat for cash.

  16. On a different note, if anyone feels like connecting to me(+ 2 NGOs, and 3 other girls) drop a line to leavegirlsalone@gmail.com. We are in the process of securing the first instalment of funding for an ambitious project, concerning the very topic of this amazing website.

    • Hi Karen,
      You can count me in for your project. I’ll email you the full document regarding your point above to me about opting out of the UK screening programme. I agree that we are being put through a lot of trouble to get out, when we never opted in in the first place.

      What grates with me is that the whole programme is like being on probation for a crime we haven’t committed. Having to report every 3 years to the authorities for an STD check is basically what the programme is about. Feeling that we don’t have access to other healthcare unless we go along with it all, is definitely an infringement of our human rights.

    • Didn’t know where to put this, but if you Google “Spain Thousands Protest Against Tougher Abortion Laws” the quote from one protestor was awesome. She had said “Bearing in mind the situation we have now with abortion, this law will manipulate our bodies & rob us of the right to choose.”

      Not something I would expect to hear in America, but maybe it tends to be bottled-up over here?

  19. Please be careful when reporting cervical cancer rates on this forum. I found from statistics that the number of new cases are reported and then the rates of cancer are reported from the total cases of all types of cancer. This inflated the numbers. These are not deaths or rates per population.

    In Ontario, Canada, 571 cases of cervical cancer were reported. The population of Ontario at the time was less than 12 million lets say. So 571 divided by 12,000,000 multiplied by 100% is 0.005%. Some people have been reporting statistics as high as 0.6% for Canada. Please check your resources.

    Some statistics are also highly extrapolated and manipulated. For example African countries tend to report high incidences of cervical cancer deaths. As most of them do not have much medical resources it is doubtful that autopsies to determine death are done when most women are never in a screening program or get treatments.

  20. What is a baseline mammogram?

    I am sceptical about mammogram screening as well. I am not interested in compressing and irritating my breasts. So approaching the screening age of 50, I want to be prepared.

    I was told that I would need a baseline mammogram at screening age start of 50 because I do not have high risk (no personal history or family history of breast cancer, less hormonal use etc).

    My understanding is that a baseline mammogram is done when a woman is younger and used for comparison over item as more screening mammograms are done. Then if anything is found ultrasounds are done. If a women finds a lump herself she is going to have a diagnostic mammogram and an ultrasound anyway.

    I greatly doubt that all these radiographer so keep these baseline records (required to store medical records for 10 years) and even if they would be used for comparison at all. If a tumor is found, it is a tumor and comparing it to a previous X-Ray is not going to change a diagnosis much? Same protocols followed.

    So why get more radiation from more screening mammograms? Since radiation causes cancer why would I want a baseline mammogram anyway or regular mammograms at all? The diagnostic mammograms are higher radiation but they are only used when needed such as finding a lump or dimpling or other sign of breast cancer.

    • Hi Moo,
      I declined my first mammogram summons as I’m over 50, but I’m so shocked that in the US and Canada, it is offered yearly and to very young women too, when there is evidence that the radiation DOES give you cancer, especially if done at a young age. The Cancer Research UK website states that radiation for medical reasons is indeed a factor – see here
      http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/types/breast/riskfactors/

      As a teenager, I showed up positive for tuberculosis and had to go for a chest X-ray. On the above website it states that people like myself who went for these chest X-rays now have a 3 fold increase for getting breast cancer as a result. Another great screening programme doing more harm than good (for some anyway!). For this reason I’ve decided I’ve had enough radiation, and will not be taking part in mammograms.

  22. http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/science-and-technology-committee/inquiries/parliament-2010/national-health-screening/?type=Written#pnlPublicationFilter

    This is promising, if it’s done the right way and they listen to the right people. Dr McCartney and several others have already made a submission.
    We are light years away from this sort of review in this country, we had the opportunity to introduce evidence based cervical screening, but after a lengthy and LONG overdue review looks like we’ll stay with outdated and excessive population pap testing. Not that it affects me, I’ve never taken part in the program and never will…I value and respect my cervix and the rest of my body.
    It says to me though that vested interests still control our programs, they have little to do with healthcare.

    • Elizabeth, this does look promising! Thank you for posting the link. From Dr. McCartney’s submission:
      14. NHS Screening
      c) Invitations and targets.

      “Screening invitations are sent out by a central office. However it appears that they come directly from the person’s GP. This is dishonest and designed to increase uptake rather than to increase informed choice. It has unintended consequences. For example, there are some patients who are so afraid of being pushed into cervical screening (because of pain, previous sexual assault, or informed dissent) that they become afraid to approach their GP about serious unrelated symptoms in case they are reprimanded or cajoled into screening. Rather than being allowed to make an informed choice, they feel as though their autonomy is not respected. This view has been formed from my own and other GPs’ experiences as there is scant or no research evidence investigating this aspect. Additionally, many readers have contacted me over the last few years to report their own similar experiences as patients” (Dr. Margaret McCartney). http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/WrittenEvidence.svc/EvidenceHtml/5793

    • Thank you for putting up this link to the UK parliamentary discussion of screening programmes. I read through several of the personal accounts. I really feel that these women were harmed by screening and lack of informed consent. It is appalling the total lack of information given about whether early detection of cancer (no symptoms) is really helpful. These women were made to feel like a piece of meat being pushed through the medical cancer mill. I am truly expressing compassion toward them and their families.

    • I was very pleased to see this. I hadn’t realised this was going on. The personal accounts are very moving and informative of the conveyor belt process to mastectomy, which this programme puts 20% of attendees on.

  23. I was watching the documentary called America The Beautiful: The Thin Commandments. Essentially, it’s about society’s obsession with thinness. Not the fit or healthy or this-is-my-body-type thin, either. The unhealthy type of thin. Anyway, the Centers for Disease and Control Prevention or CDC publicized that the total number of deaths per year from obesity added up to 400,000. People challenged that number and it got lowered to about 350,000 per year. The number was challenged again, and finally someone on the board came clean and said that really only 25,814 deaths per year were actually caused by obesity. That number was padded by people who were perhaps “overweight” but died from completely unrelated causes and led healthy lives otherwise. That’s quite an inflation on the actual number of people who are harmed by obesity. The CDC are the same people who promote vaccinations and push screening programs as well as medications. It’s safe to say that doing your own research is a safe bet, especially here in the US where the CDC essentially works as a marketing agent for the medical industry.

    • Here is a quote: “The director for the CDC at the time stated that the CDC didn’t plan to use the much lower obesity mortality figure in its public awareness campaign, nor did it plan to reduce its fight against obesity.”

      • So they’re sticking to the same course, no matter what the situation? That thinking seems to show up in other things as well. Doing something in spite of a refusal, continuing something in spite of a directive to desist, saying something is safe when it’s not, saying something is accurate when it’s not, acting like there’s a major prevalence of something when there isn’t.

        I just started reading Birth as an American Rite of Passage & it hits a lot of subjects. One of them being the pyschological underpannings to various things that they do. Some people think that they (“they” meaning pretty much anybody certified) never do anything out of deeper mental alignments & that there are never any ulterior motives.

        It’s a very rough read, but it’s useful information. Makes a cultural point, too. I know I’ve mentioned this a few times, but it’s striking how much freedom is (or was) talked about in America & yet how much it doesn’t functionally work that way.

    • That obesity thing is interesting. A lot of people ARE fat & die early, but maybe it’s cuased by stuff that causes obesity? Like not dying of the gunshot, but dying of lead poisoning? I’m not saying they made an innocent mistake, but maybe there’s something else causing a problem that they’re not telling people about (maybe because they said it was safe). Seems there’s a cause of miscarriages that gets unsung, too.

      Something I just read about was that the things that get added to food & water cause “stress problems.” It’s not being stressed-out, but these chemicals & such causing the same problems as stress. Effects on the nervous system & on hormones cause various problems, not just the “stress-related” ones.

      By-the-way: How have things been going with people pestering you about getting all kinds of tests done? I remember you saying that a lot of people were trying to grind you into doing things before. Anybody still trying to goad you into things or has that gotten better?

      • Essentially, yes. Regardless of the truth, they’re going to keep doing as they please. Also, BMI is not an accurate way to measure health, so plenty of healthy people are categorized as being obese. If you saw them in person, some of them would even be very thin. So the health problems of these individuals were probably counted in the publicized mortality rate, considering someone’s BMI is how they measure obesity. Disregarding the truth over greed or other vested interests seems to happen a lot in this day and age, though.

        I’m sure that’s a wonderful book! Honestly, I don’t think I could bring myself to read it, though. Intentionally looking into things like that kind of just turns my stomach anymore. Another interesting concept that ties in with the ideal of people “never doing anything out of deeper mental alignments” is that Kristin Cavallari (I think that’s how you spell her name) publicly admitted to not vaccinating her children. The comments on the article were completely tearing her apart! One doctor even referred to people who aren’t doctors as laymen and said they shouldn’t have an opinion since they haven’t studied it. A lot of the comments were backed up saying that there’s never been a study to show a link between vaccines and health issues and since our bodies are already made of chemicals, it’s just adding to what our body naturally produces and therefore unable to cause harm. The truth is, there’s plenty of unbiased information out there for people who are interested. Vaccines CAN cause problems. Of course medical organizations aren’t going to do studies on the relation between health issues and vaccines because that would mean less money and possibly less health issues for people, which in return would mean even less money! Furthermore, it’s a bit like mixing lemon juice and baking soda. It makes a wonderful exfoliant for your skin that causes no harm. There are chemical reactions which cause it to have cleansing properties. If you mix baking soda with vinegar, those are still chemicals, and natural chemicals at that – but I certainly would NOT use them on my skin. That may have been a poor example, but hopefully it was a decent enough illustration of the point. All chemicals react to each other, but the reaction isn’t necessarily something you’d want on much less in your body.

        Obesity is a problem, yes. We as humans do need to exercise regularly and eat healthy organic foods – and that’s important. I have my own theory about the higher number of obese people in relation to their mortality rate. The chemicals used in non-organic foods are typically different forms of growth hormones to make them grow faster or larger. Some people can eat non-organic all their lives and lead healthy lives because they were born with a stronger immune system. However, for other people, their body takes in those chemicals and it affects their body accordingly. Of course, the FDA has approved these chemicals so the medical industry isn’t going to blame that for peoples’ health problems. So that would be a case in which someone did not die from obesity, rather chemicals destroying their body over time. This actually relates back to the point I was trying to make in the last paragraph. Not all chemicals are meant to be in the human body.

        You essentially said the same thing about food & water contaminated with chemicals. It can cause a lot of problems. Not just stress, but over time they can cause diabetes and even some cancers. Oh how I long for the good old days when everybody had their own garden and no one had to think twice about this sort of thing. By the way, it is illegal to use GMOs in many other places. The UK has a law requiring to label whether or not products have GMOs or added chemicals. I’m sure similar laws exist throughout Europe. Australia is currently fighting against it, and it’s looking like the people are going to win. It is illegal to use them in most places in Asia. The US seems to be the only country okay with it because we have people saying “your body is made up of chemicals, so more chemicals won’t hurt it”.

        Things have been going well with that. Nobody has mentioned anything. I’ve just been eating better and exercising and enjoying life and trying not to stress. I’m happier than I’ve ever been and I feel at peace with life. So to me, that’s really all that’s important. I feel a lot more confident now, too, so if anyone ever says anything, I think I’ll be able to dismiss it much more easily, rather than getting worked up over it.

      • Glad to hear all that, Ro. It does seem that a lot of the world has a problem with those things (India’s another place where they’re clashing with that stuff). If nothing else, it’s not digested as well- causing someone to be fat.

        On that level, (herbs, dietary things, effects of different conditions with food, etc…) Arthur Haines seems good. He’s got a website I started reading & he wrote a book I’m planning on getting. He’s also on Paleoplanet.com sometimes. I know I’ve mentioned Rosemary Gladstar a few times, but this is someone I didn’t know about that also seems very knowledgeable. There’s also John R. Christopher & I was just reading a book called Cure Tooth Decay that mentions nutrition & physcial degeneration (actually, that’s the title of a book by Weston A. Price). Just thought I’d through a few of those in.

        I get what you mean & it IS stomach-turning to read some of it. I can’t believe anyone finds that situation suitable! I also can’t believe that a woman’s mother would teach her in a way that bolsters their way of doing things. That goes for a lot of things, but so much of pregnancy & childbirth is very hostile- however low-key something may or may not be.

        A big part of why I’m looking to move out of America is because I want to find a place that’s not so pervasively dictatorial & basically, antagonistic to life. It’s like the Borg Collective over here! I know that doesn’t apply to everyone, but it applies enough to cause problems- whether that’s what the majority is or not (and I’m not really sure which).

        I really hope I can get it because of my heritage. It certainly seems like it, but if not- that’s going to be a major project to get all the paperwork handled & they might give me a run-around or half the story or something on any step of this whole thing.

      • I’ve mentioned this before, but I think this country definitely values all science as law and fact rather than theory. When looking back at history, science has been proven wrong many times. For example the whole “the earth is flat” thing. I was reading an article which had to do with religion and most of the comments were talking about how science was the be-all end-all, our emotions are just chemicals, empathy has to do with evolution, humans don’t have souls, etc. If a scientist says something, it isn’t questioned or debated. Since the medical field is an extension of science, it makes sense that the same ideology applies. Philosophy and the philosophy of religion/spirituality is more common in other countries, especially throughout Europe and Asia. They have an entire university dedicated to philosophy alone in Scotland. Since philosophy encourages people to constantly question things and figure out what they believe as an individual, and what is REALLY true, I think it has impacted those cultures more heavily.

        I came across his website not too long ago! He has some very good information. I haven’t ready any of Rosemary Gladstar, but I probably will in the future. I know you’ve mentioned her before, but so have a few other people so her material definitely sounds like it’s worth the read.

        I agree. Childbirth seems so hostile and you always hear about complications. The medical industry insists there would be more risks with natural births or home births, but they never mention all of the terrible things and mishaps of medicalized births. There seems to be a much more laid-back approach elsewhere, and home birth seems to be much more acceptable in some other countries. Developed countries (whatever that really means, developed countries don’t always act developed), might I add.

        In regards to your comment about the general society here being antagonistic to life, the US has the highest rates of death and illness among all age groups. I don’t know it’s from over-diagnosis or chemicals or what-have-you. Either way, that’s the case.

        I know that some countries will allow you to apply for citizenship once you’ve worked there for a while. Another option you might be able to look into is to work for an international company here in the US. After you’ve established with them, put in a request to be transferred to whichever country you’re interested in. If the request goes through, then you can apply for citizenship or dual citizenship if you don’t want to lose your American citizenship. Best of luck with applying for citizenship! I hope everything works out for you.

  24. I am not particularly against cancer screening if people want it. I do not like the lack of informed consent, coercion, treatments pushed, registries that gather personal information without consent, lack of healthy lifestyle information given by medical industry. I would rather public funds be spent more wisely than on all the screening propaganda. I believe cholestrol screening and medications have caused the most damage. Time will tell.

    People are going to get cancer and everyone dies. It is just that some cancers will kill a person and others are slow growing and will not. The medical industry is saying they cannot distinguish between the lethal and non lethal forms so they push treatment on anything found. The problem of overdiagnosis and overtreatment is huge. So really is there more research being done on that aspect?

    As many of the women in the uk parliamentary review explained that being a cancer patient greatly affected their lives. Someone getting a cancer diagnosis is likely to suffer in personal and family life, careers interrupted or destroyed, not being able to get insurance (even travel without insurance) and not to mention the suffering from treatments that sometimes turn out to be unneccessary. So getting an early diagnosis may or may not “save” their life but it is often not worth it. It might not extend their life with any quality. Many people die from complications of cancer treatments. I know several.

    There also should be more options for people who want to do cancer screenings but would like monitoring rather than immediate treatments. I would like the option to screen and then follow alternative treatments rather than have to leave the system if I do not “comply”. However no doctors will seem to discuss natural therapies, either diet or herbs or accupuncture even chiropactics. I know the harassment is bad enough to screen but once a person is diagnosed then they are harassed even more to get treatments.

    My own mother refused cancer diagnostic tests in the hospital. She had been sick for months although her doctor was very slow to get her any diagnostic test. Once she had a scan that showed multiple “masses” she just wanted all the testing to stop. The hospital just offered her morphine. They pulled out her IV and she died in a few days. I believe during that time she was given no food or water. She could not eat anyway but I think she died of dehydration rather than cancer. This even further degrades my confidence in the medical system.

    How does refusing cancer treatments affect a person’s life. If they required other medical attention is that refused? Can they still access social support programmes for income supplements, housing? We know many women are threatened with doctors telling them they are banned until they get a pap or refused medications other than hormonal birth control. So what if they have an abnormal pap and refuse colposcopy or LEEP. Does all hell break out?

    Right now I going to use online diagnostic tools and consult with a herbal store if I am sick other than bleeding, broken bones. I am avoiding seeing a doctor just because of all the cancer screening harassment. Maybe that is not wise. I think eventually I will be telling my doctor off and just occasionally using a walk-in clinic when necessary.

    Making healthy lifestyle changes such as an organic diet is just out of reach financially for most people. Exercising can be done at home. However many people are working two jobs and family obligations make it very difficult for them to take care of themselves. Poor women are especially vulnerable to the dilemma. They might not have time but do not have the money for transportation to buy and cook healthy foods. They have more stress. So what is the point of some pink ribbon campaign offering them a free pap. Ridiculous.

    • Moo – I agree, especially with the last part of your post, “So what is the point of some pink ribbon campaign offering them a free pap. Ridiculous.” Just imagine if all of the money used on these campaigns went towards stopping the production of chemically enhanced, genetically modified foods and providing GOOD food for everyone, particularly those in need and/or of lower income. The world would be a much better place and there would be far fewer people going hungry. It’s sickening to think about just how much money gets wasted on campaigns when it could be going towards making a big difference in the world. They could use it on food, finding safe and natural methods for treating different diseases, providing homes for the homeless – the possibilities are endless. I have no idea how much money is spent on these campaigns, but I have no doubt that between Canada, the US, Australia, and the UK combined it’s probably easily in the billions. Disgusting. I’m not saying that screening shouldn’t be available for those who want it. If they do – great! Information should be available for those who want it. But it should be honest, unbiased information that allows women to make an informed decision. Furthermore, the sharing of this information should not be so publicized that it causes women to have unnecessary worry and wastes valuable resources that could be used to help people. Information could be publicized so that people are aware of the screening programs without it being as overboard as it is right now.

      • They seem to want all these problems, just as its own thing. Like I’ve said about a few things: it’s malice over money.

        As for screening- I honestly think if it exists, they’ll try to impose it on people. It won’t be an option, it’ll be an imposition. That’s the way they tick & they’d probably be this way even if they weren’t in this kind of situation (although, an easier angle might add to things).

  25. I just wanted to show you this- I was reading the archived comments of the unnecessary pap smears blogcritics thread, and found this infuriating idiot who called himself “Dough Hunter” and claimed he is a gyn with over 47 years of professional experience. He left so vile and misogynistic comments( “It’s a good thing you have men to make the hard choices like this for you, they go out in the world and make decisions that save lives not get hysterical”.. …”Women, especially educated ones, are choosing selfishness over childbearing “for the benefit of society” at a rate that will cause the collapse of first world nations (barring sufficient third world immigration). You, individually, are choosing selfish devotion to your vagina over the lives of thousands of people.”) , that all the other commenters assumed he is a troll, but then-
    9608 – Sarah P
    Feb 20, 2013 at 9:27 am
    There is a Richard Douglas Hunter who is a Gynecologist in CA with a listed graduation date of 1965. It’s got to be a coincidence though, doesn’t it? A professional wouldn’t use terms like ‘smelly snatches’.”

    rest of the archive here: http://unnecessarypapsmears.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/over-10000-lost-comments-on-unnecessary-pap-smears-find-a-home/comment-page-39/

    (Imagine a vomiting internet meme here)

    • Sounds like he’s being himself & that’s to be an abusive asshole. “To make decisions for you”- right there applauding imposed situations of this nature. “Choosing selfish devotion to your vagina over the lives of thousands of people”- so thousands of people will die because someone doesn’t get these kinds of tests done?

      Sounds like what a doctor would say if they were to be more without guile.

    • Karen, you have been doing some fine reading! I’m sure those of us who commented regularly all remember “Doug Hunter”! His comments brought on some fine retorts, including one by Jacqui that made reference to his “smelly wrinkled ball sack” ha ha. BTW the format on the unnecessary pap smears site has been changed recently. The format looks more like the old Blogcritics site now: http://unnecessarypapsmears.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/over-10000-lost-comments-on-unnecessary-pap-smears-find-a-home/#comments

      • This is great I personally like the new format much more- and this archive is so important, it should be regarded as a piece of women’s history- the first online space for women to went their anger against a form of structural violence, perpetuated by the medical industry, for profit and power ( and 10,000 plus comments without the pro-s taking over!- not one doctor has managed to say anything convincing ).

      • Also I really do wonder, why is it taking so long for Blogcritics to restore the comments? I am no believer in any conspiracy theories, BUT the few mainstream articles stating the obvious (ie that pelvic exams on asymptomatic women are harmful, that the pap test is outdated and risky) were released only after Obamacare, and the evidence has been here for decades, it does makes me wonder….

  26. Wow tones of racism and eugenics. Give the infertility causing treatments to the poor uneducated woman because you are doing the world a favour, I suppose that this Nazi only thinks that rich white women should have babies. Probably he is a sperm donor. Yuck.

  27. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2582507/Teenage-model-dies-cervical-cancer-doctors-refused-smear-test-young.html

    AAARGH… the Daily Mail (some affectionately call it The Daily Fail) is a right wing, misogynistic, xenophobic UK newspaper. They started a whole bloody campaign to lower the screening age for cervical cancer. Such stories feature regularly – but of course it does not make them representative in any way. They cherry pick tragic things happening to support their own agendas. They would never publish a story of a young man who had prostate cancer and died of it…

    • OMG NO!!!! This newspaper is called The Daily Nazi in our household, for obvious reasons. It openly supported Hitler and Nazism during the 1930’s, and regularly runs hate campaigns against non-white members of the UK population today. It is really time that our health service stepped in to stop the lies and misinformation about cervical screening, but no doubt it will stay silent, hoping that these mad campaigns to lower the screening age will shore up adherence to its screening programmes.

    • This a very tragic death of a young woman. She died because her doctors made a mistake. Cancer SCREENING and Refusing a diagnostic test is very different. Perhaps she asked for a Pap test and her doctor made a mistake in not giving her one because she had symptoms and said she was too young to have the test funded. It might not have even made a difference if the cancer was progressing so quickly anyway. She might have died from the treatments but we will never know the truth.

      Choice was mentioned. With the screening programmes most women feel they have have NO CHOICE. Why do they want to extend NO CHOICE to younger women? I would say let women have choice then there would be more funding for younger women who want or need a Pap test.

      Propaganda at its best.

      I recently found someone on the internet who I knew 20 years ago. I remember that she had cervical cancer. She stopped going to doctors and did her natural alternative therapies. Sorry do not know what. Today she is running her own business and has two children aged 10 and 8.

      • This is a case of medical negligence, plain and simple. Our clinical guidelines state very clearly that a young woman in her situation should be examined. Symptoms demand diagnosis, not screening. I wouldn’t want a pap smear even if I had symptoms – it’s far too unreliable.
        This girl’s mother should be suing the doctors who neglected her daughter, not starting some nonsense campaign.

        No doubt, Ada, The screening Nazi’s welcome the media frenzy surrounding these very rare cases – after all, fear is how they get bums on seats, right? To hell with informed consent.
        And we can hardly expect the health service to correct any lies or misinformation when they’re been telling big fat porkies all these years!

        People never see the big picture when it comes to screening… we pump millions of pounds into bad programs which benefit few and harm many. In the meantime, many other areas of healthcare are struggling with limited resources…
        Think about it. What did Angela Raffle say about cervical screening? You have to screen 1000 women for 35 years to save ONE life. That’s at least 11,000 smear tests done to find ONE case. Factor in further tests, colposcopies, biopsies, ‘preventative’ treatments etc. etc… not forgetting the incentive payments for GP’s… that’s a HELL of a lot of money spent trying to save a single life. Meanwhile, people are dying through lack of care, denied medications or surgery which could save their lives because it’s deemed ‘too expensive’… yet we have the money to keep the screening machines rolling. It just doesn’t make sense.

        Oh, and by the way, regarding the opt-out procedure… my mother was offered a smear test a few years ago, completely out of the blue. She went to the surgery to have some bloods taken (she has arthritis) and the young newbie nurse asked her if she’d like one. She politely declined. She was 71 at the time, so if this nurse was looking to boost the screening figures she picked the wrong lady!
        Anyway, a few days later she received a disclaimer letter from the surgery. Just required a signature. No counselling, no faff… I did explain to her that she didn’t need to opt out because testing is supposed to stop at 65 and the surgery obviously screwed up, but she signed it and returned it anyway. Just goes to show, they can make things nice and easy for us when we’re no longer a cash cow.
        And no, I didn’t make a copy. *kicks herself*.

  28. Moo, it’s disgraceful that they continue to mislead young women. (and all women for that matter) Long standing research shows those under 30 don’t benefit from pap tests, so urging young women to have them just means LOTS are harmed in day procedure after false positive pap tests. It’s risk for no benefit.
    Also, placing your faith in pap testing could cost you dearly, young women tend to get adenocarcinoma of the cervix, an even rarer form of cc and usually missed by pap tests. (false negative cases) So booming up the pap test can mean young women ignore symptoms and rely on their “normal” result. Young Finnish and Dutch women are urged to see a doctor if they develop unusual and persistent symptoms, like pelvic pain or bleeding after sex.
    For all the testing and treating of young women here, in the States and elsewhere, we have the same (or more) cases and deaths in young women as countries that don’t test at all before age 30. If the pap test worked we’d have fewer cases and deaths in young women.

    It also, amazes me that doctors would do a pap test on a symptomatic women, how could you trust such an inaccurate test? These women should be referred for proper investigation. Screening is inappropriate for symptomatic women. Diagnostic testing is very different to screening. The mileage made out of Jade Goody’s demise was opportunistic and deceptive, she had an adenocarcinoma and was symptomatic, she delayed further treatment after being traumatized by a biopsy (and it sounds like some sort of treatment) when she was only 16 or 17 years old. (she had abnormal cells removed were her words, from memory)
    Why on earth was a 16 year old girl having pap tests anyway? Jade Goody said the early treatment put her off having more treatment, hardly surprising…if we adopted evidence based testing and gave women balanced information informed decisions could be made.
    If Jade Goody had been Dutch, there would have been no pap tests and the advice would be: see a doctor if you become symptomatic, can’t help but think she may have been better off if she’d been protected from excess and non-evidence based screening.
    I cannot imagine how distressing it would be for a teenager to have pap testing and “treatments”. (something many older women find traumatizing)

    • How did they finally diagnose this, anyway? Also, why didn’t they offer that beforehand? This article completely omits alternatives (isn’t there that CSA blood test that’s supposed to be very reliable?). It also would never read “Young woman dies from complications in surgery for misdiagnosed cancer.” They mention any other complications or aftereffects of treatments. They mention any miscarriages caused by getting these tests or someone committing suicide over one or more happening.

      • Alex, I understand the CSA blood test was blocked and never saw the light of day, there are powerful vested interests protecting population pap testing, they don’t want women self-testing or understanding the significance of HPV. Keeping us in the dark makes it easier to push excess. Imagine pap tests being offered to the 5% of women actually at risk rather than 100% of women (or attempting to “catch” that many), that would send a fortune down the drain.

    • Thank you Elizabeth for clarifying. The doctors made a mistake. That young woman should have been given diagnostic tests and not just refused a pap. The Pap test is not a diagnostic test and rather not useful for investigating symptoms. The situation of this young woman’s death makes me very upset.

    • I find it disturbing that hear in the states they have pushed back the screening age from 18 to 21 like thats any better. The Acog sees woman 21 “should” have a pap every till they are 30 then if no abnormals are found they can wait 3 years in between. I herd that they conceder this age group high rick for stds and that is the reson really thats no excuse. And quite franckly I am sick of people like the Acog making asumptions about my life and lumping all woman togeather. There are virgins and woman who use protection. If this is true why dont they push for males to be screened too. Its like the Acog thinks they are womans care takers and know whats best for us. Now they also want all woman to have domestic viloance screening even tho some woman are not in a relationship at all. Its one thing after the other to keep woman traped to these exams. This is in the US.

      • It must be to mislead women into testing for STIs and to generate lots of excess biopsies and over-treatment, because the evidence has been clear for ages: these women do not benefit from pap testing, but produce the most false positives, and testing every year means BINGO – a goldmine of over-treatment. You’re right too, they focus on women, men get STIs as well…BUT testing for STIs should always been our choice, whether we’re male or female.

  29. I dont know if anyone has seen the Mtv show Ackward with a teen girl having sex all the time. It is a American show. Well on one part of the show the teen girl went to the gyn to get birth control and her friend went with her. Well I do not remember the exact wording , but she was nervis and told her friend she didnt know what the doctor was gona do. Now on the show this girl is like 16 or 17 and her friend was telling her that the doctor was gona give her a pap smear and swab her cervix. And said that birth control and this exam was something that was all on the woman something woman had to bare. It made me angry for the fact this show was teaching teen girls that they should just ecepted that they will have to have a pap for birth control and gyn exam also they have no bussnes giveing a teen girl a pap smear. It just ticked me off. It seems these shows are always showing girls and woman going to the gyno all the time like its normal and right whaen your healthy. There has to be a brainwashing idea with these shows or they really think all woman go to a gyn.

    • Hi Kleigh,
      Disgusting, sending the wrong message to teenage girls and possibly putting some off using birth control. Even America has moved to no testing before 21, of course, many doctors are ignoring the changes and also, even if they skip the pap test, might demand a breast or pelvic exam. Sadly, doctors, especially here and in the States are not to be trusted. A research project here found some of our doctors test girls under 17, they mentioned this was inappropriate, but more needs to be done to discipline and educate these doctors. Allowing an “anything goes” approach risks the health and welfare of teenagers and also, sets them up for abuse by predatory doctors.

      • Yes elizabeth, it does put woman off using birth control. I know that is one reson why my teen cusin refused to go on the pill my aunt offerd to take her to a gyno but she freked out and got upset a lil while latter she got pregnant. This sick idea of forcing woman to have paps has left alot of woman and young girls in bondage. Most woman have no idea the pill has nothin to do with birth control. My aunt is a good woman but thinks woman have to go to a gyn if they have a uti she thinks its connected to the reprodutive organs. I wonder who put that in her head. once I had a uti i went to a walk in clinic with a PA and all they did was take a urin sample. My aunt told me i should go have a gyno exam to make sure i was ok. Bc she has been made to belive utis are a gyn problem and olnly gyns can test for them.

    • I bet if she had a black eye from getting beaten-up by her boyfriend, she wouldn’t say it’s something a woman had to bare. It’s so appalling that women think it’s wrong in some way to have bodily autonomy.

      It’s like: This is something I have a problem with, due to the mechanics. Oh, wait- it’s doesn’t count as a problem, because reality doesn’t apply to something that happens in a medical setting.” For Christ’s sake, it’s like someone told them “No only means no when a doctor doesn’t argue.”

      They never mention that this is a hig risk & low utility method of diagnosing something that’s massively rare to begin with. They also don’t touch on anything deliberately done by doctors like lying & tellsomeone that they have a problem or causing one themselves. Both of these things would generate a repeat costs if someone is coming in for more tests & follow-ups. Plus them getting extra bonuses for reaching target numbers. Both of these are possible with this subject, but it’s somehow immature to mention it- because it’s an invasive situation.

      It’s also sometimes considered immature to mention invasiveness as it’s own problem, just like pain is it’s own problem. This being antagonistic to someone’s alignment is deemed immature & something to ridicule. As if it’s not a good enough reason & someone is going to counter someone’s action of not getting these things done to them. I guess “sexual distress” is the word for having a problem with something on that level, whether it’s imposed or not. Maybe it’d be good for someone to know & use the term in a confrontation on this subject?

    • Some young American women are using Planned Parenthood HOPE plan. They do not need a pelvic exam to get birth control pills, just answer a questionnaire. I believe however it is offered to women under 25 only. ( really? Another magical age).

      Women are given STD tests without asking. It is assumed that they could have them without knowing. Even if they say that they and their partners were both virgins before and neither with anyone else, the answer is “oh Dear, now, they are lie and TELL YOU that they were virgins.” The same thinking about women who are virgins unless they are grossly overweight are treated the same.

      If people want STD tests, fine. There are clinical urine tests. What bothers me about this new Cobas test is that it is a vaginal swab. Then a speculum exam will be used and so why not do the whole thing? with all the tests, pap, bimanual, rectal while they are at it. The Cobas could easily be marketed as a self test but it is not approved for that.

      Even UTI can be treated with herbs or alternate therapies. You have to wonder why those yeast infection treatments suddenly came on the market for retail sales. Women can also buy kits from the pharmacy for BV detection (bacterial vaginstis), ovulation predictors and pregnancy tests. Now one has to run to the doctor for all that. It just costs too much. So why the stall to get HPV tests into the retail market?

      • Moo
        I have concerns about the HOPE program as well, many women have reported online they were pressured at the first consult and it continued, the pressure increasing at each consult. One woman was told she could “delay” the exams, making it clear they’d be “required” at some point.
        I think it’s safer if women go in prepared, some branches may be better than others and it may also, depend on the individual, some people see it as their duty to convince you to have these tests. I have a sinking feeling though this is an attempt to get you through the door, on the Pill and then the pressure starts…(if it didn’t start at the first consult)
        The thinking is probably: once on the Pill, you’ll want to stay on the Pill so easier to coerce/pressure you, just having you in the consult room might be enough to get you over the line and in the stirrups.
        I’ve heard too many women complain about this program to accept it really is easy access to the Pill without the unnecessary exams and tests.

    • For Karen & Kleigh: Thanks Karen for the kevinmd story. Amazing the md author is female. This woman needs to be eval’d for narcissism. Only in her own mind can she be such a positive force for patients. Every time she has a bm plants everywhere spontaneously pollinate!

      Re MTV. What do you expect? Come the age of gansta rap, women are now classified as whores, pigs, and things men screw and throw away. This is MTV trying to be responsible…

      • Several young women in the office were upset over the uncut video clip by Robin Thicke, a girl was naked at the start, (long distance view) he was in a suit, and during the clip the girls dance around topless in tiny g-strings, again the men are fully dressed. The song goes, “I know you want it” basically using the No means Yes theory. On the wall behind Thicke are the words, “Robin Thicke has a big dick”….very tasteful stuff.
        I could see what they were upset about, but then I’ve fumed over gratuitous female nudity for many years and listened to people (usually men) justifying it by saying full male nudity is pornographic, but full female is not, yet if we walk down the street naked we can be arrested for indecent exposure. Always sounded like a thin excuse to me.

  30. http://www.healthline.com/health-news/women-hpv-test-could-replace-annual-pap-test-031814

    “I think in the short term, even if the FDA adopts the recommendation, most gynecologists will continue with contesting,” Patel said. “This allows us to see who is at risk by being high risk HPV positive, but also allows us to pick up dysplasia and treat those lesions so they do not progress to cervical cancer.””

    This makes no sense because HPV- women are not at risk and don’t need “dysplasia” or anything else treated. Seems to me they want to add the HPV test to general excess, but don’t want to give up jumping on every tiny “abnormality” on the poor cervix.
    Of course, the evidence based program in the Netherlands will not even offer pap tests to HPV- women and that’s MOST women (about 95%) so that means no removal of “dysplasia” “pre-cancer” or any of the other nonsense in not-at-risk women.

  31. Now here is a great idea, let’s make appointments for all women in the target age range to have mammograms then they have to show up or re-schedule – we don’t want anyone missing out on their test, do we?
    How unbelievable is the attitude, do we make unrequested appointments for men to have cancer screening? No, it seems this level of disrespect is reserved for women.
    Hope it never gets off the ground or women throw the invitation in the bin and send a letter of complaint. Honestly…it makes me see red. I’m surprised Finland apparently adopts this coercive and disrespectful tactic. They might get their backsides sued off with so much evidence now pointing to serious over-diagnosis and uncertainty of benefit, you can hardly make an informed decision when you’re strong-armed into the testing room. A pre-arranged (unsolicited) appointment means others have made the decision FOR you, grossly inappropriate.
    ww.warwickdailynews.com.au/news/support-for-breast-screen-initiative/2188577/#c819804

  32. Some doctor bragging about how he aims to “stop being a doormat to patients” http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/03/stop-doormat-patients.html
    ““Because you are not taking your blood pressure medicine properly and you aren’t trying any of my suggestions about exercise or stress reduction, I am going to instruct my office to only schedule your appointments with me at 8am on Mondays. That will require you to make an additional effort to get here early and wade through the traffic. I will be available to you for emergencies, but I reserve my prime time appointments for my patients who work with me to improve their health issues.””

    Ewwwhehehe, who the hell these people think they are?

    • The point is that patients are consumers. They are customers. They want a certain level of customer service or they will take their business, that is their healthcare elsewhere. With an insurance model. These are rate payers.

      Even in a publicly funded system. It is funded by tax rate payers and voters. They can demand what they want.

      So why do these service providers, doctors, think that they can book more than 9 patients per hour, keep people waiting for hours in their reception area, not let them have appointments when they are sick for days etc? If there is no choice ok but when there is choice patients leave. Dentists already know this and there is never the hassle with them.

      Every business has difficult customers and there are skills to learn to deal with them.

  33. That’s why a respectful working relationship is so important. My GP is patient and listens, she knows I won’t simply follow orders, I challenge her from time to time, but in some ways that makes her job easier. She knows my refusal to have pap tests, mammograms and a colonoscopy is coming from a sound base and knows I won’t be suing her if I’m unlucky enough to develop breast cancer etc.
    There are doctors I couldn’t work with, they’d be out for me. I’m amazed what some women put up with, rudeness, coercion…I’d be heading for the door and then sending a letter of complaint. Doctors are not our guardians, disciplinarians, judges or anything else, they’re providing a service. Just as I choose my hairdresser and accountant, I also, choose my doctor. Who is the right fit for me? Of course, I was not so brave as a young woman and chose to avoid doctors like the plague. Middle age has it’s advantages!

    • And experience is a great teacher – IF you’re capable of critical thinking.

      I was talking to a colleague of mine some time ago, we started talking about the ‘Race for life’ (oh how I despise all this ‘Cancer awareness’ B.S.) and ended up on the subject of Pap tests. Turns out she had a cone biopsy for CIN3 at the tender age of 22, and of course classes herself as a survivor. So she was pretty shocked when I told her what I thought of her precious test. We got into quite a heated debate when I said I don’t have them anymore.

      Anyway, I did manage to make her aware of things she’d never considered before.
      For instance, our NHS sales brochure – sorry, ‘information leaflet’ – states that ‘abnormality can be caused by many things’. And then neglects to inform the reader of what these ‘things’ might be.
      I asked a lot of questions to which she didn’t know the answer, and I think it finally dawned on her that her knowledge was very limited and she agreed that the ‘powers that be’ seemed to be withholding information. Result!

      One of the things we talked about was the fact her doctor had told her the CIN3 had a 1 in 3 chance of progressing into cancer.
      I said, ‘That means 2 out of 3 WON’T progress. Yet how many women do you think, when they’re told they have a ‘pre-cancerous’ condition, tell the doctor they don’t want treatment? That they’d rather monitor the condition and only treat it if it gets worse?’
      Of course, she said she didn’t think anyone would take the risk of it becoming cancerous.
      The only way you can be sure if a condition – any condition – is going to get worse without treatment is to adopt the watchful waiting approach. How do they know precisely how many dysplasia/CIN cases would progress if doctors routinely slice off anything they don’t like the look of? It’s simply not logical, Captain!

      You know… if a woman goes for a routine mammogram (count me out!), and they find something ‘suspicious’, it requires further testing to determine the exact nature of the abnormality. Most of them aren’t tumours, and even if it is, it’s not necessarily a threat.
      However… what if, instead of running further tests, they simply tell the woman, ‘it MIGHT be pre-cancerous (DCIS) or cancer, but we can’t be sure. So we’ll just take the breast off anyway, ya know, just in case, and then the pathology will be able to tell if it’s cancer or not.’
      Outrageous, right? But I’m sure that if this was ‘the norm’, many women would accept this barbaric treatment without question. Probably come away from the whole experience feeling grateful to have escaped cancer, instead of being angry at being butchered.

      But isn’t this exactly what is done to the cervix? Treat everything just to be on the safe side because none of the tests are reliable and they can’t differentiate between real disease and fluctuations which may be due to your hormones playing silly beggars!

      ‘We’ll slice ‘n dice regardless of your biopsy results – IF you had a biopsy, that is. If the tissue we cut away shows signs of disease, we’ll swim in the warm glow of having saved another life, even though the ‘disease’ might have regressed on it’s own.
      If we treat you, a la conisation, and the tissue shows benign changes, we’ll pat you on the head and tell you what a lucky girl you are because we removed all the ‘pre-cancer’ and you will walk away believing you have escaped death. No matter how awful the experience was, no matter if the ‘treatment’ caused permanent damage, you will sing our praises to the high heavens and tell everyone how ‘important’ the pap test is because you believe it saved your life. It didn’t, but we’ll never admit that we make mistakes, and you will never find out. You don’t check your own pathology reports, you just believe what we tell you, right? So overdiagnosis and overtreatment will remain our dirty little secret.
      And thus, by bullying other women into testing, you will ensure we have a steady stream of frightened, compliant women desperate to be ‘saved’ streaming through our doors and lining our pockets for many years to come. Kerching!’

      Elizabeth, I wish I could approach the subject with the calmness you posess. Seems middle age has shortened my temper. Must be my hormones, eh? 😉

      • Re: The cutting off body parts because of abnormalities thing. You know what I just realized? I’ve never heard of a man’s prostate or testicles being cut or removed because of cancer or benign tumors or anything of the sort. It seems that only a woman’s body parts aren’t important and a man must keep all of his. That really irks me. Perhaps I’m a bit out there with my ideology on this, but I truly do believe that there are natural cures and treatments that don’t cause any harm to the person for ailments and diseases. Obviously, everyone’s body is different and so treatments would not work on everyone (medical treatments don’t work for everyone either, I can’t tell you how many times taking a medication [even for a short period of time, as I have never had a regularly prescribed prescription] has made my symptoms worse or given me new ones) and sometimes diseases are invasive. If that wasn’t the case, we’d all just live forever. But when I look at older civilizations such as the Roman Empire or older Egyptian culture or even the natives here in the US, they had all natural cures for things and the life expectancy was no worse than today. In fact, it seems as though it was better. Those are just my two cents on the matter. As I said, that ideology may seem a bit out there and I may be wrong, but I just have a hunch that there are successful natural cures out there.

      • Hi Kate, I completely agree with your latest post here. In chatting with a colleague, I too revealed that I had not had a smear test in many years, and got a look of horror and amazement that I had managed to stay alive all this time without having my cervix scraped on a regular basis. She launched into how I absolutely must get it done, but fell silent when I casually mentioned that I had no intention of doing so, as I had opted out of the programme.

        Just searching the internet and the NHS sites are full of personal accounts of women, who have just been saved from the jaws of death, and they always say that once their organs had been removed and sent for analysis, they were then found to have cancer in them, so wasn’t it a great job they caught it early. A common thread through all of this is that they couldn’t find the cancer first when these organs were still in their bodies. I’d really want to be convinced I actually had cancer before I had anything removed.

      • Ro- I think you’re totally right about that. No one acts like it’s a badge of manhood to get your balls cut off, either.

        It’s also interesting how if a guy decides to not get his prostate scraped, cut, or burned because he feels some lower abdominal pain that is not considered faulty of him.

        I’ve said it before, but someone can have malice as a reason for doing something. There can be any number of psychologocial underpannings that someone won’t admit to for the things that they do. They might not admit to doing these things, either. If this happens from the top down, it’ll be a more broadly applied situation, instead of just an individual instance. It’s exactly the same idea as one guy being the type to go on a shooting spree, but can only do so much on his own, so he gets an army of people to do more damage.

      • In response to Ada (I can’t see a ‘reply’ button!

        If women are so prone to deadly diseases, it’s a wonder the human race ever survived, eh?
        Aside from the fact that these women never actually see the reports and simply trust what the doctor relays to them, pathology itself isn’t an exact science. Two pathologists can read the same sample and come to different conclusions.
        Angela Raffle said that cytologists learn to report even the tiniest blip in a smear sample as ‘abnormal’ these days because they’re terrified of missing cases, which is more to do with protecting themselves against litigation than anything else.

        My best friend has been having gyn problems – excessive bleeding, periods that drag on forever – for the past few years. She’s been prodded and poked, scoped, treated (if you can call a D&C *treatment*) and they’ve found nothing. In fact, her problems have become worse. She had a couple of small fibroids before the D&C, now she has a lot more.
        She’s been given hormone tablets which help a lot, so I suspect she’s going through the perimenopause. We’re both 42, so it’s possible, right?
        But get this… her GP won’t prescribe her the tablets for much longer, apparently they increase the risk of osteoporosis. (Frankly, she’s a BIG girl. Always has been. And if her bones have managed to cope so far I doubt brittle bones are ever going to be an issue.)
        She can’t have the fibroids removed on the NHS because they’re deemed too small.
        So… she’s been told her only solution is hysterectomy. So tablets and myomectomy are a no-go, but they’re happy to perform major abdominal surgery on a clinically obese diabetic?
        I am dead set against it, she believes it’s her only option. She’s desperate, I understand that, but I think she’s taking a hell of a gamble with her health, considering some of the after-effects of hysterectomy. As I keep pointing out, she might be ok, but if she’s not, they can’t just pop it back, can they?

        Rambling again, sorry!

        Anyhoo, I went with her to her last Gyn appointment.
        He said, ‘I’ll try to retain your ovaries but if they look suspicious I’ll remove those too.’
        WHAT? I just looked him in the eye and told him, ‘if you do that, rest assured we WILL be seeking the medical reports, including pathology, and if there is no indication of disease we WILL be taking legal action.’
        Not that I think legal action would achieve anything – he can just use the ‘acting in the patient’s best interest’ excuse – but I just wanted him to know that his *expertise* meant nothing to me.
        I wonder how many of his patients have *suspicious* ovaries? Maybe it’s just easier to whip everything out – the ovaries often fail after surgery anyway, so why go to all that trouble to keep them? We should stop calling it Oophorectomy and call it by it’s correct term – female castration.
        So… the GP is refusing to prescribe the meds that help my friend because he’s worried it may lead to osteoporosis, and she’s scheduled for surgery which is likely to lead to ovarian removal or failure, which in turn will put her at a higher risk of… yes, you guessed it! Osteoporosis. Among other things.
        Common sense flew out of the window when they created ‘women’s health’.

        One more thing… there’s been quite a negative reaction among the public to the announcement that the NHS wants to share our medical data… medical records are supposed to be confidential, right?
        Well, seems to me that they’ve been sharing it for years… Cancer Research used to regularly state that… I think it was 80% or something… of women diagnosed with the disease have never been tested or haven’t been tested in the previous 5 years. How on earth could they know whether a woman has had regular tests or not unless they had access to our records. So much for patient confidentiality! Yes, I know they’re in bed with the NHS…

        And 5 years? Arbitrary figure, that. And the fact is that, considering it can take many years for the most common form of CC to develop, if this test were as *reliable* as we’re told then 5 years would still be ok.
        Oh, wait… they cut back the frequency of testing to five years for older women, don’t they?
        *Smells a rat*.

        Sorry for the long posts, folks. I’ll shut up now!

      • Hi Kate
        I can assure you there has been plenty of anger and frustration over the decades, but something changed in mid-life, I felt comfortable enough to calmly and confidently declare I don’t have pap tests. The medical profession, women, everyone really….expects us to have pap tests, remain silent or at least start apologizing for our immaturity or silliness, but it has a real impact when we don’t behave as we’ve been programmed to do.
        Without emotion you suddenly have the upper hand…the reactions you receive vary from amazement, high emotion, to questioning, puzzled looks, sometimes, it prompts women to do some reading.
        When you throw off the propaganda….nothing works, they can lie and manipulate as much as they like, but it’s like water running off a duck’s back.
        As more women become informed and vocal…well, let’s just say the “pap test bean counters” will be VERY concerned, (that was Jacqui’s famous quote….) there is also, a feeling of safety in numbers, so more women will speak up and refuse to be silenced…and ignorance will not win the day. Once women only heard one story, now the evidence is starting to emerge.
        I think most women move through a range of emotions once they’re informed and for some, anger will remain, especially those who’ve been harmed by this testing. I was one of the lucky ones…I got to the evidence very early.
        By the way, your young friend with a CIN 3 result, this is the very reason those under 30 are not pap tested in Finland or The Netherlands. Young women often produce highly abnormal results due to a transient and harmless infection or the pap picking up normal changes in the maturing cervix or even inflammation caused by sex or tampons.
        The VERY rare cases that occur in young women tend to be false negative cases picked up when the woman becomes symptomatic. So your friend was almost certainly over-treated, but the system is so dishonest these women are left believing they are survivors, rather than victims of non-evidence based screening. The damage these programs do to young women is IMO, culpable, we know screening is high risk for no bnefit for them, yet we keep on screening and misleading, now I’d say the same thing about older women, most women are HPV- and cannot be helped by pap tests, so why are we continuing to test and “treat” them?

      • Well said Elizabeth, I completely agree with your above post. Pap testing is the Female Genital Mutilation practise of the Western developed world.

        No-one likes to admit they have been fooled or tricked, and when confronted with the CC evidence most women are incredulous that they could possibly have fallen for all the coercion and bullying, as they consider themselves “empowered” to have gone along with it all, but I think the seeds of doubt are starting to sprout. Those of us who are now middle aged and bore the brunt of a dictatorial call/recall programme must speak out about our experiences. I do not want my teenage daughter to go through what I have done.

        The comments following Kate’s Guardian article kicked off with an obnoxious woman encouraging everyone to attend, but she had to temper her responses, when the stories of pain and anger followed on. We must continue to rationally and calmly state our case until women are truly able to make an informed choice about this dreadful business.

  34. There is an interesting role reversal theme showing up in videos and ads as in the following music video. It would be great if there was a video showing a man at the doctor’s office with chest pain, and being coerced, bullied, yelled at by the doctor over a prostate exam.

    • Something like a young woman forcing an old man to allow her to examine his prostate, unless he is not getting blood pressure medicine.

  35. The cancer screenings are getting more coercive even for men now.

    The male/female medical abuse or neglect is still there. Some women getting mastectomies will get breast reconstruction surgery. Men who have had a testicle removed due to cancer just have to walk around with one ball. Men with prostate problems really do suffer. Please do not belittle male suffering.

    Men who have sex with other men are being told that they need anal paps and more exams and “treatments” for those abnormals results. They are told all the cancer horror stories. Just a whole new market for doctors.

    Even colonoscopies – I saw one statistic that 1-3% of polyps are cancerous. The risk that they could become cancerous (I do not know). I am sure that the causes of occult bleeding are never even addressed in most causes. The screening tests, particularly the FOBT is very unreliable since even some foods can cause a positive result. As well the equipment used for colonoscopies can never be sterilized.

    • For KateUK – sorry there is no reply button or post comment button. Tell your friend to take a look at this site http://hersfoundation.org/facts.html
      I know 6 women who have had a hysterectomy and after 1/2/3/4/5 years all of them have had types of prolapse……….meaning more surgery. 2 of them have had 3 more surgeries, 1 of them 2 more procedures and the others nothing but problem after problem. As for data sharing, everything is on there, from smear test and colposcopies it is noted on your record, the size/shape/colour/pubic hair is recorded…..do we really want or need that information shared? Oh yes I forgot – WOMEN are walking diseases!
      Oh and kate never apologise for rambling, we all have done it and still do, feel free any time!

      • Thanks Chas!

        The HERS info is very illuminating – but I fear my buddy is going to go ahead with surgery no matter what. She doesn’t want to, but feels it’s the only way she’ll be rid of the bleeding.
        She’s just got her fingers crossed that all will be well. With her track record, I doubt it.
        I’ve seen the ‘information’ form she’s been given… if I remember correctly there was a mention that a small number of women experience a reduction in libido, or words to that effect. Nothing else regarding long-term effects. Typical.

        You know, my sister took her own life a few years ago. She’d been having mental health issues for years, and when we got to see her medical reports there was a form with some basic details on it. No mention of the (numerous) meds she was taking, or anything regarding her psychological state… but plenty of space for the doctor to report whether she’d had a mammogram and smear test. You can imagine what my reaction was when I saw that!

  36. Seems like the Guardian is peddling the propaganda as well: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/20/women-not-undergoing-cervical-screening-cancer-risk-lives-campaigners-research

    As usual, not mention of informed consent, risks and false positives, the rarity of the cancer, and so on. The commenters seem to be clueless, the usual nonsense about “a little embarrassment that can save your life” hahaha, there is no solid scientific evidence to support that statement, and whether a stranger penetrating a woman’s vagina is a little embarrassment or not, is up for everyone to decide for themselves… I wish people would finally start to see the wood from the trees…

    • I would say “Sexual dissonance” would be a better word- that seems to be the one where things are a problem on that kind of level. I guess problems are inconsequential?

      “Sexual distress” would probably work, too- but it seems to be more limited to when assailed in that way (like “damsel in distress”).

      They really do tend to omit the risks & ramifications, don’t they? It’s a bit odd that they worry people with this very rare cancer & yet don’t have any concern that it’s not an accurate way of getting an answer. If someone WAS going to worry about, that would be a big concern. It’s very noticeable when someone looks PAST a problem instead of AT the problem.

    • I can only take so much of the Jo’s Trust website before it makes me want to vomit. This charity is supposed to be supporting those who already have a diagnosis of cancer, yet it devotes much of its efforts to pushing the cervical screening programme on women. I don’t think it is ethical for a charity to push a particular cancer test on anybody, and I find its attitude extremely patronising. It certainly doesn’t accept that women have any choice in the matter, referring to those who don’t attend as “persistent non-attenders”.

      They have even got a Cervical Screening Award, which they give yearly to clinics which have come up with all sorts of campaigns to increase the uptake, such as sending large pink letters to people. In any newspaper item about CC Jo’s Trust is always behind the story, speaking as though it were the voice of womankind. Are there charities, which use their resources to send letters to men telling them how often to see their doctor? This charity way oversteps ethical practice.

      I noticed that in the comments section of The Guardian article, members of the public had given the pro-screeners a run for their money, and there were a good number of people voicing their complaints about cervical screening, including one who said she would be struck off her GP’s practice list if she did not respond to her letter, so this kind of treatment is still going on.

      • Ada- I have to admit I did not read all the comments, just could not bear this tsunami of patronising, misogynistic BS anymore.. I reported the last commenter called lizmint for hate speech- “hate speech against women- prescribing what and how someone should allow a stranger to penetrate their vagina. No mention of CONSENT, or CHOICE- penetration without consent is assault. Therefor this commenter propagates assault. This comment should be removed”

      • Nice one! I’m so pleased you did. I also thought of reporting lizmint, when I saw that the comments had been closed. She seems to have toned down her argument a bit on getting a volley of replies against the screening programme. I think this is what Elizabeth is saying in her post, that at first pro-screeners think they are admired for going. They jump in with both feet blogging about their righteousness in being diehard attendees, thinking that they are setting an example to us all. It takes them aback to find that a lot of us women on the web think they are brainwashed twats!

      • Ada… you remember that Jade Goody’s diagnosis led to numerous campaigns to lower the screening age to 20? And that there was a review into the program after all this nonsense?
        Well, I’m reading Margaret McCartney’s book (Patient Paradox) at the moment and she mentions that the director of Jo’s Trust was present during that review and stated that ‘screening did not cause harm’.
        The arrogance of some of these people!

      • Hi Kate, I have also read The Patient Paradox after finding it on Margaret’s website. Robert Music is a businessman, and obviously it is his job to promote Jo’s Cervical Trust. I don’t have a problem with this charity being there to support women who have been diagnosed with cervical cancer, but I have a problem with this charity using much of its resources in pushing screening programmes onto asymptomatic women, and regularly running ad campaigns to frighten women into going for their smear tests. I don’t agree with this aspect of their work at all. Their comments forums are full of terrified young women, trying to make sense of their abnormal smear results, consoled by smear test veterans, who have been through all the surgery and come out survivors, championing their butchered bodies. None of this would be necessary, if we all had truthful facts in the first place, but then informed women wouldn’t bother adhering to the programme would they?

        Apart from this, Robert Music has often made outspoken remarks along the lines of the smear test being a quick and easy, painless procedure, which women are silly to avoid. This is his standard comment, and appears in every newspaper article we see about cervical screening. I just wish he could experience the pain, so many women experience as a result of his propaganda.

        What also gets me about his stance is that, like all the pro-screeners, he fails to make clear the difference between the invasive adenocarcinoma, which kills women very quickly, and the squamous cell sort, which takes decades to appear. His charity should have a moral duty to inform women of this difference. From what I have read, the adenocarcinoma frequently fails to be detected by the smear test. Women like Jade Goody and other young victims may have had the adenocarcinoma, and hence many of them had negative pap smears before they died. Instead of being honest with the public about the smear test, being completely useless in the face of this particular type of cervical cancer, we are sold the story by Jo’s Trust that the smear test would have saved their life, so we should all trot along to our medical centres and get one done right away. The health authorities stay silent on the issue knowing that more honesty will see a drop in adherence to its programmes.

  37. I found out that in (Ontario, Canada) a doctor can earn up to $13,0000 per year in incentive bonuses for pushing cancer and other screening tests and vaccinations. This is in addition to the fee they are pay for doing the procedures and consultation fees for an apointment.

    Where are all the health care dollars going? I really do feel that this is excessive. Is this really about patient care? It is really saving the system money? I would really like to see the total incentive paylout per year.

  38. Well said, Adawells, and Jade Goody did have an adenocarcinoma, but that didn’t stop them from using her case to sell pap tests.
    IMO, these groups mislead women, it’s called “raising awareness” (read: scare to death) because it helps protect their turf, it has nothing to do with healthcare. The more women who “think” they were saved, the more women will focus on this cancer, view it as a great threat, test and keep testing, spread the word, pressure other women etc…
    So many women on the websites of these groups have clearly had false positives and been over-treated, yet you’re banned if you dare suggest such a thing. (for example: CIN 1 does not equal Stage 1 of cervical cancer)
    They also, have no interest in hearing about better testing options, like HPV self-testing or primary testing, which provides an insight, they’re not interested in reducing deaths and over-treatment, they just want women to keep having pap tests with lots being over-treated. Don’t rock the profitable screening boat, a fabulous business model.
    That’s why I say the cancer so many women fear doesn’t exist, there is no such thing as common cervical cancer, it’s rare and always was…and it was in natural decline before testing even started. It would be like whipping up a frenzy over thyroid cancer, people would think you were mad. Why are you worried about that? Yet they worry about something even rarer, cervical cancer. We’ve been trained to greatly fear a remote risk.

    We have a group here who have already started scaremongering, they know the program must stop testing those under 25, the damage being caused is getting harder to hide with more and more countries moving to protect young women. These groups intend to make it difficult by scaring and misleading young women, make them believe the govt is risking their health to save money. It says to me these groups often contain or receive financial support from those with a vested interest in screening. These groups are part of the problem and IMO, are not to be trusted…they also, often use women who’ve been unlucky enough to get actual cervical cancer to sell pap tests to others, IMO, they use these women to get to other women so they can use them too.
    Scare tactics should never be used to push screening, we should screen because we’re satisfied with the evidence…that’s why they prefer to use scare tactics, the evidence would shock most women.

  39. Scaremongering serves these charities only too well – the more people fear a disease, the more ‘survivors’ testing produces, the more support the charity gets. Thing is, if a regular company uses dirty tactics or false advertising to ‘sell’ their products, customers will quickly realise they’ve been sold a dud and report them to Trading Standards or the like.
    But these charities, and indeed the NHS itself, seems immune from such regulation and are free to say whatever the hell they like. And the sheeple fall for it.
    I mean, if my boyfriend said that a pap test is painless, my automatic response would be ‘how the f**k would you know’?
    Yet some MALE director or spokesman of a cancer charity tells us a test is ‘painless’ or ‘worthwhile’, that’s ok?

    As for Jade… tested and *treated* from 16. End result…. death. So much for ‘preventing’ cancer.

    • What really angers me is when these charities peddle their hate speech about how women do not have a choice, and how it is “no big deal”. This fucking test was a large-scale human experiment, as it became a population based screening framework, without clinical trials. It harmed masses, ate up millions of pounds, the harm is definite, the benefits are based on speculations. AND, it involves penetrating the vagina of women, and undermining their right for consent. So coercing women to allow a stranger to penetrate their vagina, through lies, threats and misinformation, on a mass scale, since decades is “not a big deal”…. you bet if there was justice, and a parliamentary committee set up, quite a few people would be deservedly jailed…

      • I have actually quoted on this forum how a person from the cancer screening agency told the provincial parliament (Ontario, Canada) that women should not have to consent to have their personal information in regards to Pap tests collected because otherwise people would decline and the programme would fail. They just collect without consent from all the labs and that information is never allowed to be deleted. It all goes into a provincial registry that can be accessed by any health practitioner that a women sees. The information can also be used for “research” not much of which I have seen published.

        Read up on The Rape Culture and understand what the constant coercion and forced Pap tests are to women and the men (and sometimes women) who do it.

  41. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/cervical/Patient/page2#Keypoint11
    Adawells,
    Cervical cancer “in situ” is referred to as Stage 0 cervical cancer or CIN 3 – most of these lesions do NOT progress to invasive cervical cancer. There are various studies…some say about 12% of cases would progress to actual cervical cancers, others go higher, up to 30%
    These women do not have cancer and most would never develop cancer.
    Then you have the Staging for actual cervical cancer, Stage 1, Stage 2 etc. Some women confuse staging with CIN 1, 2 and 3, the latter (once again) is not cancer.
    Many women who’ve been treated for CIN 3 or the scarier sounding cancer “in situ” have simply been over-treated.
    The madness of Stage 0 cancer…once again, a great business model.
    Has anyone read “Saving Normal” by Allen Frances? Normal is rapidly disappearing when we have Stage 0 cancers AND with cervical cancer, we keep statistics for CIS or Stage 0 cancer. It could almost be viewed as an attempt to make cervical cancers numbers look a bit better, bump them up a bit.

    • An excellent and very informative link. Thank you. By including the “in situ” figures it certainly bumps up the overall statistics to a whopping amount – a bit like including the figures for those people who have got a cough, and adding them to the figures for those who have died of pneumonia?

      • Exactly, do we see Stage 0 or NOT cancer included in other cancer stats?
        I think it’s a step in the right direction changing the names for some of the non-cancer, no “carcinoma” unless it’s actually cancer. So DCIS, lobular carcinoma and cervical in situ cancers will be called something more benign…hardly surprising many people believe they have cancer when they see the word “carcinoma”.
        We have to change the way we think about cancer, not all cancer is life-threatening and after a certain age, about 50, many of us will have cancer somewhere in our body, but we’ll die with it, not from it, so what is the point searching for it and treating something that will never bother us? DCIS only became an issue when we started screening women, prior to that women didn’t know about it. Screen detected so often amounts to over-diagnosis and over-detection.

  42. Also, it makes the cervical screening program look better, look at all these lives saved…it really is incredible the lengths they go to…to make cc look like a big problem, major threat, and to show how the screening program is worth the money, doing great work, saving lots of women.
    Of course, including the CIN 3 cases does not work when you consider the lifetime risk of cc is 0.65%, then it’s clear we’re “saving” women from nothing. They’d argue: well, we don’t know which lesions would move so have to treat everyone…Finland has shown there was always a way to keep over-treatment rates down, (although still far too high when you consider the risk from cc is so low) and now we know most of the ASCUS, CIN 1, 2 and 3 nonsense should be scrapped…confine your offer of testing to the roughly 5% who are actually at risk: those HPV+ and aged 30+
    If a woman is HPV- these classifications are irrelevant, she’s not at risk…HPV+ then you at least know the woman is at risk.

    • Thanks for this also. I’ve read a bit about HPV testing, but how is it done? Don’t you still need to have the painful smear test in the first place to get some cervical cells to test whether they are HPV+ or -? Also, it is not clear to me how frequently this needs to be done, since even the Gardasil vaccine is not expected to last a lifetime. Are we still going to have this wretched recall system for HPV testing?

      I have been researching self-sampling kits in the medical journals, and although other countries like the Netherlands report good feedback from women, the UK specifically limits their own experiments in this to the very hardest to reach groups of women who don’t use the health services anyway, and then dismissing self-sampling as a failure when only 10% of them come back. No consideration given to offering self-sampling to all the other women on the programme, who would almost certainly prefer this to the pain of the speculum.

      • Adawells,
        HPV testing is like a pap test, but there are also, self-testing devices available that are just as reliable as a sample taken by a physician/nurse. Tampap is in the UK and the Delphi Screener is in the Netherlands, Singapore, Thailand and can be ordered by *Australians over the net. (and I assume so can women from many other countries)
        (*this is kept VERY quiet, but it’s now mentioned on quite a few forums (by me and others) and I know quite a few Aussie women have now used the Delphi Screener. I know of 6 women in my circle who’ve used it (all HPV-) and another 2 about to use it)

        An Australian distributor was being sorted out, but I doubt that will happen, this device is a threat to the pap testing program…vested interests will derail anything that threatens their turf. Also, smarter testing can be derailed by the program and others by skewing the information they give to women. Things like, HPV self-testing is unreliable, it produces too many false positives#, you still need pap tests so what’s the point, women might get confused and mess up self-testing etc. Their major concern, of course, is losing control of women and that affecting the “success” of the program (and their profits etc.) So scare-mongering will keep some women on exam tables having invasive testing.

        #This argument angers me, HPV+ (about 5% of those aged 30+) means you’re at risk, but most of these women will never develop cervix cancer. Sure these women may be concerned unnecessarily about their positive status, BUT there appears to be no concern about putting 95% of women through unnecessary pap testing and a huge number through biopsies etc. with population pap testing.
        At least the 5% ARE at risk and have some chance of benefiting from pap testing. (if they choose to test) So I find that argument transparently about protecting population pap testing and over-treatment, not women. It’s an argument used over and over…they also, often include young women and conclude HPV primary testing would not work, too many would test HPV+ (about 40%) CORRECT, that’s why we should not be HPV or pap testing those under 30. So protecting excess is used to deny HPV primary testing to older women. (30+)

        In the UK we have women being told if they use Tampap and test HPV- they still need pap tests, wrong! But I suspect the product was only allowed onto the market on that basis and they hope those testing HPV+ will sprint off to the GP.
        It’s all about “reaching” women….(read: capturing)

        You’re right, self-testing is often only discussed for hard-to-reach women, but if more information reaches women on HPV self-testing and the significance of being HPV- becomes known, then more women will hopefully seek it out.
        I doubt countries like Australia, the States, UK or Canada will ever release their grip over women, powerful vested interests influence/control this testing for their benefit. In these countries women will have to do their own thing if they want evidence based testing. Of course, if more women reject the pap testing program it will eventually lead to it’s demise, they NEED about 80% of women to test regularly to justify their existence.

        HPV testing is only an improvement on the status quo if it’s used the right way…so the new Dutch program would be the one I’d follow…(if I wanted to test, and I don’t) So that’s 5 primary HPV tests or self tests at 30,35,40,50 and 60. NOTE: that most of these women will have fewer than 5 HPV tests, those HPV- and confidently monogamous or no longer sexually active might choose to stop all further HPV testing. So some women may only have 1, 2 or 3 HPV tests. (and most women will never have a pap test)

        Used the wrong way HPV testing adds to the misery of these programs and the congestion in day procedure, so that’s the American practice of ADDING HPV and pap testing for all women 30+ or using the HPV test on women under 30. (40% would test positive when most have a transient and harmless infection)
        Currently the only country (as far as I’m aware) who actually put women and the evidence first is the Netherlands. (and Finland who have had a 7 pap test program since the 1960s but who now need to get HPV primary and self-testing off the ground)
        I imagine UK women could order the Delphi Screener from Delphi Bioscience in the Netherlands or of course, Tampap is available there as well.

  44. In regards to adenocarcinoma – it is still rare. Studies have shown 80% have HPV 16 and 18 present. (Really might be arbitrary depending on age of women since many younger women are HPV positive anyway). Recently more diagnosis have been made in recent years probably since using the cervical brush method with Pap tests. The adenocarcinoma could actually be caused by pap testing and subsequent testings and treatment.

    The epithelial layer of the exocervical is thicker so there is the cin1-3 rating. The skin of the endocervix is much thinner, only one layer thick. Any dysplasia on a Pap test there is going to register as cin3. When a biopsy of the endocervix is done it is going to introduce more HPV infection there, more than a brush sampling. A cone biopsy is supposed to be a treatment as well as a diagnostic test.

    Does it make sense that brushes and equipment do not belong inside the cervix? If HPV infects cells by microabrasions in the skin why introduce them with nonsterile surgical equipment?

    There are statistics that women who never or seldom get Pap tests have a slightly higher rate of cervical cancer. I would like to know if women with adenocarcinoma ever had Pap tests or biopsies. It might be that cancer is caused by pap testing methods themselves.

  46. Karen, I know, it’s infuriating. I just responded to an article written by a doctor on the 6 Minutes site, it was a bit of a rant actually. It’s the same old story, woman doesn’t have pap tests, got cervical cancer and now she’s a vocal advocate for regular pap testing. Another scary story…and misleading and of course, contains no real information on actual benefits and risks. Informed consent? What’s that…
    The article has been written for GPs, so it’s worrying the same approach is used within the medical profession to sell pap tests…and remind GPs, no doubt, of the “need” for regular testing.
    The “naughty girl, you didn’t have pap testing” is not only disrespectful and inappropriate, it almost blames the woman for her demise. It’s misleading and incorrect to suggest a pap test WOULD have prevented her cervical cancer.
    These women are then often used to “sell” pap tests to other women or doctors use their story to scare women into testing, heaven forbid they gave us the evidence.
    Will the medical profession ever use something other than scary stories to push screening at women?

    • The website says you have to register to read the complete article. I would like to read your comments as well.

      I find it just maddening that cervical cancer is supposedly “easy to treat in precancerous stages”. That is why screening is pushed. Only that there is too much overtreatment of what some women’s bodies will clear themselves with a good lifestyle and nutriition. How many women with cin2 are told to go home, take some vitamins and stop smoking and get retested in one year or 6 months? They are all pushed for LEEP when convenient for a doctor in two months or 5 months or just after a colposcopy.

      I was reading the ACOG website in what was recommended for well women exams on their website. Included was them asking about a women’s dental health and if she saw a dentist regularly. Does that seem odd? They also ask too many questions about sex and “sexual dysfunction”. Even with just regular family doctors which we have in Canada, the well woman exam is just dominated with tits and ass checking. A women might have other concerns such as heart and Lung problems but they are put aside for all this naked glory to be examined.

      A major Canadian women’s magazine had an article reporting that cervical cancer will develop in 1 in 145 Canadian women. That is almost 0.7% if you do that math. But really where is that statistic coming from? I think that is really inflated somehow.

    • Nope. Still can’t access the article. Can you tell us the story? Sounds very interesting.

  48. Ada, I notice the site is for medical professionals, not sure how I got access, but they send me their newsletter every week. Sorry the links don’t work.
    So, the article is called, “All for the want of a pap smear”, this is so misleading and remember she’s speaking to other doctors. It implies she went through surgery, chemo etc. when a pap test would have spared her the ordeal. We know a pap test is no guarantee, false negatives occur as well as false positives. Did the woman have adenocarcinoma of the cervix? If so, a pap test is unlikely to have helped her.
    ” Never a person to visit doctors, she was also a very private intelligent woman in her forties who had never married or had children. ”

    This annoyed me too, is this to “explain” why she didn’t end up pap tested? Doctors know women are often captured when they get pregnant or if they take the Pill.
    I hate the way we judge women who choose not to screen, one of the requirements of a population screening test is: the test must be acceptable to the target population, yet it’s clear to me the pap test is unacceptable to many women. I’d say many women would choose not to screen and that’s why coercion, misstatements, scare campaigns etc. have been used to force women into testing. (you need huge numbers to screen when you’re screening for a rare cancer with an unreliable test, and know you’ll condemn large numbers to excess biopsies etc.)
    Did anyone ever ask women whether the pap test was acceptable to them? Surely we’ve just been TOLD to screen, it MUST be acceptable, don’t be silly or immature etc. it could save your life! How many decades have women endured pap testing? We can put people on the moon, but nothing has changed in cervical screening, no self-testing options.

    So the woman is symptomatic, diagnosed with cc and has treatment.
    “Marnie’s medical file has now mushroomed to the size of the Sydney telephone directory, and she has become a very vocal exponent of the virtues of regular Pap smears.”

    This annoys me too, I hate the way women are used to spread the word (and fear), it is inappropriate for doctors or other women to simply urge me to screen. Screening should be an informed decision. I know nothing about Marnie, her risk factors, the type of cervical cancer she had etc. I don’t just screen, I do my own research and make informed decisions, I also, don’t take advice from screening programs, pro-screening groups, vested interests, survivors (real or imagined) or celebrities. Why should that be so unacceptable?

    Part of my response:
    “So I wish your patient all the best, but if she’d had the option of testing herself for HPV, at least she would have known she was HPV+ and had a small chance of benefiting from a 5 yearly pap test, instead we use her demise to keep pushing outdated population pap testing. Who are we really protecting in this country?”
    There are lots of interesting articles on the site, shame most of us are locked out. Another doctor has commented, but completely ignored my comment.

    • Many thanks for this. I am finding that in trawling the web, I am frequently coming up with sites I can’t get into, and the information available is getting older and older. What we really need is some inside information about the future of cancer screening programmes. It is clearly being discussed as we have seen from the recent link to the UK Parliamentary Committee. So what will happen to this? Will this information be filed away for a few years?

      Our local community has planned a health forum at the end of this month, where residents can talk about what they want from their health services, and I intend to go along and speak at this regarding our NHS cervical screening programme.

      In the meantime I found this article from the Lancet by David Holmes, still in favour of screening but shedding some interesting info on the Jade Goody affair:
      http://www.thelancet.com/oncology Vol 11 April 2010

      a section reads:
      “The agenda in cases of celebrity cancer diagnosis is often set by a tabloid media short on facts but heavy on what is often termed scaremongering. For example, most of the coverage around Goody centred on the suffering she was enduring, and the tragedy that she had developed the disease at such a young age. There was very little mention of the fact that Goody had several abnormal Pap smears in her teens, had abnormal cells removed, and then ignored later abnormal Pap results and several letters requesting that she return for additional treatment. She ignored the letters because she was scared, but the tabloid coverage of her death would have done very little to reassure young women in a similar situation. Although Goody’s death increased screening rates, in her case it wasn’t screening that was the problem. But the inability of the media to tell the whole story meant that a valuable opportunity to educate people about the importance of following up on results was lost, while calls for a younger age at screening paid no consideration to the risk of overdiagnosis. Clearly none of the blame for this lies at the doors of health campaigners; these examples were not, after all, part of any health campaign. But it does call into question the wisdom of saturating the media with celebrity-endorsed campaigns to raise awareness of cancers and screening initiatives.”

      I disagree with him that the blame does indeed lie at the doors of health campaigners, because they do not speak out about this misinformation, and go along with it, if it terrorises women into pap tests.

      • The article is not free access so I cannot comment.

        I would like to comment on how earlier screening experiences can turn women off lifetime healthcare though. As well as lack of self testing and respecting some women want women screeners only. Women also do not to want to be judged or infantized in regards to their choice of lifestyle and participation in screening. Not enough accurate information is given out either.

        The “failure” to screen is out at ignoring letters, inconvenience and travel problems. I would say it has more to do with either the test procedure itself.

        Before doing some research I knew the Pap test was for cancer but did not understand the treatments and risks. I thought a Pap test was required only for oral contraception and if I was going to get cancer that it would have happened before now. I got suspicious when the male doctor would get angry when I refused. What I might have wanted was if there was a female doctor available to do the test but this male doctor will not give up his incentive payment for my health. So now I know more and would like an HPV test just to see what is going on. I find out it is almost impossible for me to get one in my country without a Pap test and I would end up with my info in the goverment registry. Sorry just a simple anonymous HPV would do and then I could decide to go from there.

        If NHS has problems, well Canada is not much better.

        Some women might also want to try some non mutilating alternative therapies for dysplasia but the medical field just scoffs at them.

      • Exactly, and he fails to mention that Jade Goody should not have been pap tested in her teens, if she’d been symptomatic she should have been sent to a gyn for a full assessment. If you’re pap testing a teenager, 1 in 3 will produce an “abnormal” pap test, so it was the incompetence of the doctors who did the pap test and “treatment” that resulted in a young woman scared to go through the same procedure twice. She said they’d already removed the abnormal cells and didn’t think she could face it again.
        We need to come down hard on doctors who do the wrong thing and risk the health and welfare of teenagers and young women. (and older women, doing pap tests on women with no cervix is a good example (removed for benign reasons) or doing annual pap testing)
        I place the blame squarely at the feet of the medical profession and this program.
        The other lie: Jade Goody had a adenocarcinoma, usually missed by pap testing, yet they used her death to scare women into pap testing.
        If you lie to women you make it impossible for them to make an informed decision and IMO, the best decisions are informed decisions.

        I know what you mean, we’re in the middle of a review here, the Committee have called for submissions, but I imagine the bulk will be pushing to retain profitable excess. I doubt we’ll ever see evidence based testing here or self-testing. Most women are in the dark so it’s easy to deny them choice and smarter testing options.

        The Govt is wasting millions on this program, but I doubt they’d have the courage to fiddle with it too much, vested interests are already scare-mongering, “we shouldn’t wind back the program, it’s a huge success and we’d hate to see women die simply to save some money”…already busy manipulating and scaring women. The Govt knows women have been lied to from the beginning so they can hardly complain, they’ve gone along with the scare-mongering to achieve targets and ignored our legal rights. (and they know unethical measures have been taken to pressure women into screening)

        Now they want to make changes, they find they’ve backed themselves into a corner, oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. MOST women still believe the screening “story” so will be suspicious of any changes.

        The best we can do here is alert the individual and hope some are motivated to do some research. You have a better chance in the UK, you have some high profile and vocal advocates for evidence based screening and informed consent. They tell women whoppers here and no one says a word, they’re all “in on” the deception and some of our doctors also, seemed to have swallowed the “story” hook, line and sinker.

  49. http://tv.greenmedinfo.com/fire-medical-doctor-peter-glidden/ I came across this video and it’s definitely a good one! There’s a lot of good information and sources on the greenmedinfo website. Also, I’m trying my best to be chemical free. What are some good natural alternatives to things like toothpaste and deoderant? Are there any good natural substitutes for hair sprays and hair heat protectors? What about sunscreens and lotions? I know that’s a lot of questions, but a lot of people seem to be informed about alternative products and cures for things, so any advice or answers are appreciated! Anyway, back to the main topic, the video is very informative. It’s a bit dramatic and perhaps cheesy at times, but it’s honest and informative which is what’s important.

    • Baking soda works for a suprising number of things (including cancer treatment- I remember it being something to do with the body’s pH & it makes it an inhospitable environment for cancer). A soap & shampoo substitute as well as a deodorizor is one set of things. Using it for a toothpaste seems doable, but I’d be somewhat concerned about it scraping the outer layer (although that seems to actually be generated by the body, not just a shell like an M & M).

      A good book that I’m still reading is Cure Tooth Decay by Ramiel Nagal. It gets into a lot of things about nutrition, seeing as you run into a lot of physical degeneration from bad intake (whether that’s in terms of quality or amount).

      Rosemary Gladstar has a book on natural cosmetics, but I haven’t read it. She has other books, too (there was one on integrating herbals into your diet- Medicinal Herbs: A Beginner’s Guide). She also has an online herbal course, but I don’t know what it covers.

      Arthur Haines & John R. Christopher might be a good authors to look up, as well. They both seem to cover the stuff that’s more infused into general living (as opposed to using something in response to a problem like when putting an herb on a wound).

      Ori Hofmeckler wrote a few good books & the Warrior Diet makes that point about how if you’re body has to process & filter all kinds of things from your diet, that’ll leave less for doing other things. He even said the quantum mechanics are a bit of a mystery, but if you’re always in a state of digestion things get diverted to that.

      • Alex – Baking soda CAN be bad for enamel, but they use it in several different conventional toothpaste brands. So I don’t think it’s harmful, it would probably just need to be diluted a bit before using it.

        The book on natural cosmetics is a must for me. I’ve been slowly switching over to organic and all-natural makeup products (as my budget has allowed), but the book has a lot more information I’m sure. I’ll get ahold of as many books of hers as I can. I’ve seen you mention her work several times before, and from what you’ve said, her books are very informative.

        I will look into books by Haines and Christopher and Hofmeckler too. Speaking of using things and responses to a problem, are there any good books about homeopathic and naturopathic (is that the right word?) cures and remedies? I’ve done a bit of research online, but what I’ve found is that most websites are bias and are pushing their own work at ridiculous prices. So it’s a bit difficult to sift through what is real, valuable information and what has been published so someone can make a few extra bucks.

      • Yeah, she’s good. I haven’t read the Arthur Haines book yet, but the Ori Hofmeckler one I can give you some description on right now: Basically, you save most of your food for the end of the day (maybe a light lunch & a big dinner). This allows the body to burn off fat reserves (whether that’s to lose weight or keep it from piling up) & this will give you energy. It also give the body a chance to filter things out, so you also have the benefits of that. This pattern also keeps your insulin from running all the time (which is not good & probably a cause of diabetes- the pancreas getting overworked). All this is with food that’s fresh & un-screwed-around-with. Keep the carbs light (something I was reading in that Cure Tooth Decay book is that phytic acid, which tends to be in grains, causes a lot of problems- including the blocking of various nutrients).

        A side-note on that type of subject: Wheat Belly is supposed to be good, but I haven’t read it.

        As for hollistic medicine & such: Rainforest Home Remedies is a good one. It gives a how-to on that Mayan massage for women (apparently, massage is good for a lot of things for anybody). I wonder why they say to boil the stuff in the recipes, since I’ve always heard that you destroy various nutrients that way (maybe it’s just vitamin C?). Either way, you can boil the water & pour it through the air to let it cool a little on the way down & just simmer whatever it is (just be careful it’s not so high that you splash yourself, of course).

        There’s a few jungle medicine books & some of those Chinese acupressure/martial arts books have things like that in there (Yang Jwing-Ming is a good author on that). I wouldn’t be suprised if there was some type of Ancient Greece herbal remedies book or some such floating around. I saw a book Western Herbs for Martial Artists that might be good for different things.

        Haven’t had the money for all of these & sometimes I swamp myself with information.

  50. Sorry for double posting, but here’s another very informative video. tv.greenmedinfo.com/vaccines-medicine-attempted-murder/

  51. My doctor argued to me that some statistics such as “over 56% of women diagnosed with cervical cancer never had or did not get regular Pap tests.” So I told him that the other 44% who got Pap tests still got cancer. I still do not think that just over 5% difference is really that much. Because Pap tests do not prevent cancer. He still argued that in early stages that cervical cancer can easily be treated. However I know about all the overtreatments for what is not cancer or even precancer. Happy to have found this site.

    For the women asking about more natural deodorant and toothpaste. There are many toothpastes available that do not contain fluoride, glycerin or SLS (detergent). Our bodies do not need fluoride (the lie is that the teeth need it but it causes more problems) and many pharmaceutical drugs are full of it. Try a health/herb store.

    Aluminum in antiperspirants could be a problem as our body does not need that either and it is harmful. Even those natural alum stones contain aluminum. You can make your own deodorant with baking soda, coconut oil etc. there are recipes on several websites. Another really good deodorant is baby diaper ointment containing 10-40% zinc oxide. Get a brand that doesn’t contain fish oil. Your body does use zinc. I use these and they work. You still sweat but no smell. It takes two weeks to adjust and detox your pits so you might have to wash more often until it is over.

    There are more natural sunscreens and products but most of them can be avoided. Google “eat your sunscreen”. Diet is more a factor and unless you are very fair skinned and burn easily you do not need sunscreen unless you are a life guard or work outside. I use sunscreen maybe one day per year (first day of the season that I will be outside in full sun). Wearing clothing and hats protect your skin.

    All these toxic chemicals in cosmetic and cleaning products tends to concentrate in the bladder, breasts, uterus, prostate. These is why they are being discussed here,

    There are alternative to shampoo and hair products. You can wash hair with soap, soapnuts, baking soda. Condition hair with oils, citric acid. Hair dyes do cause cancer but they are never removed from the market. Start googling recipes. The information is out there.

    When our body is fighting to remove toxins from our food and environment it has less energy to spend fighting disease and checking cancer cells. Mutations pop up in cells due to damage from uv and other radiation, chemical and fungal toxins and toxins from virus infection (HPV infected cells produce proteins that cause cell mutations), smoking and second hand smoke.

    Good nutrition and taking vitamins boost the immune system. There have been many studies showing that cervical dysplasia improved with folic acid supplements and other vitamin B and beta carotene. Seems strange you never hear that from any doctor though.

    • Moo – Thank you so much for you advice! I think I’ll try the baking soda and coconut oil recipe. Baking soda is good for a multitude of things and always seems to work well. As far as sunscreen goes, I’m not overly concerned about skin cancer, but I have very fair skin and so if I get burned, I blister and my skin peels and it’s all-around a painful experience which I’d like to avoid LOL. That’s really the main reason I use sunscreen and why I want to find a better alternative. I’ve seen some supposed all-natural sunscreen in whole foods markets, but I don’t know if it is legitimately all-natural. I suppose the best thing to do would be to look up all of the ingredients individually.

      As for shampoo and conditioner, I’ve already been using all-natural products made with natural plant extracts and oils (and completely free of chemicals).

      Honestly my biggest concern at this point is starting a completely organic, whole-foods only diet. As a college student, I’m on a budget and I don’t have much to spare. I’ve been doing my absolute best to avoid processed foods, but on a budget, that’s very difficult. Do you have any advice as to where/how I could find affordable organic whole food products?

  53. I think the secret to good health has been known for a long time now, I look at the way my ancestors lived. (the ones I remember anyway) They saw a doctor when they were symptomatic, pregnancy meant the local midwife and the bush hospital or baby born at home. There was little in the way of processed food. One of my Aunts, she died in her early 90s, I can’t recall her ever being ill, (aside from an occasional cold) she was always active, fiercely independent and outspoken.
    She had a baking day every week and made all sorts of delicious things, with a lot of the ingredients straight out of the garden, she made her own jams, pickles, bread, cakes, soap, cleaning products etc. She was a trailblazer and worked when married women didn’t work. I had another Aunt (they were sisters) who was similar, she lived into her 80s.

    Now horrifying (with a smirk) to think my aunts did not have pap tests, mammograms or anything else, neither would have given cervical cancer a single thought, just as we don’t dwell on rare cancers EXCEPT pretend-cervical-cancer, which fills the minds of many women – a cruel joke.
    There were people back then who lived unhealthy lives, more people smoked…I can’t recall obesity being a problem though, the very overweight were unusual, but certainly past generations had their issues, problems and stresses. (for example: PTSD and alcoholism were never really addressed, an issue for lots of men who returned from war, the attitude was, “be a man and get over it, you’re lucky you didn’t die over there”.)

    The medical profession mistreated women back then too, but that’s only if they could get their hands on you. My aunts rarely saw doctors, and it was even infrequent in old age. I still use some of the old remedies, the poultice is the best. My Aunts did not rush off to the doctor when they had a cold, they gave their body time to heal and helped it along the way.
    I do that too, and in almost every case the symptom disappears in a couple of weeks.

    When I compare their lifestyle to our situation…well, I’m left shaking my head. We lost the plot somewhere along the way. Now so many women live a half-life, a medically controlled life full of anxiety, pain, embarrassment etc….too awful for words.

    Moo, if you’re deficient in something, then vitamins are the answer, but if you have a balanced diet with no health issues, IMO, they’re a waste of money. I know people who take lots of supplements every day and all they get…coloured urine, it all goes straight through. In fact, over-using vitamins can cause health issues. They’ve finally tackled the promotion of multi-vitamins for healthy children, they’re unnecessary and can be harmful.
    I know older women who take Calcium and Vitamin D every day thinking it can’t hurt, but it can, too much calcium is not good for you. A relative developed kidney stones and it was put down to the overuse of calcium supplements, she thought it would make her bones even stronger.
    If possible, IMO, we’re better off getting what we need through a balanced diet.
    Potassium is very important so I include bananas in my diet.

    Vit D – everyone seems to be deficient and taking supplements, the Govt flagged a review recently when they noticed Medicare is spending a fortune on blood tests to check Vit D levels. (and it’s rising) I plan to do some research into the area, my levels (like everyone else) are low.
    The people who make the supplements are making a fortune, is our concern about Vit D just the result of clever marketing….AGAIN?

    • Seems like your ancestor ate organic fruit and vegetables since she could grow her own in her garden. Sunscreen and avoiding the sun to “prevent skin cancer”, even more rare than Cervical cancer, is going to make people vitamin D deficient. I have to agree that calcium supplements are often just wrong. A women with cervical dysplasia needs either a good multivitamin or more leafy green vegetables and red/orange vegetables. Supplements are not bad however because no everyone can afford organic, grow a garden or cook from scratch.

      It really burns me the food bank gives people such bad food and on the verge of mold bread. These people lined up all have some disability and many have cancer. So help kill them.

      There was a study done that used green tea extract pills and vaginal cream. It worked for most women but it was small scale. However there is a cream for external warts that has components of green tea extract on the market. It is very very expense.

      My ideal is that naturopathic medicine be funded so I can see one rather than a MD. I would prefer to use herbs and other therapies rather than antibiotics and pharmaceuticals full of fluoride. Although they would likely be as pap happy as the rest.

      • Moo, It is expensive to eat well, most of the so-called superfoods are very expensive.
        The thing with “dysplasia”…leafy greens are a great idea for everyone, but most of these women are HPV- so their dysplasia is not going anywhere. I read so often someone has dysplasia, but at least they’re HPV-, honestly, talk about a snow job. Hopefully, we’ll move away from this absurd obsession with the cervix and get back to basics.
        Yes, it would have been organic food, the thing I miss, the beautiful aroma and taste of fresh fruit and vegetables.
        Now I find fruit and veg often has no or little aroma and not much flavour and things go off very quickly, usually because they’ve been in cold storage for weeks/months. I grow herbs, beans and tomatoes in my garden and plan to put in peppers and zucchini this year. Every time I pick something I’m taken back to my childhood, in my aunt’s garden picking peas, carrots and strawberries for dinner, wonderful.

  54. http://www.healthline.com/health-news/women-hpv-test-could-replace-annual-pap-test-031814

    This is an astonishing statement:
    ““I think in the short term, even if the FDA adopts the recommendation, most gynecologists will continue with contesting,” Patel said. “This allows us to see who is at risk by being high risk HPV positive, but also allows us to pick up dysplasia and treat those lesions so they do not progress to cervical cancer.””
    This is the dishonesty or incompetence women are fighting against, if you are HPV- you can’t benefit from pap testing and certainly don’t need your “dysplasia” treated. Dutch doctors must read this sort of rubbish and scratch their heads. It’s like we’ve rewritten the evidence to suit the medical business model.
    So these “people” will find a way of continuing to pap test all women and “treat” many HPV- women, making sure their “dysplasia” is taken care of. Madness.

    • They might try to hold out with the pap testing but I think the more women find out about the HPV test and demand this, it could finally turn the tide. Once women become aware there is an alternative, and it is more accurate, and demand the HPV test instead of a smear test, the sheeple won’t be able to trot out that old argument that they like to be safe rather than sorry.

      In the US where health care is market driven, I can see women preferring to go to gyns who would offer the new test over the old. The pap test is so universally disliked and unacceptable to womankind, women must demand this and hold out until it is implemented. This has been the first development in cervical screening for 50 years and it has given women a bargaining tool in the matter.

    • Love the way you said”people.” The observation that they rewrite evidence to suit the business model is absolutely accurate. I truly believe that malice & general pervyness plays a major role, as well- if nothing else, a few people at an organizational level being whatever way would color the actions of their subordinates (just like a dictator with an army- another area where things are medically imposed & generally judged to be innocent).

      They use specious reasoning- that what they say sounds true, but isn’t. The dots that they connect are false & they just keep saying the same things over & over (which, I guess is a part of the whole specious reasoning thing- that they keep asserting a point AS IF it’s an extant situation). I guess a lot of people have heard the same things for a long time & don’t figure that could’ve happened without it actually being true.

      A point that I don’t get how it’s near constantly overlooked is that these doctors impose this on women. It’s not her doing- THEY are orchestrating something. Then they say that someone IS consenting to something because of this or that (whatever they make up). They’re ARGUING that she’s consenting to something- which, if it were true, there wouldn’t be any argument! They are interjecting their own influences & then saying someone is free to make their own decisions. Coercion & deception are common methods of doing this, but attaching a rider to whatever else is going on or simple comportment (just steering the situation in whatever way) are also typical methods. These things are a little hard to put words to & that’s part of the point: it makes it harder to “lock-on.”

    • Elizabeth that is the controversy. How can a women have a negative HPV test and still have dysplasia? If all dysplasia is caused by HPV then who are they trying to fool? The Pap test is inaccurate or the “dormancy theory” is brought in. There is no clinical evidence of HPV going dormant in the body and comes back decades later. There is no published study that I can find. Because if it did then it would have to be proven to be the exact same strain that resurfaced from dormancy and not due to reinfection. This “THEORY” of dormancy was PROPOSED in one paper and it is NOT FACT.

      Some viruses such as herpes zoster which causes chicken pox and shingles can be dormant in certain type of cells. However not every type virus does this. As for a “single HPV transformed malignant cell laying dormant and resurfacing years later” – what kind of science fiction is that? Our body produce damaged and malignant cells all the time but our immune systems take care of them. Even cancer cells do not “live forever” since there are many substances (some in plants such as green tea) that cause their death (apoptosis). Some cancer cell lines might be propagated almost forever but no one cell lives forever.

      So suppose that there is just one HPV transformed cell that is cancer. It grows in the basement layer of the cervix. After many years these cells from a tumor. So does it produce HPV particles or not? Apparently all the cancer tumor cells were infected with HPV? So suddenly the Pap test will just show cancer cells and no HPV? There is no CIN progression for these dormant cancer cells in the basement layer then? Defies logic.

      The more and more I read, I am getting quite convinced that cancer has more to do with toxins and nutrition than anything else. However this research is being mostly ignored. All the cervical dysplasia treatments and pap testing and contesting or co-testing with HPV is just about the money as is ALL the cancer and other health screening that is being forced on us.

      • A young women enrolled at Yale university went to the college health clinic for a health issue unrelated to weight. She was told her BMI was too low and she had to be assessed for anorexia nervousa. This included weekly weigh-ins and consultations with a nutritionalist and a psychiatrist. They threatened to with hold her graduation if she did not comply. She complained to her dean who told her he did not know what she should do other than comply. She was told he had to gain 3 lbs to get her weight to a minimum of 95 lbs. she managed to gain 2 lbs eating junk and was told that was not good enough. She is a small women height 5′ 2″ of Asian ancestry and looks like she has a small frame.

        Doesn’t Yale have agood law school? She was screened without being asked and then they use coercion holding out her diploma. Huge lawsuit coming. I hope she makes a huge settlement.

        Health screening is continually being misused. It makes me think of the new mother who sees her newborn having vials and vials of blood taken for all the over 100 screening tests. What is it the total blood in a newborn anyway? Seems to me taking out that much blood and causes so much stress and pain to a baby could. It be good.

      • I hope it’s blatantly obvious what other things this could apply to. A medical interaction turns into an attempt at comportment. They basically just try to steer the situation.

        Isn’t it odd how the direct stuff has become somewhat more of a subtle tactic? No deception, no speed-talking or information overload, just simply giving orders. It’s unexpected, just like bold-faced lying (it’s just untrue, not some kind complex manipulation).

        Speaking of which: I just noticed how specious reasoning indicates deliberate deception when revealed. If someone connected all kinds of false dots & it comes out, it’s gets real obvious that they sat & figured out a lie. Pretty hard to act like there was some confusion & it was a mistake at that point.

  56. So many good articles are locked behind pay walls or for doctors only, on the 6 Minutes site there are two articles stating OTC access to emergency contraception has not resulted in fewer unplanned pregnancies in young women. They argue women are missing out on valuable consultations with a doctor that could properly inform them on contraceptive options.
    Of course, no one mentioned taking the actual Pill off script would be the best way of reducing unplanned pregnancies, abortions, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. It’s all about maintaining control and protecting their turf.

    • I have access to a university medical library and don’t know what I would do without it. It is a goldmine of useful information, and I spend most evenings researching it for medical information. Yesterday I had an operative hysteroscopy under GA, thinking it would involve simple polyp removal, but they found none but a very thickened endometrium and mentioned I’d be back for more surgery. “What on earth do you mean?” I said. Hysterectomy, they casually replied. I’m now feeling very low and tearful about it today. If it’s not cancer, and is not causing me any problems, why the hell should I have my womb taken away? My research has told me that only a quarter of removed wombs turn out to be cancerous, and that hysterectomies, especially those done vaginally have increased rates of prolapse and incontinence. Gynae flatly denied this when I put it to him, saying it is nonsense. I’m now awaiting the results of the biopsy, but I just want to be out of the whole f**king system.

      • Sorry about your situation Ada. Hysterectomy is their answer to every problem for all women over a certain age or says that they have “completed their family”. I have read this on several websites that detail protocols for gyn investigations. For example the exact same CIN situation for a younger women might mean no treatment, a slightly over women might be told she needs a LEEP, while an older woman would be told she needs a hysterectomy. Of course many women will not question their doctos judgment or ask for other options. What makes me angry is that women are not offered other options or told the truth.

        Endometrial hyperplasia has a few types and there are certain risks of each for cancer. So definitely get a hold of the biopsy report and go do your research. Just be thankful that you have access to that university medical library. Also try to get some access to journal searches for the most current information. Most of the university librarians would be happy to help you use the journal databases to find articles since they are usually bored as hell.

        If it is not causing you any problem or cancer, you are right, why do anything. Try to find some herbs that will help you shed off the lining.

        This is one of the reasons why I refuse to pap. I do not agree with many of the treatments offered. I might want to know what is going on but there is too much pressure and no privacy of health records (for health professionals). Every woman over 40 should know that any abnormality on a pap is going to start a cascade of investigations, some very painful and will ultimately lead to taking hormones (causing other cancers) or hysterectomy.

      • If I might ask: Why even bother with the results? It seems that they lie quite a bit & it tends to be very prevalent with this sort of subject.

        On the one hand, they might lie individually for whatever reason that you may or may not find out later (bonus incentive payments, getting everyone to pay attention to them, mommy issues, etc…).
        On the other, there’s the possibility of there being a much broader situation (false information in schooling- whether financially motivated or for whatever other reasons to include simply being wrong & running with it).

        Either way, I’d figure not getting detrimented by it is a priority. Keep in mind, you don’t have to battle them to the finish or anything- you might just terminate the interaction between you & them. It might not be useful to try to “use their momentum against them,” so to speak. They very likely won’t come clean on a lie & trying to catch them in one still relies on THEM screwing THEMSELVES.

        Like I had said in my last post about specious reasoning, if they’ve connected the dots in all kinds of false ways it just becomes more obvious that they made all kinds of shit up when it finally comes out.

      • adawells my mother had a hysterectomy years ago because of heavy perimenopausal bleeding. She should have been treated with progestin. Instead she had a hysterectomy because he stupid male gyn recommended it. It has been the bane of her life. She has severe prolapse. She had surgery to fix it but it didn’t fix it one iota. She is incontinent. And personally, I think it aged her.
        More recently I know someone who had a hysterectomy because she had some mystery illness where she just felt tired all the time and generally not well. For some stupid reason her doctor thought it was “hormonal” and advised she had a hysterectomy. (Why a hysterectomy would fix that, I don’t know). Anyway I have heard that she is so much worse after the hysterectomy. ( I am not surprised).
        Your gyn sounds like a typical arrogant male doctor who thinks he knows everything about women’s bodies but knows nothing. Anyway why not just have an ablation if it really is a problem? ( I suppose doctors don’t get paid as much to do those).

      • Thank you so much for your replies to my situation. I’m feeling very much between a rock and a hard place. I hate this waiting for the biopsy results. I am so sorry for your mother’s situation, Mary. I have been looking at alternatives and thank you for your suggestions. This operation will be an absolute last resort for me…

      • Thank you Moo, Alex and Mary for your replies, but the biopsy result came back as grade 2 adenocarcinoma of the endometroid kind, so it looks as though I’m for the chopping block and progestogens are not an option. It’s endometrial cancer – the genuine thing – saw it on the report. I’m still awaiting a scan to ascertain staging. Had an appointment recently and expressed my wish for the absolute minimum to be removed. I could insist on keeping my ovaries, but not sure yet if this is storing up trouble for later, but I have read that they reduce risk of osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease if kept. It saddens me that my cervix will have to go after I have saved it from the assaults of the pap test for many years. Stay with me.

      • Ada
        Hope all goes well, you’re right, it’s a blow after you’ve kept the pap test police at bay for many years. The important thing is to have confidence in your doctors. My mother was referred to a general surgeon when she needed bowel surgery a few years ago, we decided she should she a colorectal surgeon, being in the right hands can make all the difference. My baby brother has Parkinson’s Disease (he’s only 45) and has improved a lot under a new specialist, one of the best in the field.
        Sending positive and supportive thoughts your way…

  57. This is depressing – Nadia Kamil’s ‘Pap Rap’ is all over the social media. Great intentions but unfortunately she’s giving the wrong advice.

    • It’s pretty appalling how they present these things as an act of liberation & independance. It’s like they’re saying “Take back your body & hand it over to someone else.” No mention of risks or inaccuracy, either. I guess these are as irrelevant as bodily autonomy?

      Why is it so hard for someone to understand when there is some kind of dissonance with any medical situation? They actually argue with people! It’s like someone is saying “that doesn’t exist despite its existANCE.”

    • This is so depressing… but fits well with all the rape culture presented in shitty pop music like this

      • “please excuse the misogynistic language of hiphop”… good girl, good little dumb citizen propagandist, hahaha

      • oh my goodness, it’s incredibly depressing! A clear symptom of rape culture it is! What on earth has happened to modern women that they equate submitting themselves to a stranger and have their private parts exposed and examined as ‘female empowerment’ ? Has it never occurred to her who invented this shit in the first place? The visuals in this video are really appalling. The different sets of women’s legs shown in the ‘funny looking stirrups’ with the whole setup looking funny combined with the lyrics to urge women to have their smears is simply making fun of women who say NO to this rape shit! It makes it look like women are supposed to see this as funny including doctors, like it’s no big deal. That has always been the message behind the pro pap propaganda which is a constant attempt to spread the lie and therefore suppress the truth that IT IS A BIG DEAL to have your private parts exposed and fingerfucked by those who deem it “necessary”. Ugh I hate this bitch and notice how many thumbs up this shitty video has, grrr!!

      • Yazzmyne- you should have seen the obedient little responsible women on jezebel who came to defend her after I left a comment… the usual kinds, they had dysplasia, so they think they have the right to tell other’s whom to spread their legs for. Unfortunately the thread deleted, but it was a rather good one, some shining examples of bigotry and stockholm syndrome- “the NHS would never” ahahahahaah….

    • Yes, lots of misinformation, but who cares, isn’t that the way they’ve always promoted screening to women? Second most common cancer for women, please, give us a break, they never give up, wheeling out the same old chestnuts every time. CC is rare in the developed world and always was, a far cry from common. Also, a pap test is no guarantee your cervix is fine, ever heard of false negatives.
      Also, the put-down, always there, “your vagina is nothing special”.
      It’s sickening and to think this is the way women promote testing to other women, we have accepted their lead…hook, line and sinker.
      Some women think it’s so modern, fashionable etc. to harp on about pap testing or breast screening when they have no clue when it comes to the evidence, their “advice” is actually harmful.

  58. It’s frustrating when it’s tied in with women’s empowerment. I’m a feminist and I think coercive vaginal screening is perpetrating rape culture rather than sexual health awareness.

    Is there anyone out there that could do a take on Nadia Kamil’s ‘Pap Rap’ on the risks of cervical screening?

    • I have to agree with several posting on here that all the cervical screening is about the rape culture.

      Maybe we should explain the rape culture. Men are victims of it too, so are the old, very young and any vulnerable people.

    • I get why you use the term “rape culture,” as there are unconventional variations, but I would suggest a different phrasing for a few reasons: Off the bat, a lot of people think of the conventional wrestling & screaming variety and when they look around they don’t see that- so it comes off false.

      Another thing is that if you would say something like “a culture that’s hostile to women” or a “woman-harming society” someone will probably ask how it’s that way. Then you can explain the dynamics & they can’t very well argue without saying “What happens ISN’T what occurs.”

      When you point out that a situation is what it consists of & that this consists of penetration as a product of someone else’s decision-making (whether that’s through coercion, deception, or outright force) they won’t be able to say you’re making something out to be something it’s not.

      Another thing is that altruism doesn’t produce ownership, but people say things like “they only want to help” or something to that effect. I guess the idea is you’re wrongfully attacking them by making whatever situation not happen to you?

    • It’s funny you should bring up rape culture. I completely agree that forced screenings are part of rape culture, but I’d also argue this site often perpetuates rape culture. Many women on this site believe all male gynecologists get a sexual thrill out of pelvic exams (which, honestly, is an extremely stupid assumption). Lets talk about the main rape myths perpetuated on this site:

      1) All men are animals. This is exactly the argument used by rape apologists. “Men are animals, and that’s why it’s your fault you were raped. You shouldn’t have been wearing that skirt.” Honestly, if you really think all men are rapists, go join Cathy Brennan and her little band of man-hating freaks. You sound as ridiculous as the people who claim “trans women aren’t women, but are men trying to force their way into women’s spaces to rape them.”

      2) Rape has anything to do with sex/sexual attractiveness. “Male gynecologists perform pelvic exams on young, attractive women for nothing more than sexual thrill.” No. Rape has absolutely nothing to do with sex. Rape is ENTIRELY about power. So stop it.

      When you say these things, you are perpetuating rape culture, and you are becoming part of the problem. As someone who has watched an absolutely stupid amount of “annual exams,” I can tell you that desexualizing it is EXTREMELY easy. There is nothing sexy about it from the provider’s end. It’s extremely clinical. This is not always so for the patient, but for the provider, yes. You want to know why these exams aren’t going anywhere? Money. In asking American doctors to follow WHO guidelines, you are asking them to take a gigantic pay cut. The other thing is socialization. Doctors are socialized in medical school that they are figures of authority and what they say goes. They’re also socialized to be total jackasses. There have been a few studies identifying this and some people have talked about trying to change it, but so far nothing is happening. There are not any more rapists in the medical profession than in the rest of the population (4-6%).

      • ladyprotips- I don’t know who are you addressing, I do not think you can generalise, all men, obgyns etc. I do not think you can switch on and off sexual urges, but the focus should not be on how male ob-gyns feel- but how the patients feel. A strange male is a strange male, regardless of which university they went to. The picture certainly is more complex then to pin it on horny men wanting to assault young women, but it is part of the problem. What you say, how doctors are socialised to objectify people and be total entitled little dicks is true, and rape being about power is also true- and I think this mix precisely is the perfect climate to incubate all the horrific abuse.

      • The thing is we know that some male doctors do get a sexual thrill out of perform breast and pelvic exams because they have been found guilty in the courts of law. So there is no argument about that. It is a fact. Now the problem most women have is, we don’t know which doctor has appropriate or inappropriate thoughts, because of course most know how to act professionally.

        The problem I have with male doctors is the judgement they make on a woman’s looks either positive or negative. One doctor denied it was sexual because he had to examine “obese ugly women” . So apparently he only notices when when they are unattractive. I wouldn’t want a doctor making such harsh judgements about me when I am most vulnerable.

        Another point, the Spanish Gynecological Society published a series of cartoons in their official newsletter which were drawn by a male gynecologist. They ridiculed women and their conditions -prolapse, incontinence, etc and there was even a joke about a young attractive woman being told that she needed to have a pap smear every three month – remember this was a joke by a male gynecologist in their official newsletter. Do I believe that a female doctor is going to make fun of my body or my condition when she has the same body parts? No because that would mean she finds her own body funny too.

      • ” Lets talk about the main rape myths perpetuated on this site:

        1) All men are animals. ..”

        Uhm that’s perhaps what you are reading into, but that’s not what I get from this site.
        I find it ironic how it is more often *men* who think that another man has no business in doing these type of intimate exams on women as opposed to a lot of women who naively believe that a man with a white coat on isn’t even capable of having sexual thoughts when performing pelvic exams. And I don’t think it is because men suffer from internalized sexism either that they in general believe that women’s genitals shouldn’t be examined by another man, no it is because they know how they think. And they know it’s not right.

        There’s a difference in not viewing men as animals and seeing their humanness but still being wary of the fact that those sexual instincts remain there despite they are humans as well. It has no use to go into extremes and be oblivious of their sexual thoughts/feelings, because that is also part of them. And some men do behave like animals so there is nothing sexist in pointing that out. It is sexist to be in denial of that and call the one who exposes that fact as ‘sexist’.

        “Rape has absolutely nothing to do with sex. Rape is ENTIRELY about power. So stop it.”

        Rapists rape for different reasons and may have a multitude of reasons of why they rape. Oftentime it is because of a mix of power and sexual thrill where one aspect may ignite the other. I think *you* are doing a very good job at perpetuating rape culture by stating that rape has “absolutely nothing to do with sex” !!
        If rape had nothing to do with sex then rape wouldn’t even exist or would never be acknowledged as such. Rape involves the sexual act forced onto someone against their will. So regardless of whether the rapist does it (partly) for his own sexual pleasure or not, it is still a sexual act! So how come, rape has nothing to do with sex?

        And it is for this very flawed type of thinking that people have a hard time acknowledging that pelvic exams can be rape, because they supposedly have nothing to do with sex either, since the purpose (officially) is not to derive sexual pleasure from it but for medical reasons. It doesn’t matter whether one, both or neither of the people involved derive sexual pleasure or have the intention to get a sexual thrill out of it. The fact that the act involves penetration of the sex organs means that it is a sexual act. If we don’t recognize that, then pelvic exams will never be able to be considered rape because they supposedly have nothing to do with sex.

        Your reasoning is as bad as judges back in the day who would argue that a woman could not have been raped if she orgasmed as a result. It doesn’t matter how her body responded, sexual arousal is not proof that she wanted it or even liked it. The other way around, sexual arousal in the rapist is not proof that he wasn’t raping her, because you believe it’s about ‘power only’. What determines the rape is that it involves the penetration of her sexorgans against her will.

        And on another important note, I have always said that I believe one of the main drives for gynecologists to examine women in this way, is because of the *powertrip* they get from it and that has everything to do with rape as well. So even if the gynecologist gets no sexual thrill from it, it is still rape when it is against her will and he or she is stripping her from her power. I will even go as far as to say that most women are raped from these exams despite giving their consent, because a lot of them *feel* raped from it. They don’t want to submit to it, but they believe they have to. The body says ‘no’ but the mind says ‘yes’ due to brainwashing. Again, it doesn’t matter even in the least bad cases where an examiner is as clinical as can be, it is about the experience of the one who is undergoing it.

      • On an other note, the sexist polemic that men are animals, so women should not wear short skirts, stay out late etc. limits the participation of women in public spheres, and excuses men should they become agressors. Let’s apply this same sexist argument to male gyns- male gyns are animals, so women should not visit male gyns- whom would this limit, only the male gyns- women who would still be too scared to not present their private parts up for inspection each year could still get the same service. Yes, some males are predators, but it should never be a reason to confine women’s liberty, but denying the obvious, that sexual assault in medical setting does happen is just wishful PC nonsense. Again, the focus should not be on how the male doctors/jealous husbands feel, but how woman feel. I agree with Yazzmine, the body does not distinguish, it does not matter whether the bed has stirrups or wrough iron ornaments, whether the sheets are white or pink, so on, the body will be affected, and such affect is pre-cognitive- look at women who say they shake and vomit afterwards when they have to present for such exams.

      • Karen, I am addressing the sentiment often addressed on this site that “all male gynecologists will rape you.” I mainly see this sentiment from Patient Modesty (who I agree with in theory, but not that all male OB/GYNs are rapists). I think you’ll find the VAST majority of it to be about power, and this is going to be true among female OB/GYNs.

        Mary, I’m not into Schrodinger’s rapist or any variation of it (all men are rapists until proven otherwise). You want to know who comments on women’s looks? *Women.* I can’t say I’ve ever heard a male in a gynecologist’s office comment on a woman’s looks. I hear that from the nurses, CNMs, and female OBs. Do they talk about patients in general? Sure, especially when multiple providers are seeing the same patient. Never names, just general things. And of course, being a student shadowing in my uncle’s old practice, they told me a lot of stories about *him,* in addition to just medical anomalies they’d seen, and of course the main doctor I shadow talks about each patient we see with me so I can learn. We don’t go back in his office and go, “WOAH did you see that nasty vajayjay?” (I can also say that thought has never actually crossed my mind.) Pretty sure the only time we honestly talked about a patient personally was the time one patient smacked her gum really loudly during the visit and it aggravated me and the time a 30 week pregnant woman came in smelling of cigaret smoke so strongly I went back into his office and choked (I’m extremely allergic and I bitch about everyone who smokes around me). His nurses, however, are very prone to doing this, and the female doctors often join in, as was the case with the med school profs and students I’ve worked with. My thoughts when watching an exam are: “Her breasts don’t have any dimples or irritation,” “Her cervix looks pink and healthy,” and one time, “Dear God that is a fuckton of yeast.” Colposcopies are a touch different in you can see an abnormal area right there (it turns white). I would also like to add that med school profs are an entirely different breed of dick.

        Yazzmyne, I work at a rape crisis center when I’m at school, and I can tell you rape is not sexually driven. I have spent a lot of time delving into the minds of rapists with the help of trained psychologists in order to better help the survivors I work with. So don’t sit and tell me I’m perpetuating rape myths because you don’t like what I have to say. Rape may be an assault upon the sexual organs, but it is not about sex or having sex. It is about power, dominance, and control. If you’re going to argue rape is a sexual act, then by your definition, a pelvic exam cannot be rape, as a pelvic exam is not a sexual act, but an act carried out on sexual organs (they are different). It is the “carried out on sexual organs” that makes it rape. Both rape and pelvic exams have nothing to do with sex. That’s my point. A pelvic exam can be rape, because rape is not about sex. And I know you all seem to think a pelvic exam is basically sexual intercourse, but it really isn’t. It’s a medical exam that, when done without consent, is rape.

        Yes, the power trip is a big part of it, and I think you’ll find this to be more common among female OBs. In addition to a power trip, you have to remember that OB/GYNs are taught in medical school and residency that vaginas are a disease and before gynecology came along, women just fell apart and died in the streets all the time. The guy I shadow overscreens because he ACTUALLY THINKS every patient he has will fall over dead if he doesn’t. He also said a couple of things that made me think information is presented differently to American doctors than UK doctors. He said something about, “There’s thought pap smears don’t need to be done every year,” like this is brand new information that isn’t solid yet. It’s amazing, CME credits really are a joke. He doesn’t HAVE to know the new pap smear guidelines or why they are so, because NO ONE MAKES THEM LEARN NEW THINGS (or in this case, old things that are just being allowed to make their way over to America). And this is astounding because my father is a pathologist, and while his CMEs were still laughable, they were YEARS better than the ones for OB/GYN.

        In the end, putting off abuse to the sex of the doctor is stupid, dangerous, and will end up ignoring a lot of abuse. It was a WOMAN who tried to force me to get an exam at 11, a WOMAN who threatened to hold me down if I walked into her office, and a WOMAN who told me I was a liar and a slut when I told her I wasn’t sexually active. It was a MAN who told me he believed me, a MAN who told me women don’t have to get exams for birth control, and a MAN who diagnosed my endometriosis based off symptoms and family history because I said NO to an exam. It is unfair and frankly just false to paint male OB/GYNs as monsters.

      • Ladyprotips, you are certainly entitled to your own point of view, but your claim that the sentiment often addressed on this site is that “all male gynecologists will rape you” is unfounded. Where has this been stated? And by whom? Misty (Medical Patient Modesty) has not made such a claim, nor has anyone ever stated that “all” male gynecologists will rape you. Misty in particular and many of us in general are attempting to raise awareness about potential harms associated with pap tests/pelvic exams, and one of those potential harms is sexual assault by male doctors.

        From the post Sexual abuse under guise of health care: Dr. Gerald Monk, a professor at San Diego State University, states “Patients can feel especially violated in the context of health care. Not only do patients anticipate being safe and secure, they expect to be healed. Following an adverse medical event, a patient may experience a lifetime of heartbreaking anguish and suffering.” https://forwomenseyesonly.com/2013/04/19/sexual-abuse-under-guise-of-health-care-presents-barriers/

        Women generally trust their doctors. For me this is the saddest part: when good women who are trusting are abused. The abuse can range from unnecessary intimate exams to full blown rape. It is more than just the abuse that makes sexual assault by doctors so devastating. It’s also the loss of trust and this can affect how a woman lives her life. The reality is that some male doctors sexually abuse their patients. Knowing this in advance can help women prevent sexual abuse from occurring. No one is saying ALL doctors abuse their patients, but some of us are saying that it can and does occur.

        After reading about the awful experience you suffered at the hands of a female doctor I can better understand why you defend male doctors. However, the vast majority of sexual abuse cases are committed by male doctors.

      • Ladyprotips, perhaps you could enlighten us why we should all go and see her edit.
        I couldn’t see anything of note apart from ‘if you don’t want to go that’s OK’

        A video dressed up as a feminist statement to encourage young women to screen. A mention of Mary Wollstonecraft to give it additional feminist cred.
        “Only takes 30 seconds girls and it’s FINE, honestly It’s FINE! AND the nurse has seen THOUSANDS of vaginas and YOURS is nothing special. Wear a skirt and it won’t be so bad when you take your knickers off” Yada Yada Yada
        How about a video on the downsides of screening, perhaps a rap and a dance with puppets about cervical stenosis or cervical incompetence after ‘treatment’.

      • Ladyprotips- (for your second comment) This all really is IRRELEVANT. No one would dispute that such a practice does exists, where they only talk about the patient out loud when she smacks her gum or whatever. The existence of such a practice does not negate the seedy, sexist history of gynaecology, full of human rights abuses. The whole principle is so rotten to the core, and founded on a false ideology that women are inferior and sickly. You mention too that doctors are trained to think vaginas are walking diseases. As long as this thinking prevails, as long as Marion Sims has a statue, and not Anarcha, on whom he experimented, and as long no public apology is issued to all the women wronged and harmed, training books rewritten and functionaries changed to the highest echelons, and the NHS call-recall opt out legit harassment scheme dismantled, along with the financial incentives attached to meeting the screening targets I honestly do not care what nice and neat polcor little things gyns are thinking about whilst they are peering into healthy women’s vaginas. Structural problems are only masked with smiles and nice warm fluffy strirrups, you know.

      • ladyprotips-

        You say that it are women who comment on women’s looks. I’m not going to dispute that, but that doesn’t mean that men or male doctors in specific don’t do that. It’s not because you never heard them speak in a non-professional way about women that they don’t have other type of thoughts. It would only be naive to believe so. Women probably feel more freely to say things about other women, because they are women themselves, whereas male doctors will be more watchful to not say those things amongst their female colleagues because they could be accused of sexism. But I have read enough accounts of male doctors who made sexual comments towards their female patients (when nobody else is in the room shadowing them of course) or towards their male colleagues.

        There is even a male gynecologist who argues that men should not be gynecologists because he believes that even if they are fairly good, their subconscious motivation is to be in a powerful and controlling relationship with women.

        “Yes, the power trip is a big part of it, and I think you’ll find this to be more common among female OBs”

        I’m sorry for your experience but that doesn’t mean you can generalize all female OB’s versus all male OB’s based upon your personal experiences. Many women seem to do this and I definitely believe that many female OB’s are in the business because they too want to patronize and control other women, but I don’t think more so than male OB’s. Even women who are not in the business already do that to other women. Just look at Nadia Kamil. Why doesn’t she urge all men to have their prostate checked anyways? Because a feminist is only “concerned” about the health of other women? If you ask me, it’s that she succumbed to the bully tactics (originally started by men who invented gynecology btw) and now became a bully herself, mistakenly believing she’s doing something for the good cause.

        “The guy I shadow overscreens because he ACTUALLY THINKS every patient he has will fall over dead if he doesn’t. ”

        That may seem on the surface, a belief that is based on concern for other women but it’s really one of deep disrespect by viewing women as naturally inferior and weak, resulting in the urge to control women masked as intending to ‘take care’ of them. The fear that is injected into women’s minds and their willingness to succumb to the bullying tactics only feed their controlling and disrespectful attitude even more so and creates this power imbalance with a big loss for women. And that is also why these doctors aren’t willing to educate themselves properly on the matter. It’s because they subconsciously know that the facts might actually make them lose their control over women, because the pressuring and overscreening would no longer be justified.

        “Yazzmyne, I work at a rape crisis center when I’m at school, and I can tell you rape is not sexually driven.”

        Mind you that a lot of rapes are not reported so you won’t be encountering all types and you may have a distorted view because of that. Here’s an article about rapists explaining their own motivations http://jezebel.com/5929544/rapists-explain-themselves-on-reddit-and-we-should-listen
        Clearly, some of them are sexually driven, like it or not.

        ” If you’re going to argue rape is a sexual act, then by your definition, a pelvic exam cannot be rape, as a pelvic exam is not a sexual act, but an act carried out on sexual organs (they are different).”

        No not according to my definition because I already said that a pelvic exam is a sexual act and if you look up the definition of rape it says: “any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.”
        Definition of sexual intercourse: “Sexual Intercourse means penetration of one person’s sexual organ by another’s sexual organ or by a foreign object manipulated by another person.” And isn’t that what a pelvic exam is; the penetration of one person’s sexual organ by a foreign object (and/or another person’s fingers) manipulated by another person?

        So yes I stand by my definition as it fits the general definition anyway and I don’t see why a sexual act would be different than an ‘act carried out on sexual organs’. The term kind of speaks for itself: an act that involves sex organs.
        I will say that a medical exam such as a pelvic exam involves a sexual act that *can* be done for medical purposes without neither party having the intent to derive sexual pleasure from it. Whether there is a sexually satisfying purpose or pleasure being derived from the sexual act is a different thing.

        I think those who still have pelvic exams themselves, will feel in particular more resistant to accepting the idea that a pelvic exam is a sexual act because the body already knew it all along but the mind keeps suppressing the thought, otherwise if it wouldn’t be such a big deal and ‘not sexual in any ways’ as always claimed even if you consented to it, why the upset? If it would be so much far off the truth what I’m saying then people would be equally upset if I said ” when someone says ‘hello’ to you, it’s a sexual act and therefore can be rape”, but it’s not, therefore nobody would get upset by such a ludicrous idea. All I’m saying is that, the heavy resisting emotions that such a statement (a pelvic exam is a sexual act) tends to generate is because a sensitive spot is being hit, a truthfulness that most do not want to acknowledge.

  59. From Wikipedia
    “In feminism, rape culture is a concept that links rape and sexual violence to the culture of a society, and in which prevalent attitudes and practices normalize, excuse, tolerate, and even condone rape.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_culture

    I think rape culture fits. While it is debatable whether or not aggressive coercion to have a pap smear is considered an act of rape, this type of treatment is an action that happens regularly in a culture that condones all the things that normalize sexual violence and its aftermath, such as dehumanising and objectifying women’s bodies, victim blaming, and rejecting women’s right to say NO to having their genitals penetrated.

    • “it is debatable whether or not aggressive coercion to have a pap smear is considered an act of rape”- rape is the act of penetration without consent, but the propaganda is pure hate speech- promoting the idea that women are too inferior and irrational to make decisions for themselves, so others have to decide for them who penetrates their bodies, and for what reason, and it’s for a woman’s own good that she is treated like public property, and it is normal that she has no agency when it comes to her reproductive organs.

      • It’s an attack when it’s a product of someone else’s decision-making. I don’t know how to underline, but I keep saying that so specifically because there are situations where she’s not in a state TO conflict with anything- like when unconscious or drugged-up. Imagine if someone passes out at a party & someone else takes liberties. No fighting, but still an issue.

        It doesn’t even have to be that serious- like with a groper on a train or someone with a camera in a bag. Don’t be fooled, someone’s not unknowing in these situations. Someone might act all innocent & confused, but this was something they aligned in a particular way. What? Did they just trip UP a tree with a pair of binoculars glued to their head?

  60. How does rape or sexual assault pertain to pelvic exams? I am glad this is being discussed. When a gun is held to a woman’s head and she is told to say “yes” and the sexually assaulted then it is definitely a crime. When a doctor coerces a woman into having a pelvic exam by threat of denial of medical treatment, no one can see any parallels? If a woman at first consents to sexual contact and then withdraws her consent at anytime or is unable to give consent (unconscious, drunk) it is considered sexual assault in my country. When a woman is saying stop during a colposcopy and the procedure is not stopped then is it not sexual assault?

    When it “feels like rape” then alternatives should be offered to women in healthcare for their consent such as only female doctors and staff, self tests, less invasive or painful procedures or even anaethesia or whatever makes them feel like it is not rape. But only if they consent and are given full information which does not happen too often.

    For colposcopies, The age factor and risk factors should be throw out. Women should be recommended treatments and given facts about regression or natural treatments and the actual state of their cervix not on how many sexual partners they had, how many paps they had, how many pregnancies, abortions, miscarriages, their religion, their race, their marital staus, their sexual orientation, whether they want to have children or not or judgements about whether they will “comply” with future treatments. The actual state of a woman’s cervix should be the only factor in recommending treatment NOT sexual history or anything else. The only person deciding what to do about her cervix and uterus should be the women herself with information based on facts.

    The victim blaming also has to stop. Women got fed up and the Slut Walk phenomenon happened. The first Slut Walk was in Toronto 2011. Of course some people did. to understand what the Slut Walk was about either.

    • Just let me clarify one aspect of the above discussion. Risk factors (such as age at first sexual encounter, number of partners) might be used to access risk for determining who needs screening. But it is not because women are told that everyone needs to screen. The same information is often used to “punish” women into more extreme treatments for abnormal pap results and what is diagnosed in colposcopy.
      So now I am refusing all the screening questions because I know they are screening questions. I never knew before. If a doctor said now would you like to have a screening for x and these are the questions, give a list and then I might. Taking a history is totally bogus most of the time because it often does not make any difference i diagnosis I other areas. My experience anyway. Most doctors do not listen and their history taking and the as wers they write down are only for their litigation purposes only.

  61. I have herd woman say that they told the doctor to stop the exam and the doctor did not. Also girls being held down by nurses and doctors. I herd of this happening back when paps and well woman exams first got started. There was a time when woman were told to just keep quiet if there husbands beat them. And that it was there falt, they needed to keep the family together . Woman were mistreated at work and were fierd if they spoke reported it. My family member was held down in the hospital bc she felt a need to push the baby out . The nurse tied her to a hospital bed and forced her legs shut till the doctor could get to the room and no one called the police. This was in the 50s. The pap smear became standard of care when woman were still fiting for there rights. No one ever asked us if we found this screening acceptable it was just pushed on all woman and for birth control in the US.

  62. Saying “if you don’t want to that’s okay” along with a whole song saying “do it, do it, do it” doesn’t really strike me as a counteraction of the overall endeavor of pushing someone into it. It’s seems like she was just trying to cover herself (ironically enough).

    She’s telling someone “it’s fine” in that person’s place, as if that’ll transform anything. Something involves someone LESS because this same thing has happened to lots of other people? No, that’s not true.

    I don’t know if this is a factor here, but she IS half Iraqi. Maybe the idea of a woman not having say in what goes in where transferred over to this subject? Not trying to sound racist, but the ideology in that part of the world is not one of female bodily autonomy. I don’t know if she was raised with that belief system or maybe with some undertones of it, but that can be a factor.

    • . ? Talking about the singer in the video. The shock value must come into it. For a women to put “cunt” in a video is shocking. Apologizing for the language.

      The Pap test is not fine but what about the women who gets a abnormal result? It is not going to be fine. No one says anything much about these follows or recommends alternative therapies to clear HPV.

  63. I am re-posting the following comment from a website that was allowing responses to the Nadia Kamil video and personally found it to be very apt:

    “Women are told unless they spread their legs and allow a collection of samples to be takes and a pathologist looks at the samples they die, all of this straight from the 1930s, as if science had not progressed since then, and as if this “test” (sorry the word test implies accuracy) would actually be harmless and simple and effective, and as if the cancer was a major threat, and as if female reproductive organs were public property… I am so cracking up…
    By normalising such medicine, making fun of doctors penetrating vaginas and belittling and ridiculing women who do otherwise than told by nanny state you are
    very much part of the problem. Since when is it ok to tell consumers they are immature if they demand a better technology? Why should someone be belittled and ridiculed who wants to have agency over their own body?
    And what about this stupid language- “necessary”??? Sorry, whether necessary or not, I will decide that for myself, your opinions are irrelevant. You pay lip service to condemning misogyny at the beginning of the video, yet you think you are any better by thinking you have the right to tell other woman how to manage their vaginas, and what you do is carrying on the work of all the nudge units who came up with all the applied behavioural psychology about the responsible women and smears being a lifestyle and identity marker. You are very much part of the problem.
    -“hella trendy”? WTF Lady… you are engaging in COERCION big time… removing the choice of women related to a vaginal procedure, are you getting it, why is it wrong? Smears are outdated and risky, the cancer is rare, has always been in the developed world, and it is not for some aspiring comedian to decide how adult woman manage risks related to their reproductive organs. Do you know what informed consent it? And do you know it is a legal and ethical requirement before smear tests? Do you know about the NHS target payment scheme related to smears? Do you know what penetration of the vagina without consent is… do you think it is funny??? Do you have any whatsoever clue at all, or do you just parrot what is spoon fed to you, make a few lame jokes, get oversized props and try to get some attention?”

  64. And another comment from the same website:

    “I do not find the rap pap video funny or catchy at all. Neither am I going to jump on the bandwagon in blissful ignorance to spread my legs for a stranger to look for a rare disease with an inaccurate test (the pap smear) that produces a high rate of false positives resulting into further unnecessary harm.
    What is really disturbing about this “feminist”‘ message is that instead of helping women -as she believes (by making light of the situation)- what she really is doing, is making light of the rape culture we are living in and further perpetuating it as women are already urged and coerced into having pap smears. But apparently it is “trendy”, “progressive” and “feminist” to ridicule a woman’s choice to decline a pap smear? Why else call these exams “necessary” for every woman? Why make it look like fun when so many women DO feel traumatized from these exams?
    You should rather be concerned about the many women who are met with ridicule when they decline a pap smear and are bullied into having pap smears when they go to the doctor for unrelated health issues. This “catchy rap video” that is supposed to make pap smears ‘trendy’ is instead making it even more difficult for women to say NO to an outdated invasive medical exam that poses more harm than benefits to their physical health and trivializes the invasive nature of the exam. Way to help perpetuating rape culture, Nadia!
    Obviously the video gives the message that having a pap smear is ‘not a big deal’, but for a lot of women it is and no matter how many silly rap video’s you make about it being ‘funny’ and ‘cute’ that is not going to change anything for these women. What about advocating for self-testing to those who want to get tested (and these tests already exist mind you, look into the Delphi screener) or is the thought of handling your own vagina instead of submitting yourself to a stranger whilst obediently rattling off the age old mantra ‘that it’s no big deal and oh so necessary for us women that your gynecologists instilled into you-too scary for a “feminist” like you to even ponder upon?”

  65. Ok so I’m 16 virgin and I just had my first ‘exam’ last week and still feel violated. I have a medical condition called PCOS and due to this I had to go to a Obstetrics/Gynecologist in my area. The Dr. is a expert on my condition and has been treating PCOS for years so my mother and I decided to give him a try.
    When my mother and I went in for the appointment he seemed like perfectly nice, friendly guy. After the three of us (the Doctor, my mother, and I ) talked about my symptoms and he wrote up a few prescriptions. Just when I thought we were done he starting talking about doing an exam. When I objected, he chuckled and said “well you are going to a big girl doctor now”. I was dressed in the little cotton robe, laying on the bed in the exam room, when he entered the room. He started talking to me before the exam(trying to make me less nervous I suppose) and asked about my grades, I told him “A’s and B’s” and he said “good if they say C’s I run my hands under cold water before the breast exam”. he then untied my rope so my entire chest was out for everyone to see and then began touching me. I was so sick disgusted that I couldn’t even watch I stared at the wall until it was over.
    He then put on some gloves and told me to side down and put my feet in the stirrups. I wanted to runaway and cry but did as he asked. He sat in this little chair and stared at me. Then he placed his hand on my inner thigh and slowly slid his hand down to my woman hood. Then he inserted these metal tongs into my vagina and opened me up until I wanted to scream in pain. After he pulled the tongs out of me he stuck his fingers in me and started touching me all over.
    When he finished he took of the gloves, washed his hands and started talking to my mother who was standing in the corner during this entire ordeal. Just before he left he smiled at me and said “I always take longer with the pretty girls”. I can honestly say that I have never felt more dirty in my entire life. After I the long quiet drive home, I went to bed and cried myself to sleep.
    Was he coming on to me when he said “I always take longer with the pretty girls”? Is it normally this painful? Do most girls feel this violated or am I just too sensitive?

    • This is an account of a pure sexual assault- and he admitted it! (” “I always take longer with the pretty girls””) Does your mother unterstand what happened? Does she understand she should have protected you? Would she be willing to be your witness, and engage the police?

    • You are most definitely not too sensitive. Your feelings and your reaction are normal. What they did to you was NOT normal! He violated you with the permission of your mother, it’s too disgusting for words. These medical procedures that way too many women submit to and accept as ‘normal’ are far from normal! And especially you objected to it but he proceeded anyway, neither did your mother stood up for you because she is brainwashed as well. On top of that chemical drugs don’t help to cure chronic diseases like PCOS. It’s due to a hormonal imbalance for which a blood test or saliva test would have been enough to make a diagnosis and perhaps an abdominal ultrasound. It is best cured with dietary changes and supplements or herbs which a gynecologist knows nothing about.
      And yes he knows he is an evil jerk for forcing you into this violating exam while he knew you didn’t want it and wanted to humiliate you furthermore, making you aware of the fact that he knows it’s not just a ‘medical exam’ but was knowingly raping you by referring to you as a pretty girl and taking longer for that matter. . Have you told your mother about that comment he made? Maybe that will wake her up a little.
      In any case I hope you find a way to protect yourself from another of these violating exams and stay away from these rapists. If your mother can not be convinced then you may have to lie about things to not make her force you to see that sadist or another gyno (even if she’d agree to see another gynecologist, know that it is your body and it is perfectly normal to not want to undergo this exam no matter who performs it as many of us decided to never see a gynecologist simply because we don’t want to and don’t see the use of it either no matter how nice some may be). I wish you good luck! It’s a sick world we live in.

Comments are closed.