3,978 comments

1. There was discussion on here a while ago about the BMI and it being inaccurate so I wanted to share this link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439

   Yet another screening tool that is inaccurate and out of date that the medical profession continues to use and cause harm with.

   With the death of Robin Williams there has been a lot of discussion about mental health and suicide. For me it has highlighted that it’s not about access to health care as he had the money to get good health care (although for some there is also the issue of access to care with some areas having wait times of up to a year). It’s about access to effective treatment. To get effective treatments research money is needed and yet research and services to mental health are cut while cancer research and screening receives millions to billions. Every year in Canada about 4000 people die by suicide often related to mental illness and about 20% will experience a mental illness in their lifetime. The WHO states “Depression is the leading cause of disability worldwide, and is a major contributor to the global burden of disease.” Yet the focus remains on cancer and with pap smears a rare cancer. The focus to me is off.

   • ADM
     I agree, the money goes to the pin-up cancers. Mental health has always been ignored, no one wants to know about it. The mentally ill are largely powerless. Fewer people are interested, fewer want to put their name to it. It’s hard to make mental health look sexy and appealing. Knickers and attractive backsides on display for cervical cancer, breasts obviously for breast cancer, notice they often use younger breasts to sell the breast screening “story”…maximum impact and attractiveness, you want to attract as much attention as possible. It’s why some younger women think they should screen because a 20-something woman was used in a news report.
     They want women to join this fun and responsible club, harder to make depression look like a fun club. YET mental illness is a huge problem, I think it’s something like 1 in 5 will suffer from depression at some stage in their life, 1 in 3 for clinical anxiety. It’s often something hidden away, not many want to talk about it.

     A colleague admitted to me recently that he’d had ECT about 15 years ago for a serious depression, I heard he had glandular fever.
     He felt there was enormous ignorance and judgement with mental illness, he listened to people say, “people are never the same after shock treatment” …dying to say something, but never did.
     ECT changed long ago, no convulsions, people get a muscle relaxant with the short term sedation. It meant instead of years off work, he was back in 6 months. He responded well, not everyone does.
     Yet no one knew about his 6 month battle with serious depression, he was suicidal when he was admitted to a private hospital. (apart from his wife)
     He felt they’d be judgement, he’d be viewed differently, people would be disappointed in him for not coping (especially his father) and his work might dry up if it got out he’d been in a psychiatric hospital. He’s retiring next year and plans to do some work for a mental health awareness group, many have expressed surprise that HE had a problem with mental illness.
     I don’t blame him for keeping it quiet for 15 years, but that’s part of the problem, the shame, the perception of weakness or being odd, the stigma, and the silence and secrecy.

     Cervical cancer and women’s cancer screening has the full force of the feminist movement behind it, lots of outspoken, high-profile, powerful/influential and attractive spokespeople, and politicians like the brownie points that come from women’s healthcare initiatives, like extending our breast screening program when it should be reviewed urgently. Switzerland is talking about scrapping their program, yet we’re extending ours. When the evidence is ignored, it’s usually IMO, about something other than healthcare.
     I believe women’s cancer screening is largely about other things, not healthcare OR we’d do it differently, more effectively, ethically and legally.

     The marketing, awareness drives, walks, morning tea events etc. also, bring the pin-up cancers to front of mind and change our perception of risk.
     Look at the pink ribbon juggernaut, commercial interests now drive the awareness and screening programs because THEY benefit from it…products with a pink ribbon, they give a cent or two to the program for every item sold…and they make a LOT more money as a result. It all means it creates a sort of artificial frenzy of concern about the disease. (the reality and evidence is completely irrelevant)
     If you look behind these programs and the groups that support them, you’ll usually find vested and political interests. Following the evidence does not suit the business and marketing model, neither does informed consent.

     The poor struggle to get decent healthcare, but are still IMO, more likely to get a pap test than decent care for their asthma or diabetes. The programs need this group to reach their target. Also, the wealthy in some countries are over-serviced by the healthcare industry, they’re targeted by vested interests and sold every test under the sun. Some of these people would be left with issues as a result, some may lose their life.
     When healthcare is mixed up with political agenda, scientific ego and massive profits, it stops being medicine and becomes a major threat to our health and lives.
     A colleague was telling me about an “amazing” executive health service, she was thinking of doing it every year. I cringed when I looked through the list of exams and tests. Anything called healthcare is considered a good thing by some/many, it means some people drop their guard and don’t see the wolf in sheep’s clothing.
     She was shocked when I said the exams and tests were unnecessary, not backed by evidence, and would harm her sooner or later and may even kill her. At least I made her stop and think…

   • Some of the health screening questions are just bad. For example the waist measurement of 35″. Seriously, lump in a 5′ woman and a 6′ women and try to say that a 5′ woman with a waist of 34″ is ok and a 6′ woman with a waist of 36″ is not.

     What problem I have with mental health services is how law inforcement and social stigma influences who and when of treatments. If a person shows up at a doctor’s office and says they feel suicidal then they are going to be admitted to hospital (against their will) for two days and sometimes accompanies by police. This goes into a police database and remains there. When the need a police check to get a job, even a volunteer one or try to go on vacation into US from Canada, it comes out.

     The health screening tests for depression are no good either. Someone walks into a doctors office and says they are depressed then they are handed a prescription when really they end to see a psychologist or social worker. I wonder how many of the suicides were of terminally ill patients who are denied the right to a dignified death?

   • ADM and Elizabeth:

     Wait times for access to certain specialists can be months – or even years – FOR MOST OF US. Robin Williams had more than adequate money to be able to get in to see a specialist of any kind basically at his convenience.

     I don’t know where you live, but there is PLENTY of access to, and even a PUSH for treatment or toward getting treatment in everything from schools to obstetricians and pediatricians. You cannot turn on a television or open a magazine seeing a direct-to-consumer ad for some psychiatric medication or other, showing someone down and “mopy” in the “before” picture, then out having fun with something in the next. Then, “Ask your doctor if you need (brand-name drug).” without mentioning what it’s for. If it’s a TV ad, a very fast list of the side effects (each of which effect at least 2% of those taking the drug), or if it’s a print ad, these are in microscopic print.

     It’s hardly being ignored, but it is not being treated either. Many people with a mental illness need it treated in some other way than a prescription mental health med. Some have physical problems causing the mental illness (thyroid being a major one, blood pressure being another, diabetes being another big one). Thyroid is seldom tested AND THE RESULTS READ. Blood pressure screening is pushed, and blood pressure medications are overprescribed, sometimes causing (apparent) mental and other illnesses of their own. Diabetes screening is fairly good, but variable. Treating the wrong illness with the wrong drug often leads to CASCADING MEDICATIONS, where another medication is added to treat side-effects of other medications, or multi-way interactions among meds – a phenomenon known to exist but not studied. Meanwhile, the underlying illness is ignored and festers. In other cases, the person has a temporary problem, best solved with counseling and/or a social worker.

     There IS research into mental health and mental illness. It’s just that the results of that research are not being used. They exist in an academic journal. Consumers do not read these. Physicians claim they do not have time to read them. Instead, they get the sales pitch from a nice-looking drug rep, peddling whatever wares she has, giving out pens and coffee mugs, and telling the doctor just what she (and her company) want them to know.

     It has been shown that they track these things by having pharmacies give out prescription information about these drugs – patient’s names, doctor’s name, drug name. It’s a violation of the law, but it’s widely done. Then competing drug manufacturers do direct mailings to patients/consumers for their drugs.

     The suicide rate more than triples when someone is getting “help” in the form of an SSRI pill, and increases for people on other sorts of psychiatric medications.

     In 1950, before the advent of most of these medications, depression and schizophrenia were short to moderate-term illnesses. People usually got over them. Now, mental illness is chronic and is the major cause of disability of people under 23. Moreover, depressed people were SELDOM violent. Violence is a known side-effect of SSRIs and SSNIs – including suicide. The stigma associated with multiple depressed people is associated with violence in the mind of the public.

     ECT works by damaging parts of the brain. Muscle relaxants stop the outward convulsions, but it works by producing a seizure in the brain severe enough to damage parts of it. There are no good theories as to how or why it works, in some cases, on some people. It makes no sense that damaging something in nearly-random ways would somehow “fix” it.

     Meanwhile, the community mental health care centers, which opened in the US during 1970s and increased during the 1980s when State mental hospitals were closed, designed to provide long-term care for the mentally ill, have been commandeered away from providing any “real”, effective treatment to those who need it. Instead, they involve someone asking the mentally ill if they’re still taking their meds, giving them more, and having them come back in several months. Some of these drugs are taken, some are sold illegally. For instance, Seroquel, one of the powerful antipsychotics, are sold as “Quell” or “Baby Heroin” to opiod addicts.

     Every third child you run into is taking amphetamines for ADHD. Often, these are prescribed because someone at the school tells the parents “your child cannot come back to school until he is taking (specific name-brand drug).” When I was in school, we were told to NOT take the amphetamines sold by the creepy-guy-in-a-raincoat, because they would damage our minds and bodies. Now, the school and the doctors are pushing them. Did the physiology of teenagers change or did the effects of amphetamines change? Or, did those in power over the issue find a way to make a lot more money, and push the drug dealers out of the way?

     • It’s not money, it’s malice. I say it all the time, but think about something: What “overhead” do these people have to worry so much about? They get a lot of cash & I guess it’s an attempt to make it look innocent or somehow a more “regular” thing than fucking with people for no reason, but ulitmately they don’t have much to worry about if it’s in terms of evictions.

       As for them that you refer to as “those in power,” they are usually trying to supplant someone else. Like the idea of a hi-jacking, they keep wanting to do what would be metaphorically be phrased as “crawling into someone else’s skin.” Doesn’t it make sense that they’re looking for “entry” in whatever way? Food, pills, injections, probing (both literal & in the figurative sense)- kind of has a general theme of “going into someone & exerting agency,” even if it’s just their influence.

       I know that’s a bit pyschological, but people sometimes think that things at a “higher level” are based on different stuff- science, math, logic, strategy, etc… . It doesn’t always occur to someone that fear & greed CAN be a reason for major financial moves. Arrogance actually CAN be a reason for a military strategy being useless.

       Connected to this is that simple malice CAN be a reason for whatever way of steering things. I guess “policy” tends to be the word for that, although “intended method of comportment” works just as well.

     • Bethkz. Thanks for telling the truth.

       I go to a church where they have a weekly service and lunch/food bank for anyone who wants to come. Some of these people are involved in self help groups for addictions, others have numerous health problems. (The donated food is mostly carbs and a few good people donate fresh vegetables). Some of the people there say that no one ever cared about them or listened to them before. These people seem to see numerous doctors and take numerous medications yet they live in substandard housing (or homeless) and have inadequate nutrition, social isolation and lack of transportation.

     • All of that medical, quasi-medical, or psychological/addiction treatment and medication costs money. A LOT OF MONEY! That money goes to multi-billion $$$ corporations – many of which have annual budgets that exceeds the annual budget of most nations. Addiction treatment is a multi-billion dollar/year industry as well, and is less than disappointing in the number of people who stay “sober” for 10 years after the treatment. When it doesn’t work, rinse and repeat, and not try something new.

       The something new is very often just having someone to talk with who will listen, will not judge, will not report to physicians, psychiatrists, social workers, or law enforcement. Rather than needing another medication that costs hundreds of dollars per month, often paid for through a government program, if that money were used to provide housing and healthful meals, it would result in a lot more “cures”.

       Moreover, “mental health” and the associated medications that go with it can be, and often is, used as a lazy way to overlook and fail to diagnose or treat a real, treatable, and easily-testable condition, such as scurvy, diabetes, and thyroid disorders (I’ve seen all of these and others done more than once!). Healthful food is what’s required for both of the examples, but that is somehow “too expensive” to do, whereas the more expensive solutions with an industry behind them are the ones given.

     • @Bethkz: “Now, mental illness is chronic and is the major cause of disability of people under 23. Moreover, depressed people were SELDOM violent. Violence is a known side-effect of SSRIs and SSNIs – including suicide. The stigma associated with multiple depressed people is associated with violence in the mind of the public.”
       Well stated Beth. I don’t know if you’ve read Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime by Peter Gøtzsche, but there is a chapter in his book titled “Pushing children into suicide with happy pills”. From the chapter:

       An internal unpublished study report that became available through litigation showed that at least eight children became suicidal on Paxil versus one on placebo. This was a serious and statistically significant harm of Paxil (P = 0.035). There were 11 serious adverse effects in total among 93 children treated with Paxil and two among 87 children treated with placebo, which was also significant (P = 0.01, my calculation; the paper didn’t say that this difference was statistically significant). This means that for every 10 children treated with Paxil instead of placebo, there was one more serious adverse event (the inverse of the risk difference, 11/93 – 2/87, is 10). However, the abstract of the paper ended thus: ‘Conclusions: Paroxetine is generally well tolerated and effective for major depression in adolescents.’ http://www.radcliffehealth.com/sites/radcliffehealth.com/files/samplechapter/gotzsche_chpt18.pdf

       I read the book hoping to find out more about vaccinations, but unfortunately they were not covered. Still, it was a great read: http://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Medicines-Organised-Crime-Healthcare/dp/1846198844
       Video clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1LQiow_ZIQ

     • I have not yet read _Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare_. I have read _Anatomy of an Epidemic_ by Robert Whitaker. He cites other studies which give about the same thing: That there are FAR more “adverse effects” with youngsters and adults taking Paxil and various other psychiatric medications than those taking a placebo. There are various long-term (?permanent? Some of them seem to last DECADES after taking the last dose of drug) effects, including sleep disturbances and sexual dysfunction – including one called “genital numbing”, whereby the male or female genitalia are either totally or partially numb, leading to sexual dysfunction as well as a propensity for injury. That’s okay though. If someone is sexually dysfunctional, there are other drugs they can take for that!

       It’s probable that the same types of fraud – including misstating the efficacy and diminishing side-effects are done with vaccinations as well as psychiatric and other medications, including those commonly prescribed like statins and beta blockers. My SO who is my common debate partner on these issues brings up that vaccinations have a very tiny markup. While that might be true, the drugs used to treat the side effects can often be big moneymakers, and are sometimes taken for 7 remaining decades of life.

     • Beth, I agree that vaccinations may be increasing health business. It’s difficult to find information that is not clouded by contradictions. I remembered reading an article about vaccinations causing micro-vascular strokes in infants and had a difficult time finding it again (not all servers will link to it). Here is an excerpt from a related article:

       Dr. Andrew Moulden, a Canadian doctor, actually discovered back in 2001 that vaccines can induce microvascular strokes in some people, though none of the journals or medical organizations he submitted his research to would publish these shocking findings. As it turns out, vaccines cause the body’s natural immune system to hyper-react to the injection of foreign particle material, which prompts a massive release of white blood cells. And these white blood cells, which are too large to enter the bloodstream, surround capillaries and actually clog and collapse them, leading to what are essentially micro-strokes.

       As a result, these blockages prevent smaller red blood cells from effectively delivering oxygen to the organs near these capillaries. And if these particles get anywhere near the brain, brain injuries such as autism and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) can ensue, which would explain a similar increase in these injuries in direct correlation to the ever-expanding childhood vaccination schedule.

       “What should be clear by now is that vaccines are taking a severe toll on people’s brains,” adds Stevenson. “The cost both to the individuals, whose lives are afflicted by strokes, and to society as a whole, which loses [its] productiveness and is burdened with their care, is massive.” http://www.naturalnews.com/039247_vaccinations_strokes_neurology.html#

       Another interesting article: why the press shouldn’t dismiss those who question the safety of vaccinations http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/lawrence-solomon/vaccine-skeptics_b_4548510.html

2. Sue: I think I hit the bottom of the page, is the last comment going to fit?

   • Alex, when a page ends the next comment that is posted will automatically start a new page. I don’t think there is any limit on the numbers of comments, posts, or pages on WP blogs.

     • Oh, all right. Thanks.

   • Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime by Peter Gøtzsche – I must get this book, I’ve heard a lot about it. I’m a fan of Dr Gotzsche, he’s a straight talker and many don’t like that, I suspect he has a lot of enemies. He’s a major threat to the billions being made from non-evidence based screening, excess etc. and they haven’t been able to silence him. He’s definitely in my Hall of Fame.
     This is a MAJOR problem in the States and becoming a problem in other countries.
     I was shocked to see a documentary by the BBC reporter Louis Theroix a couple of years ago. (children taking psychotropic drugs in the States)
     I’ve also, mentioned a book called “Saving Normal” by American doctor, Alan Frances, which is about almost every emotion now being categorized as some sort of mental illness that requires medical surveillance and medication. Shyness is now social phobia, an active child is now hyperactive etc.
     It says to me (once again) we need to be very cautious with our dealings with the medical profession and others. Australia doesn’t allow drug companies to advertise their products on TV. (directly to the consumer)
     When I was in Hawaii last year, I was shocked to see that every second or third ad on American TV was a drug company pushing something, “Ask your doctor…”
     I could see lots of people writing down the names of all of these drugs and then heading off to the doctor.
     We now have the private screening company here, I received a letter a couple of months ago, (straight in the bin and a letter sent to my local member) hope we don’t end up with drugs being advertised on TV etc.
     I was concerned a couple of politicians said recently that private insurers could have a role to play with medical consultations. I want to choose my own doctor and make my own informed decisions about healthcare, I don’t want my insurer meddling in the process. The Govt is trying to save on Medicare, but I think it would be a BAD move.
     The States has the most expensive healthcare in the world, but have poorer outcomes. When you allow medicine to become big business with blurred ethical boundaries,IMO, it stops being medicine and becomes a commercial and harmful exercise.

     • That documentary is by Louis Theroux, “America’s Medicated Kids”
       Parts 1 to 4 on YouTube

     • It’s not just all emotions and all expressions of emotions that are medicalized, but it’s also medicalized to show NO emotion or to not show particular emotions. Acts  happy: ADHD, bipolar, or delusional. Doesn’t act happy: anhedonia, emotional detachment, blunted affect.

       They can’t win. They can’t break even. They can’t even quit the game.

     • Elizabeth, Peter Gøtzsche is in my Hall of Fame too. I bet he has gone through many gauntlets, and has lost status in many circles, in order to bring this information to the public. Prescription drugs are the third leading cause of death so it makes perfect sense to begin viewing pharmaceutical companies that put profits ahead of safety, to the point of causing death, in the same light as organized crime. The book is written in a conversational tone with a bit of humor thrown in, similar to how he speaks. Peter Gøtzsche worked for the pharmaceutical industry at one point in his career. This in addition to his years of research experience makes for a very informative book.

       “Saving Normal” by Alan Frances sounds like a good read as well, I’ll have to order it.

3. That’s the nature of that kind of creature- nullifying everything, I guess. Always going against whatever is there & playing “rock & a hard place” games with everyone. They like to trap. They like to erode. They like to inflict. They like to deceive. It’s what their gravitations are, plain & simple. Other things don’t “taste” as good.

   It’s not really a “power” thing, I figure it’s about infliction- because power can go with momentum, as well as against or be actively neutral. Kids are very active & there’s a lot of things that are in flux (they’re not only living- they’re growing, developing more adult characteristics, there’s mental changes, skill development, all kinds of things). Plus, it’s more fucked-up to go after children.

   I’ve mentioned before about them viewing anything that happens as a disorder, but it’s less a theory & more proof by indication at this point. I look at them as kind of a cult with resources.

   • “Cult with resources”. That seems to sum it up well.

     Money is only part of the issue. Power is only part of the issue. It’s about gaining and keeping complete control over someone. If you mess up someone who is 70, you only get a few years of having that person under your control. If you start with someone who is 3, you’ve got 7 or 8 decades to keep them under your thumb, and the thumb of other “medical specialists”. Moreover, you won’t be questioned as much. Someone who iatrogenically injures an adult runs the risk of having them either quit your practice or file suit. With a child, that child has nothing to say in the matter. It’s only important that they sell what they’re doing as “necessary” to the parents – and get them to leave the room at appropriate times. By the time the child is an adult, they will have had adequate indoctrination to continue to return throughout their lifetimes.

     It’s quite telling that the US gets by far the most and the most expensive health care in the world, along side having the lowest life expectancy in the industrialized world – below that of many poor third world countries.

     Iatrogenically-caused deaths are directly the third-leading cause of death in the US. That doesn’t count the number of people who have longer-term adverse outcomes. For instance, those taking some classes of mental health drugs have an average of 25 years lower life expectancy. Many other drugs, or classes of drugs, given for dubious reasons have “death” as a possible “side effect”, and most people now seem to be taking 3 or 4 prescription drugs regularly. Some are taking 20 or more! The deaths caused, directly or indirectly through a healthcare-acquired antibiotic-resistant infection is difficult to ascertain…. and many of those deaths are not immediate. It won’t be correlated with “healthcare” received several years before the death.

4. Thank you Alex for that story of Gardisil. And I’ll get back to Elizabeth re statistics I may need. I’ve talked about the best man at our wedding. He designs parts for jet engines. If you fly Boeing or Airbus, your life was carried on his parts. HIs daughter is 11. It’s taken her over a year to recover from Guillian-Barre syndrome. We’re gonna find out if were due to Gardisil, as her immune system is hyperactive. She spent over 4 months in a rehab hospital. Last month she began walking again without needing a walker.

   If men had administered that vaccine, there would be a huge lawsuit, Gloria Alllred would be there demanding castration followed by execution, and the media would be up in arms. Here, 3 adult women ganged up virtually violating or raping this girl while her mom was bullied into silence. Want to bet they had her leave the room? That’s a great lesson for these women to remember should they ever be violated. And we wonder how kids become so violent and the rapings or survival sex that women (and men) endure in prison.

   My husband suffered a severe left arm fracture when he was 7. His stupid, ignorant mom, an RN, told him to be “in control” of his pain as the needle went in between the fractured bones of his wrist. They all complained his screams were embarrassing and could be heard all through the hospital. To this day, he remembers it vividly. He needs valium to see a doctor, hates hospitals (especially ER’s), and goes into a cold sweat if his flu shot is injected into his left arm. Those little kids screaming at the Pediatrician won’t forget either. Shame on the medical establishment.

   As for that medical researcher who said that she “didn’t believe” vaccines gave autism. Read that carefully. Watch how conversations with doctors are carefully controlled and you are steered (bullied) into forgetting your grave concens and buying into the propaganda. Well, I “believe” that woman whored using her words a real cush job with a drug/vaccine manufacturer.

   You can bet sure as Canadian rain that this same woman will be extremely cautious when it comes to her own kids. I’ve written here that my husband’s other friend, the anesthesiologist, withheld vaccines from his kids. Too much mercury, too many side-effects, too many shots for an underdeveloped immune system, and allergies that can develop too. Too much.

   • You’re welcome, although I don’t remember which one. Was it the one where that guy had to do the interview with a French magazine because it turns into a problem in America?

5. I saw a newspaper at my local cafe yesterday called “The Senior”, an article caught my eye, “Time to stop sex predators”. The story was about elderly women being sexually assaulted in nursing homes. This is a vulnerable group and their complaints are often dismissed, downplayed or ignored. The victim’s story is often considered unreliable because of cognitive decline, which is a bonus for the predators. They also, talked about an elderly man with some dementia using Viagra and regularly sexually assaulting his elderly wife, they claim this sort of thing is increasing. Viagra is easy to obtain (unlike the Pill) and likely to be used incorrectly by someone with dementia.

   They outline the case of a male nurse who admitted (when he was challenged) he regularly lubricated an elderly woman’s vagina to make her more comfortable, to deal with the dryness. The woman had not complained of dryness/discomfort and no one at the nursing home had asked him to lubricate anything. This came to light after the woman became very upset when he entered her room and her daughter quizzed her about her reaction.

   It was a depressing article, but I’m not really surprised. Some of the offenders were picked up by CCTV cameras or reported by other nurses or family members. Sexual assault is mostly about power and control, we can be a victim at any age.
   It makes you wonder how many cases are never picked up.

   There is talk that males will not be employed to care for babies, toddlers and children in the State system after a recent high profile case where a male carer was caught on camera sexually assaulting his charges, just horrible stuff. Some people are screaming “discrimination”…we’re not all like that!
   I’m sure that’s right, but surely the welfare and safety of our elderly and children should be our first concern.
   Note: He was charged with 7 counts of unlawful sexual intercourse along with other charges for sexual assault etc.) It turns out he was involved in child porn, the Police have found video footage of him sexually abusing babies, toddlers and children. (the footage has been disseminated/sold to other pedophiles)
   http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/south-australian-government-worker-charged-with-sexually-abusing-preschool-children-in-residential-facility/story-fni6uo1m-1226997270838?nk=f951f6f61d89675ff74c1a277484ab9b

   Virgin Airlines came in for some criticism when they moved an unaccompanied child away from a male passenger and re-seated her next to a woman. The man complained to the airline and the media. The airline said that was their policy, unaccompanied children are seated next to women. I believe the welfare of the child is paramount. I wasn’t surprised the next day to see the comments to the article, many parents said they agreed with the policy.

   • I have an issue with removing men, and substituting women to deal with children in healthcare, daycare, or unaccompanied children on airlines. Speaking of someone who dealt with sexual abuse from a female perpetrator (as well as male perpetrators) as a child, that is no guarantee that the child will not be assaulted, sexually assaulted, or abused in other ways. The poor girl who was held down and forced to have an HPV vaccination was held down by WOMEN. As was said here, had she been held down by men, and given the shot by a man, there would be plenty of publicity and people prosecuted.

     Most of the iatrogenic assaults which occur do not require a penis.

     • Also, someone might act like it’s not an attack if done by a woman. That’s even a common trope on TV (tvtropes.org). I never got that reasoning. If a woman runs another woman over with her car, that’s an attack- it doesn’t matter whether she gets any gratification from doing it at all.

       On top of that, someone might very well be homo or bisexual & aggressive about it. Why would it make sense for people that are hetero, but not anything else?

       On a side-note: I’ve noticed that a lot of women seem to be reluctant to believe that someone could be a lesbian whenever things get strange. Is it THAT rare? Or is it that women don’t think there could be some warped tastes at work & arousal would never play a role in something like that.

       I understand that someone would make a differentiation between screwing around & something imposed that has physiological overlap, but it’s unrealistic to believe that arousal couldn’t possibly play a role. Come on, some people even get aroused by lighting things on fire!

     • Alex ,
       The fact that many people cannot believe that something is an attack if done by a(nother) woman, whereas they would clearly view the exact same thing done by a man as an attack is part of the double-standard on men/women, as well as a certain amount of stereotypes that anyone who is a mother, or could be, or someday might be could not possibly do something that would deliberately harmful to another person. Women are viewed throughout society as nurturers.

       People who were hurt by women (battered partners, battered children, sexually assaulted persons) are not taken seriously or BELIEVED by police, spouse abuse shelters or counsellors, child abuse counsellors, or support groups. I think it’s changing somewhat, but I know that during the 1990s, I had a therapist call me a LIAR when I was explaining to her a bizarre instance of sexual abuse from my mother when I was a toddler. I don’t understand either why she did this, as I don’t think it gave her sexual pleasure. It was a female therapist, and I had to spend several sessions with the next therapist (male) to get over the therapist! That was not very useful.

       Sexual orientation is seldom either/or. The assumption is always that the woman *is* hetero unless it is obviously otherwise – and people are often blind even then. It also changes whether the situation is loving and consensual or if forced sexuality is imposed upon them. This is seen most vividly in men who rape other men, while vehemently stating they’re no f**, while insisting that the victim was – even though he was overpowered, threatened with weapons, beaten, injured, unconscious, or otherwise incapable of defending himself. It’s no different when a woman imposes herself on another woman, except that the attack will not be intercourse, but rather something else.

       It’s changing, but in the past, when an adult woman imposed herself on a young teen boy, it was not considered abuse. If HE thought it was abuse, tried to stop it, tried to prevent it, tried to complain, HE was the one attacked, and she very very rarely got any jail time regardless of circumstances.

     • Women are absolutely capable equal to men in sexually abusing. Virgin Air may have placed a child right into the lap of a female pedophile. Re medicated children/adults. I’ve taken SSRI’s for pain caused by my disability. Never again. Weight gain, and the horrible side effects the first two weeks and two weeks after quitting. I totally believe suicides and violent acts perpetrated by individuals have happened and these meds were the final trigger. A person does just as well w/o side effects on an extremely small dose of narcotic exactly as those in high altitudes in South America chew coca leaves–and thrive w/o violence. Here again, there’s all the money involved and law enforcement which benefits to boot.

       Only in good ol’ USA will one see commercials talking up taking a pill to modulate another pill which screws with how things function in one’s head.

       Thank God for this website and everybody here. You all educated me to things I’ve always suspected. My husband feels vindicated by what I’ve found here; he felt even stronger about things here than I did. BTW, I use the word “our” in my last message referring to marriages failing after childbirth due to the process. I meant to use “the” instead. I already had kids when I met my husband. My first husband lost the desire to be father/husband when the attention of being a new dad wore off.

       It’s been said that there’s a case of ebola in Sacramento CA. If so, this could be the “crisis” this president has been waiting for so he could finish “his job” as he put it when voted in. Those of us here who watch world events, seeing our Constitutional Rights taken away, and knowing prophecy, have to wonder if the final “round up” will begin using this possible upcoming crisis. Just think what would happen if people contaminated with ebola began going to Christian churches spreading it around. Also in the news lately is a version of the “chip” that works implanted in the hand (right out of Revelations). I apologize if I sound paranoid, but after 9/11 (especially building 7), and how here I’ve seen how we’re controlled, I have to wonder.

     • I apologize for digressing to other things. Re sex in prisons. In the 80’s & 90’s rapings occurred all the time. Now, supposedly, they don’t happen as much, depending on whose study you read. However, the prison thinking within inmates is that everybody has some kind of inner homosexuality that can be explored or comes out in prison. Supposedly, this explains why, especially with women, one who even with husband and kids will days after admission take up a relationship with another woman.

       What isn’t considered, is that severe intimidations, beatings, and rapes still occur if one doesn’t quickly adjust and adapt. But apparently nobody wants to call it rape. And the former inmates do not want to discuss things either. And what you say about male inmates who rape other male inmates not calling themselves f**s is true. Absolutely true. The more ignorant views himself so long as he isn’t being penetrated then he’s not gay. As for turkeys? They are among the dumbest of the animal kingdom. Male lions will occasionally mount another male to show dominance, as will alley cats. Dogs as well. Others, horses, cattle, do same if no female is around and they’re horny enough. In captive breeding, an artificial vagina is made, and used with something the animal can mount. For visual help, other animals of opposite sex or same sex are brought near.

       Humans are not much different. Unfortunately. And the worst conditions bring out the worst in these already bad humans. In prisons, inmates will avoid being raped under horrible circumstances if they can have a bit of control in a less terrible choice. And they disassociate themselves from the event, just like rape victims outside do. Regardless if they reach orgasm, which may happen even in rapes or when the person gives themself away to avoid rape. Without the violence of hate and dominance.

       I believe what you say about the female therapist. Women, especially (from my experience) those therapists having lesser educations, don’t accept females as being abusers, period.

     • It’s not just prisons where people who consider themselves heterosexual end up having sex with one of their own sex. Many teen boys try it with other teen boys, one-on-one or in various group games. Many women had a tryst with another woman while in college, and have mainly been in heterosexual relationships. Or, got into some situation where some guy (boyfriend, husband, etc) talked her, possibly with some chemical assistance, into trying the wild side with him and another woman. Some do it on their own, and have at least one same-sex relationship often before they got married, sometimes after a divorce and a woman going through an “I hate all men” phase. The total of these are about 1/3 of all women having done one of these.

       Sex can be used for a lot of things. In a positive light, to express love, to have fun, to relieve stress, to alleviate fear. In a negative light, it can be about causing fear or pain, or showing another that you’ve got complete dominion over another person. When it’s about dominance and displays of power, sexual orientation does not really come in to play. It’s not about the assailant getting sexual pleasure. It’s about asserting power… over a child, over someone that’s been overpowered or threatened with a weapon, about getting something else from the victim. No class of people are immune from having this desire: Not women. Not doctors. Not nurses. Not even mothers.

6. Beth
   Someone has to care for children, the elderly, unwell etc. and I think the statistics show it’s overwhelmingly males who commit these offences. It may be a female is less likely to be reported, but I believe the male predator is far more common than the female predator.
   There are certainly cases of women doing the wrong thing, we’re had a couple of cases of a female teacher having sex with a teenage student, and we know female doctors also, use coercion to get women to have pap tests, pelvic exams etc. I believe coercion negates all consent and the exam becomes an assault.
   So excluding men from the care of toddlers, the elderly etc. does not give you a rock solid guarantee that no one will be sexually assaulted, but it’s IMO, less likely to be a problem.
   I’m taking about sexual assault here, I know female carers can be mean and uncaring, some may engage in rough handling or humiliate their charges.
   What do others think?

   • Elizabeth, yes, it’s overwhelmingly males who commit sexual offenses, hands down. I believe it’s rarely due to malicious intent, or a desire to have power over another. IMO males are simply programed to reproduce, and can mistake any signal from a female as an invitation to mate. One of my favorite studies ever:

     “Male turkeys aren’t fussy. Give them a lifelike model of a female turkey and they’ll happily try to mate with it as eagerly as they would with the real thing.

     This observation intrigued Martin Schein and Edgar Hale of the University of Pennsylvania, and made them curious about what might be the minimal stimulus required to excite a turkey. They embarked on a series of experiments to find out. This involved removing parts from the turkey model one by one, until the male turkey eventually lost interest.

     Tail, feet, and wings were all removed, but still the clueless bird waddled up to the model, let out an amorous gobble, and tried to do his thing. Finally, the researchers were left with a head on a stick. And surprisingly, the male turkey still showed great interest. In fact, it preferred a head on a stick over a headless body.

     Schein and Hale subsequently investigated how minimal they could make the head itself before it failed to elicit a response. They discovered that freshly severed female heads impaled on sticks worked best, but if the male turkey had nothing else it would settle for a plain balsa wood head. Turkeys evidently adhere to the philosophy that if you can’t be with the one you love, then love the one you’re with.

     Curious about the mating habits of other poultry, Schein and Hale performed similar tests on White Leghorn Cocks. They published their results in an article with the intriguing title, “Effects of morphological variations of chicken models on sexual responses of cocks.” http://www.madsciencemuseum.com/msm/gallery/top_20_most_bizarre_experiments

     Male poultry or male human, all the same IMO.

     • I don’t think it has much to do with a mating drive, actually. There’s lots of cases where someone went after an old woman or a young girl & there wasn’t any reproductive possibility.

       Also, turkeys are pretty dumb in a lot of ways- you can’t necessarily compare them to other birds, much less people.

       I was just reading about inbreeding (specifically that there’s A LOT of it in muslim culture) & that this has a major impact physically & mentally. Intelligence & sanity are both impacted in a severe way with this situation. Marrying first cousins at the very least causes issues, never mind when this is an ongoing thing.

       This could have a social impact, as well. Maybe someone is warped & then comes up with all kinds of crazy doctrines for people to follow- if they’re in a position of leadership (royalty, for instance), they might cause a large pattern of behavior. If they’ve had a bad environment that they were raised in, this might cause or add to the situation.

     • You do realize that, worldwide, 25% of all marriages are between first cousins.

       It does not raise the incidence of genetic disorders significantly. This same phenomenon plays out in terms of animal breeding.

     • Alex, I agree turkeys are pretty dumb in lots of ways . . . still, there are some similarities between male turkeys and male humans. For example, from the study re my earlier comment:

       “Male turkeys aren’t fussy. Give them a lifelike model of a female turkey and they’ll happily try to mate with it as eagerly as they would with the real thing.”
       In comparison, some male humans have been known to happily try to mate with blow up dolls.

       From the study: “Tail, feet, and wings were all removed, but still the clueless bird waddled up to the model, let out an amorous gobble, and tried to do his thing. Finally, the researchers were left with a head on a stick. And surprisingly, the male turkey still showed great interest.”
       Some (many) male humans will become aroused by simply looking at different parts of a female, or from looking at photographs of women. They don’t even need a three dimensional image.

       The sex drive in males is so strong that some will risk their careers, marriages, and reputations. I agree that reproduction doesn’t necessarily come into play as the end goal – that would require some forethought.

     • Notice how it’s always the women who are looked down upon, and questioned as to their sexual practices? Never the male doctors questioning themselves nor their fellow dudes. How did STD’s get invented? Because males in the Old Testament mounted their sheep and “knew’ them in the Biblical sense. Thanks guys! What’s the difference between Aussie & Dutch women anyway? Is there a different sex position done down under but not done up top? Doctors? They’ll believe whatever is good for them long before they accept what’s right for us.

       I can’t compare dumb men and dumb turkeys, and how easy it is getting them to mate with, well, anything having a hole. Much can be said about women too. Vegetables. We created our own industry of sex toys. Hormones make people horny, and then comes inventive thinking…

     • I really don’t think you can compare a turkey with a human male. There really isn’t enough evidence to suggest the male sex drive is geared towards sexual violence, however there is a lot of evidence to support bad behaviour in men is culturally constructed. By saying ‘men can’t help it they’re wired that way’ excuses their actions when they behave badly, and quashes accountability perpetrating rape culture.

7. I have a question about something. Are medical exams ever required (read: mandatory) for employment? If so, is there a way to exempt yourself from participating? If not and you’re still told they’re mandatory, what would be the best way to refuse such things and defend yourself from being coerced and lied to by an employer or potential employer? I have no problem being tested for TB, getting a blood pressure check or being drug tested. However, I don’t want to participate in extensive blood tests, vaccinations, physical exams, or anything of the sort. I have not yet encountered a situation where I was told any exams were required (thankfully), but it’s always best to be prepared!

   • If there’s something you want to cut out of the situation, do so. Them using cute little words like “requisite” & “medical procedure” doesn’t change what the situation consists of.

     As for “requirements,” it’s not unheard of for them to tack things like that onto employment, but it seems like that’s mostly if you’re using company insurance- which you could not do, it might even make them want to hire you more. Don’t know all the legal specifics, but it doesn’t really make sense to worry too much about that. Plenty of laws contradict themselves & sometimes ruling contradict laws- ultimately, you’re dealing with actions.

     I know it sounds dictatorial & a bit abusive, but requirements can always be changed thrid-party. “Abrogation of requisites,” I believe would be a technical term for that- if you wanted to get fancy on someone. Someone saying “Your requisites are cancelled” would at the very least unbalance them. Whether you get what you want is questionable, anyway- but maybe more & more people acting entitled to steer what happens to them would have a positive effect on the medical environment.

     Another thing is that someone can always “inform” someone of something as a trick, just like someone can try to enforce an impression. Don’t believe things just because someone says things in a decided tone or with a straight face. Someone can act certain about a lot of things & if they figure someone will believe them (because of their performance or in general), it’s a lot easier for them to keep up appearances. It can also be hard for people to believe that someone can really be that supportive of things like that- that someone puts their “heart” into lying to them & screwing them over.

     It works that way when someone attacks someone else conventionally & that person that gets attacked has a hard time believing that someone would still have a self-preservation urge. That they’d actually be rooting for whatever situation they’re looking to do, as well as being protective of themselves. See, a lot of people think of what they “equate” to- at least when it comes to serious stuff.

     • Alex – I know that wording doesn’t change what something consists of, my problem is that I have to convince them of that and get them to back off if that situation were ever to occur. Even if I DID want to use company insurance (which I’d typically have no problem declining for whatever reason), I would still have the right – both legally and ethically – to decline all screening programs and invasive exams. It’s just figuring out how to go about that the best way where it gets tricky.

       I’ve thought about using religious beliefs as a reason for declining any imposed exams or screenings that I don’t want to participate in, in the future. As of now, that’s my reasoning behind declining vaccinations. I find that typically declining something for religious reasons tends to work pretty well for most people. At first, there may be some argument or backlash for it (a sense of “your religious beliefs are stupid and I’m a smart doctor”), but eventually they’ll have to back off because it could be considered religious discrimination, and the last thing they want is a lawsuit from a religious freedoms organization.

     • Well, yeah- I know YOU know that, but if you state it to them outright it would be very hard for them to work any angle.

       I’ve always wondered: What religious reasons do people use for things like this? I know Jehova’s Witnesses have a problem with blood transfusions & the Muslims have a million regulations about nudity and what kind of contact is allowed (which seems to be more of an incidental protection from medical attacks, because they seem to get pretty damn dictatorial about those subjects themselves).

       I suppose someone could always go with “sanctity of life” as the religious principle. Self-protection because you hold that life is important & someone can’t care so much about life that they don’t care what happens to it. It wouldn’t make any sense to say that this is how things line up for God, either- so it would be both an endorsement of self-defense AND a general argument against detriment.

       Medical personnel (and it seems anyone with a western scientific background, actually) tends to act like they think that “life” is only biological activation, but it’s also the conditions & activities that make up someone’s situation.

       At some point language has to connect to something, though- so they try to exhaust someone’s vocabulary & eventually they run out of words (and some things are so basic that one doesn’t usually bother to try articulating them). “Actively weathering” someone’s arguments to counteract them.

       When they hit this point, the ending tends to be “Oh, so it’s nothing?” (and there’s no influence to produce the goal of prevention that someone is after- the argument has no “batteries”) or they lie and act like they “don’t understand” (so because they’re innocent, it would be wrong to hurt them- also they’re not at fault for any of their wrongdoings, thus no liability).

       Another one is “I agree, but… (whatever they say)” and doing whatever it is, anyway. Trying to generate a feeling of futility & fraternity at the same time. On the one hand, someone’s efforts fall short & they maybe give up hope. On the other, someone is betraying a “friend” & being the “bad guy” if they harm whoever is aiming the situation at them. It’s still something being directed at you, though- how much the one doing it emotionally supports the situation doesn’t change that.

     • Alex – Stating it outright is a fantastic idea! You’re right – there’s really really no way to argue that point.

       I don’t know exactly how religious reasons would be used in all types of situations, but I know for me, I’d use Christian science as I’m looking into that at the moment and believe there is quite some validation to their methods. Essentially, the belief is that God made our bodies to work in harmony with His creation the way that He created them to work. Which is something that I completely agree with. Because of that belief, I don’t believe in using medical intervention or digging for problems unless it’s completely necessary (emergency situations such as broken bones, excessive bleeding, etc). I trust that God designed my body to fix itself and bounce back from illnesses and other problems. Which in turn means that digging for problems would be a direct assault on my beliefs. Not only that, but because I believe God designed my body in such a way, I believe that all of our bodily functions and especially the reproductive organs (as they produce new life) were created with a purpose (whether or not we choose to use them for that purpose is up to us individually) and that the use of synthetic man-made objects in or around said organs could potentially damage the delicate balance within the body and transfer bacteria or tear skin and/or organs that are not meant to be harmed. So that is my argument for my own personal religious beliefs against those type of exams. I do admire that very much about Muslims – they hold their ground. They don’t let others coerce them into their ways.

       Sanctity of life could potentially work as well, considering that some follow-up procedures carry risk for infertility and the like.

       I think the best thing to do in arguments is to just stay firm and don’t get shaken up or heated. By staying calm and collected, but firm, I think it’s much more apparent that the person in question cannot be shaken or coerced into anything.

     • Ro: Thank you! You might be interested in Russian Orthodox, as they seem to have a “Good & Bad WOLF” mentality when it comes to ethics.

       Not to assign you homework or anything, but read what I was saying about sanctity of life again. What you’re saying works on a reproductive level, but ONLY on a reproductive level. If somoene where to, let’s say, aim for the backdoor (like with that guy in New York or sometimes people that just have crashes, falls, or an E.R. visit)- that angle wouldn’t work.

       Same deal with non-pervy variations of attack. Maybe they decide to try to keep you in the hospital when you don’t want to be there (any number of reasons, including financial ones), maybe they “find” something wrong with you from whatever tests they do (running a test & interpreting the data to mean something that they can get off on or paid for “treating” is a major potential), maybe they decide to rush you into surgery over whatever this “is” (putting that in quotes gives me a Clinton flashback).

       All of this gets them a lot of cash & probably repeat costs. If they screw up the imposed surgery (maybe they cut something important, maybe they leave something in you, whatever) this would net them quite a bit. There’s the possibility of infections contracted just by being in the hospital or by getting cut open in one (same potential with catheter, potentially a fatal one).

       Even ambulances tend to get pushy about bringing people away, since they worry about not getting their fare. I’d be ready to prove reality on the fly with them, too. It’s probable that they’d say they “have” to bring someone to the hospital. Making the point that “Oh, so someone could just have someone kidnapped by calling an ambulance on them?” might make them back off.

       Telling them “if someone refuses their services, they have no right to impose them on someone” might be a real good way of getting various people to back off. Come to think about it to think about it, using the term “forcible ASPORTATION of person,” might be pretty scary & get someone to think about technical definitions of kidnapping.

       One can make the assumption that they might be inclinced to inflict grievous harm on someone in the ambulance (anything from robbery to rape can & HAS happened in ambulances- if someone does not desire their services, why would they keep trying to get them in the vehicle?).

       Had one thought after another, there. Sorry about this being so long.

     • Alex – I tried to find information on the Russian Orthodox, but I couldn’t find any good resources about it online. Are there any books you would recommend? You’re right about that angle only working on a reproductive level. I need to reevaluate and figure something else out. Though I’m sure that Christian science is still a good defense method, it’s just figuring out how to apply it to other aspects. I’m going to start reading up on it more and see what I can find. I talked with someone on a forum about Christian science and apparently they only use medical doctors in absolute emergencies. Aside from that, they tend to seek out herbalists, naturopaths, and chiropractors as they believe God gave us all we need naturally. I agree with that completely, but that’s just about as far as my knowledge goes on the subject. As far as sanctity of life goes, I think that’s a good angle, but I doubt the phrase sanctity of life holds much weight with the medical industry these days, unfortunately. I don’t think it harnesses much respect. I understand what you were saying, and it is a good point. It’s just figuring out how to put it into words that will be respected that’s the challenge. (An example about the sanctity of life not being respected is vaccines. Quite a few Catholics [if not most] have strong moral convictions against abortion. They feel it is morally wrong. They consider it a violation of the sanctity of life. Yet doctors still vaccinate them with vaccines that contain tissue from aborted fetuses. Even still, some women are pro-choice but would never consider it for themselves as they are against it on a personal level. These women are being vaccinated with those vaccines as well, so that’s disrespecting the sanctity of their life and beliefs.) Don’t worry about going on – it’s important to have these conversations and talk things through.

       adawells – About the abdominal palpating, I figured as much. These things seem to be fairly vague and inaccurate in general.

       Cat&Mouse – It would make sense if someone had appendicitis, but in an asymptomatic person it would seem fairly useless. Or as you called it, BS.

     • Actually, I don’t- expect for maybe this Systema Manual that’s on the Systema website. It’s a martial arts thing, but it DOES have roots in the Russian Orthodox religion & it seems that the guy that wrote it gets into life experiences. Maybe there’s some connected references? I usually just presume when something pisses me off, THIS particular Christianity would agree with me, HaHa! (I’m actually serious about that)

       I get what you mean about terms that they respond to. “Sanctity of life” might not be scary or important to them, but perhaps “biological safety” would be? I’d think it’s a fairly easy connection to make that “This organism is not safe, due to intended impositions.” Something along those lines might work, since it encompasses what’s aimed at this person (organism) overall. No separation of action applied & situation that happens. Their actions are an act of endangerment & assualt, if realized.

       Adding to that: “Iatrogenic detriment applies whether you think yourself above me or not.” That one should rock them back a bit! Nice little jolt with the technical terms AND pointing out their attitude as a factor in their behavior? Certainly sounds like something a jury would side with. Not to mention that they’d probably love to finally have a term for things like that, instead of having to give examples- if they didn’t have it already.

     • Well, the only book I can think to suggest is the Systema Manual by Konstanin Komarov. It’s on the Systema website. It’s a martial arts thing, but that art have roots in that religion & it seems the book makes a lot of references to life experiences- maybe it’s got something in there. I honestly just presume that when I get really pissed-off about something, that particular version of Christianity would agree! (actually serious)

       I know what you mean about words they respond to. “Sanctity of life” might not scare them or strike them as important, but maybe “biological safety” would? Had other stuff to add to that, but I clicked the wrong goddamned icon & it got erased. Now I can’t remember it. Maybe it’ll come to me later.

     • Sorry, I didn’t see that the first comment had loaded.

     • Alex – I’ll look into it! I could definitely see “biological safety” carrying more weight with them. I’m going to write down, “Iatrogenic detriment applies whether you think yourself above me or not,” and memorize it. That’s a fantastic line!

   • Ro
     I think lots of so-called mandatory things fall away when challenged.
     Women are sometimes told pap tests are mandatory for the Pill, not so.
     I worked for the Government for a few years and a medical exam was required to join the public service and the super fund. This is going back now…about 1983
     I contacted the Govt Health Service: what exactly was included?
     It was a basic exam, armed with that knowledge I went to the appointment. I had a young male doctor and my body language probably gave a lot away.
     I told him a basic exam was all I’d agree to…and it was basic, I did not undress and was out of there in 7 minutes or so. It was basically BP check, pulse, reflexes, questions about my health…and pap tests were not mentioned. Can’t recall whether I had blood tests, don’t think so. I’ll bet pap tests are mentioned now, but if that had been the case, I would have mentioned informed consent, all screening is my choice says the law and proper ethical standards, no one can override that right.
     So my advice: do some research, why is the exam required? What EXACTLY does it involve? I didn’t undress at all, some of my colleagues were told to undress down to their underwear. One colleague declined and was able to lift her shirt and loosen her skirt so the doctor could palpate her abdomen. I think the American practice of being in the buff and donning a gown or lying under a piece of paper leaves you very vulnerable.
     Walk into the exam room informed and in control is my advice.

     • Keep in mind, though: they can always add whatever you’re worried about honestly & dictatorially. Look at immigration: apparently, they frequently make people get naked as something included in their immigration physical. A blood test would work for detecting if they have any communicable diseases & it’s not like they actually worry about the impact things have on people’s health here, anyway.

       Now, there’s nothing to say that they don’t try to add other, more invasive, things in on their own- but the point is that someone can always write something problematic into a doctrine that gets followed blindly & a deviation is responded to with a disqualification. This disqualification is not based on the conditions being in such way that causes the problems that these measures are in place to prevent.

       This can apply with anything. There was that stretch where Gardail vaccines were mandated in Texas for a while. I don’t know what they put on the list wtih immigration, but they get pretty pushy & try to exploit a lack of information with people that actually ARE citizens- so I’d expect them to do the same with people coming from any other country.

     • Elizabeth – I’m glad to know that things were fairly lax for you! If only it were still that way, or that way here. Contacting the health service beforehand is a great idea! As I said in my first comment, I’d have no issue with agreeing to any of those things you agreed to, but resent participating in any more than the absolute minimal approach.

       Unfortunately, as far as my knowledge goes, paps get brought up at every visit from the time you’re 21 until you’re considered old enough to stop screening. I haven’t been to the doctor since I turned 21, thankfully. I’m dreading it. I’ve thought of writing a note on my medical forms when the time comes, though, stating that I formally refuse all screening and will bring it up myself if I am interested or concerned. If it is brought up by the doctor without my consent or initiation, then I will walk out of the practice and find a new doctor. And so they can’t find a loophole, I’d add on that them bringing up any exams or practices unrelated to the specific reason for the visit would also end in the same manner. Then I’ll sign off on it. I don’t know if it’ll work, but it’s worth a try.
       I will make sure to mention informed consent if it ever does come up. I’ll use the word coercion as well, because from what I’ve heard, that seems to be pretty effective.

       In regards to abdomen palpating – what exactly is the purpose of that? Is it accurate for its purpose or just another inaccurate exam which puts someone at risk of being put through the medical ringer? I’ve never been a fan of it because it always seemed kind of pointless to me. I’m genuinely curious about it now.

       The last time I was at the doctor’s office, I just put the gown on over all of my clothes. There was no comment, but that’s when I had the lovely doctor who accepted no as no, never coerced me into anything, but unfortunately got fired after being at the practice for about 6 months. I was unable to find where she went, which is unfortunate. Anyway, if and when I have to go to the doctor’s next, I probably won’t even bother with the gown. If I just wear my clothes, I feel like that’s less submissive and it’ll help get the point across that I’M in control of the situation. So thank you for bringing that up! I never would’ve thought to consider that. Thank you for all of your advice in general!

     • Re abdominal palpating and pelvic exams, I think a lot of it is just done to see if any of it makes you yell out in pain. If it does then they have found something. If not then they haven’t found anything. I don’t think it’s anymore specific than that.

     • The purpose of palpation. A test for appendicitis is when a hand is pushed into the abdomen to the right of the belly button and then quickly released. If sharp pain or increase in pain results then it’s likely one’s appendix is inflamed… During a pelvic, in a very skinny girl/woman, it’s possible to push the abdomen while sandwiching the uterus and also either ovary with two fingers in the vagina, rectum, or 1+1 rectovagina. A tipped uterus is more easily found via the rectum this way.

       The bit about appendicitis is true. The rest is bs. Our organs can’t be “felt” like a testicle can. Instead, even in a skinny female all that can be determined is if the approx size is WNL. They’re really just ruling out something large and that’s not supposed to be there. A woman ovulating, as we all know, can have tender, enlarged ovaries. Thank God we have these educated doctors who charge hundreds for an invasive office visit to tell us we’re normal. While we get nothing for the thrill they just got off us. I’m referring to that news story we all saw & commented about last year where the young attractive woman was “saved” by her older male gyn who told her she was just normal and ovulating. She promised to go back every year to be saved again. In church it’s necessary to be saved just once…

       Doctors will use a deep rectal exam pushing toward the appendix to see if that’s painful. How can it not be painful? If a female is attractive, she will get the most thorough exam imaginable, especially if in the ER. When all can be done via external ultrasound and standard labs checking infection.

       San Diego CA has an Islamic identity of being where the 9/11 highjackers took flying lessons, plus being where the shoe bomber iman lived and preached in his mosque. What’s not publicized in the Koran is that Muslims are supposed to “accommodate” the infidel until he takes complete rule. To women, the rules aren’t made to protect as they are to insure total domination and ownership. I do commend Muslim females for sticking up for themselves. If they don’t, punishment is a severe beating. A religion endorsing honor killings I cannot accept as being devinely inspired.

     • Speaking of abdominal palpation, I remember a doctor basically grabbing my liver when I was younger. I forget how old I was, but I think I was somewhere around middle school age. Hurt plenty & was a bit of a suprise.

       I would think if someone was having any problems where contact would make them yell out in pain, then I’d imagine putting on pants (or skirts, shorts, whatever isn’t a moo-moo) would be a problem. You hands touch your whole abdominal area when you’re bathing, at the very least. There’s plenty of contact throughout the day with that area from your arms, your legs (if someone’s bending that much- sit-ups, carrying things, and the like), and just “bellying-up” to something (making something to eat at the counter or the table, washing your hands at the sink, etc…)- so I’d think someone would definitely find out on their own.

     • Yeah, we touch our bodies all the time while getting dressed, bathing, or even turning over in bed.

       It’s just that we’re not *professionally trained* to seek out problems.

       It is for that reason that doctors seek out the diseases which are in vogue this week, while ignoring patients’ complaints about symptoms that are not indicative of this week’s fad disease, or one they want to or like to or can make the money at treating. Or even referring to another doctor who treats that disease. It’s part of the way they operate to treat the patient for THEIR favorite disease, regardless of the complaint.

       That is why that going to a doctor is actually worse than not going to a doctor. You know very well that you won’t get treated for the presenting disease either way, but if you go to the doctor, you know that you will be treated for some non-problem – causing you a great deal of distress, possibly long-term or permanent, having effects or “side effects” from this purported treatment (some are deadly Others cause lifetime of pain and disability), and it costing a great deal of money, as well as being totally useless otherwise. Moreover, you will STILL have the original disease unless you got over it. If the original was chronic, the whole thing will have progressed. If you got over it, it probably took longer than it would if you’d have just been left alone.

     • I agree with Ada, if you feel pain or discomfort during the exam, there “might” be something (more tests) or they “might” feel something, although I understand palpation is not a good diagnostic tool. (so the CBE is also, of no proven benefit, but leads to excess biopsies) I’d say to feel a bowel tumour, it would have to be large/advanced and you’d be symptomatic.
       I doubt very much it’s an exam that finds much at all in a symptom-free person.
       Ro
       Yes, I was lucky, things weren’t so pap-crazy back then. Now I’d rule a line through all screening and point out that screening is optional, says the law and ethical standards. If it was mentioned on the form, I’d go in prepared with references. I may even send a letter with references ahead of my appointment.
       Why can screening be nothing more than an option? Because few (if any) benefit, while almost all screening carries risk. You’re offering something that carries risk to a symptom-free person. That’s why informed consent is so important.

       BP screening is the exception, the benefits were demonstrated in a fairly small RCT, but there is still some risk, the threshold for high blood pressure (and cholesterol) and the need for medication has been fiddled with over the years, some believe this is to increase the number of people taking medication. The number of people with “abnormal” readings instantly goes up when you change the threshold and so does the profit of vested interests. These medications have side effects. I know Dr Welch in one of his books mentioned an older person can have falls as a result of BP medication, (causing light headedness and dizziness) sometimes, lifestyle factors are enough to improve the patient’s readings. We should not mindlessly prescribe drugs for cholesterol etc.

       I just can’t see how anyone could force a pap test, colonoscopy or mammogram on anyone, I’d rely on the law and ethical standards. I’ve found over the years making an informed, polite and firm stand has been a great protector. Of course, I’ve never had to deal with the American or Canadian health care system, that’s another thing entirely.

       There are so many articles now on the futility and risks with routine pelvic exams, mammograms….the lack of proven benefit with all the rest, CBE, rectal, recto-vaginal, visual inspections of the genitals and they all carry risk. Would a doctor or anyone else be prepared to take full responsibility for harm that might flow from a screening test “requirement”? I think that’s why informed women are often treated carefully and differently.

       With pap testing you can mention evidence based medicine is the only medicine you’d consider and that’s the Dutch program, you “may” test yourself for HPV at age 30?
       It’s hard for them to deny the evidence, when you can show it’s not pie in the sky, but an actual program.

     • Adawells is correct on palpation. If we scream out in pain, report feeling pressure, or if the doctor ‘thinks” he/she detects fluid or swelling in one area vs another, or if very careful charting shows no swelling at all and something new is detected by same provider, then the theory on using palpation is valid.

       Remember however, these tests, guidelines, were created decades before ultrasound and CA lab tests came to be, let alone MRI & CT. Combine these with CA testing for cervix plus the Delphi, and, with no symptoms, why should we need to get naked for an invasive exam?

       I prefer these tests, which aren’t so subjective. For myself and mine, I’d prefer a colonoscopy or another test at my choice. But we don’t receive informed consent even on these. Instead, we’re talked into it, or told it’s our time due to age. Choice is taken away. In that instance, the HMO respects us b/c they are too cheap to fight us to spend the money to have it done. Other plans fight to get us to have the test so they can earn that money and prove they are busy.

       That Huff & Puff post was written by a college professor. Read it carefully. He is sure to harp in a convincing manner (just like we’re on the table), calmly stating why he is right and why he cares for us more then we do ourselves. Like he knows better than we do. Every issue showing he’s wrong is avoided. Or sidestepped with a weak claim the truth cannot be trusted. But trust him. Yes, there’s the exception, where a young woman has cancer. So do many children. Neither mean we must race for yearly screening. It didn’t stop cancer then, and won’t now.

       Elizabeth is right again. Evidence based screening wins, and it truly is best. Just not for doctor’s pocketbooks nor their daily thrills.

       Last night I sent my husband in to a salon to buy shampoo. He told me he discussed this sight in detail after finding out there had been a recent fund raiser for a woman who underwent elective mastectomy after finding out she was BRCA-2 positive. He said one woman took particular notice when he explained to her how the colpo brush can spread cancer up the endocervical canal.

     • Elizabeth, I’d like to know more about the on-line conversation you shared with that doctor. About him wanting to screen <25? Fine, just let the women choose which method. How many would opt to thrill the doctor vs blood, urine, or the Delphi? In this case he has to live by his own words, which help us but don't help him.

       Something i wish I'd added to my Huff & Puff reply. How many women have actually showed up in his Dr Shirazian's, young and beautiful vs old and perhaps haggard, that have had the problems he's so keen on intercepting and treating? The ones who had no idea whatsoever and only recognized something was amiss when he had his hand up tickling her tonsils. Give me those results in number and percentage. Instead he lumps all women into this group, no matter how unrealistic. And of these women, how many showing up are illegal aliens who've never had medical care or legal residents not having any medical insurance, relying on his free clinic? Please if possible, add that to my Huff & Puff response.

       The problem in US is doctors believe the old school way is still the norm, whether we know they are lying, whether we take charge or not. We're still confronted with the take or leave it; or as my doctor put it, 'you'd want me to check your ovaries and uterus and make sure you have no cysts or tumors and to ensure it is working ok and the internal exam is the easiest way. I'll get into trouble with the board if I just prescribe things without doing some sort of an exam…"

       Thank God it was my husband, who took a breath and remembered why there was a discussion in the first place. After hubby had reiterated the facts, the doctor agreed, and "remembered" who we were and why I couldn't have the exam. I've written about this before.

       The doctor acted as if I was intending on having him write an Rx or whatever with me totally skipping out on the exam. Not even, I was planning to see him face to face. And in this case, there's no way he could tell with fingers whether my uterine lining had thickened or not, which he admitted. Only an ultrasound could. Also, I take the lower dose of Estra-Test. I am told the lower dose cannot cause uterine cancer on their own. If a woman is to get it, then she will regardless of this med or not. So, if I"m asymptomatic, why put me through this nonsense at all?

8. One place I worked had everyone go see a nurse when they started there. They just took blood pressure and asked about headaches and general health. This was not to prevent anyone from working but just to see if there were any conditions developing or getting worse due to work conditions. This was about their health and safety programme. Because the workers were handling chemicals it was important.

   Some jobs people have to lift and they should be capable of doing that without injury. A TB test and some vaccines might be for working with elderly or children.
   But if a food server (or photoshoot model) is asked to do a breast exam or a Pap test then hey stop. That is unnecessary for the job.

9. I often chat to doctors on a couple of doctors-only sites, not sure how I got access, but anyway,
   a doctor agreed with me the new Dutch program is definitely the way to go, good. (we won’t see it here though…)
   Then this:
   “Having said the above I certainly would not like to see screening starting at age 30yrs; I have some reservations about starting at 25yrs. After all there are 30+ women <25yrs who develop invasive cervical cancer in Australia each year. If you raise the starting age to 30yrs it must miss over 50 young women each year – I would think that they would be most unhappy.

   BTW Cervical cancer is certainly NOT a rare cancer! In 2010, cervical cancer was the third most commonly diagnosed gynaecological cancer with 818 new cases in Australia, accounting for 1.7 per cent of all new cancers in women; rare? I think not.

   I also get the feeling that if what you have implied about the sexual practices of young Dutch women is true, then it is very different to their Australian counterparts."

   The long standing evidence is that screening does not prevent/detect these early and very rare cancers, early screening just harms young women. So many of our doctors don't seem to know about the long standing evidence on this subject. (or don't accept it)

   0.65% lifetime risk IS a rare cancer, 818 new cases in Australia (where did that figure come from, Papscreen? I'd want proper references before I accepted that figure)
   Even if that's the case, how many women do we have in Australia? 800 in 10 million or so…that's rare!
   I don't understand the last paragraph at all, I didn't imply anything, just set out the new Dutch program. Incredible though there is still so much judgement about the sexual practices of Australian (and other) women, this program has never weeded out high risk women anyway, all women were lumped together, now the high risk/low risk thing is irrelevant, if a "high risk" woman is HPV-…well, she's not at risk of cc and might choose to re-test for HPV in 5 or 10 years time, depending on her age. (assuming she's not in a monogamous relationship)
   I sometimes wonder how many of our doctors have accepted the screening "story" as the evidence.

   • Medical paternalism is very hard to kick out of our society.

   • I’ve noticed that you’ve appeared on the Joel Sherman website quite a lot. I like his website and enjoy reading the posts on there. It’s a good site and he gives fair comment. It is incredible to think that his wife attended 50 pap smears during her annuals. Assuming all are negative, an English woman can expect only 12 in her lifetime, and a lot are distraught that they need to attend anymore frequently than this.

10. Cat and Mouse, You’re right about appendicitis, but these patients would usually be symptomatic. I wonder just how useful palpation is in a totally symptom-free person. It’s not recommended here for the breast anymore or the testicles. Although some of our doctors will still try to examine breasts, especially young and attractive ones. They usually say they’re being thorough or that’s the way they were trained or they “believe” in the value of these tests. Some/many women don’t challenge these doctors. I’d like to see a snapshot of the women still having their breasts routinely and opportunistically “examined” here, call me a cynic.
    The example you mention has stayed with me, the trusting young woman seated on the exam table being openly misled by a middle-aged male “doctor”. It makes my flesh crawl. To think he’s so sure of himself he’s happy to put the exchange on You Tube for all to see. The profession must deal with the predators who masquerade as doctors, made possible by a profession who’ve used women in the worst possible way, ignoring evidence, consent and informed consent, an anything-goes attitude has led to shocking abuses and harm to so many women.

11. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mount-sinai-health-system/womens-health-_b_5691392.html

    Yet another article on the routine pelvic exam. It’s inevitable some doctors will fight to the end to protect this great stream of income. This exam was ditched long ago in many other countries and we have better health outcomes than US women. So these doctors are skating on very thin ice, the reasons used to justify the exam are pathetic. Interesting some think the only way to communicate with women is via a pair of stirrups…and the nonsense about finding incontinence and atrophy women are too embarrassed to mention otherwise. Paternalism is still alive and well.
    I can’t comment, I don’t have a Facebook account.
    Is it my imagination or are more US women becoming informed? These articles contain a healthy number of “we know what’s going on, you can’t con us any more” type posts. It makes me very happy. There is only one comment so far, but she sounds informed.

    • Any young attractive woman showing up in an ER or office with abdominal pain will receive every invasive exam imaginable, even if the palpation and other symptoms, fever, infection, increased white cells on labs, indicated infected appendix. When I showed up in pain at the ER I received ultrasounds. Of course, they didn’t bother to say I’d be receiving a vaginal one; nor did they inform my husband at any time either. Lying comes so natural for people in power.

      I tried to post, but couldn’t since I’m not on Facebook either. If anybody wishes to print my article on this Huff & Puff page, please do so. You may use your own name with my permission or mine, Jayne.
      Dr Shirazian in his genius did nothing to convince me that his lordly opinion is any more authoritative than the studies he criticizes as being inadequate and invalid. Here’s another doctor who actually has convinced himself that he needs to inform women, while they are naked and spread before him, that urinating on themselves and other problems is abnormal. Any women I know can figure out for herself that if for years she was continent, and suddenly becomes incontinent or has pain and pressures that weren’t there before, she has a problem and needs help.

      Dr Shirazian also fails women in general when he fails to declare that he cannot feel small malignant growth, and may not digitally detect even advanced cancer in heavier women. He cannot duplicate what cancer antigen lab tests and ultrasound does. His error rate is exponentially higher than the alternatives.

      Most importantly, no woman needs Dr Shirazian’s hands inside us to determine if we have HPV or warts. This too can be tested via blood, urine, or the self-collected Delphi screener–all these tested, validated and legal in the US. Only the doctors refuse to use them. Why?

      Another thing is this bit he adds about skipping mammograms. The Obama Administration quickly came out with new studies questioning the need for annual exposure to large amounts of radiation. There was no health benefit, and the cost plus the radiation exposure issue to me, outweigh this doctor’s statements contrary.

      You cannot fool me anymore. It’s time doctors got their heads out of our crotches, and faced the truth. And that also means telling us the truth. Yes, I mean informed consent. Something we don’t receive, ever, in an ob-gyn’s office. Now Dr Shirazian has run out of reasons why we should blindly show up every year, without that informed consent, so now he just tells us we should do it anyway. It might be good for us he says.

      To me, this is another lie built around other lies doctors in this industry do so much they don’t know when they have to be truthful. How many times are we told horrible tests don’t hurt much, only afterward to be told how painful it really is? Then in another few months they want to repeat it, saying the same thing?

      We don’t have to sacrifice ourselves to the ordeal anymore. Now technology is on our side, as are the economies of scale, multiple studies confirming. It’s time gynecologists were educated with the times, and found another way to make a living besides having young women stacked in the waiting room, all waiting their turn.

      Please anyone, please post this to Huff & Puff Post for me.

      • When i was 17 I went to a walkin clinc for a pain in my side. it was high up and i could tell it was not apart of my reprodutve tract. the first thing the gp wanted to do was a pelvic. i didnt even know what they were gona do bc they said “pelvic” i thout he whould cheek my hips. and somthing that i thout was stupid was that he rushed the pelvic first befor rulling out a hurnia and appendix. it turned to be constipation. thin a few weeks latter my mother got a bill for a gonareaha screening when i was told he was looking for a cyst on my overies. hmmmm i had never been alowd to see boys let alone kiss aboy so my mother was blown away . it was like we whould have refused had he said what he was screening for// years latter it still ticks me off and i never felt or saw them taking a swab. he just smashed my overies and he was heavy handed man and he could have brussed me.

    • What is this so-called annual “well woman exam” that does not include a pelvic exam, bimanual exam, or pap test? It was long ago determined that the “annual physical”, long considered the gold standard for everyone in medical care was thrown out as being not useful. Are they now just taking everyone’s pulse, blood pressure, vision and hearing screening, and ONLY giving it to women? Is this somehow more useful for women than for men? Or, is it just to talk women into mammograms now?

12. http://contemporaryobgyn.modernmedicine.com/contemporary-obgyn/news/whither-annual-bimanual-pelvic-examination?page=full
    This gynecologist’s solution: add a transvaginal ultrasound to the routine bimanual exam.
    It sounds like a desperate attempt to make a sale, “Wait! I’ll throw in the cushions for nothing”…
    Needless to say the TVU in a symptom-free woman is not a good idea and will lead to more unnecessary testing, procedures and even surgery…so profits might even be bolstered…crisis over.

    • For Kate. The women here know how to care for and feed a cervix as much as any clinic. It’s normal for a woman to have abnormal smears time and again. While off you go to colposcopy, no answers are ever given. Unless you specifically sign the medical information release and demand actual results (as written on medical form plus interpretation) you’ll never get a clear picture. The care provider must also compare present findings to your history. Do findings match? No use pursuing another colposcopy (what was the pain like? Worse now or back then?) until you find out if the diagnosis is the same or different. And what the treatment plan is for either possibility. Force them to communicate with you!

      Elizabeth. Another great article you’ve found. Author Dr Lockwood has self-exposed himself excessively to the FL sun. Unfortunately, his age reflects his stubborn refusal to release his speculum. Interesting, the study he criticizes didn’t include the effects of pap testing in finding and reducing cancer. It’s the pap testing that has women making anniversary visits to her gyn. Combining poor clinical benefits of pap testing (the stats we know–48% women being pap tested still end up having cancer) with the results they obtained would really spell doom for pelvic exam futures.

      Dr Lockwood criticizes this study for having poor data. The study was gleaned from records dating 1946-2014 (68yrs)!! He picks diseases and issues of mostly chronic issue, or those caused from trauma like childbirth. A woman having these will know herself and continuously seek medical attention, or discuss them during office visits following a procedure. These problems don’t gratuitously between annual well-visits. But big words among those uneducated in medical literature will create concern and false belief among many that this guy is right.

      He then whines about the lack of studies determining if these exams are helpful, vs the study conclusion that fear, excessive pain, and excessive treatment from false positives drive women away from clinics. He then claims pelvics are an incentive for women to receive other gyn care. What he means is that if we want other care such as birth control, and “non-gyn care.” So what he’s saying, is pelvic first, then everything else afterward. How many of us have complained exactly of such practices? Being blackmailed onto the rack for spread and scrape in order to receive the actual care we originally scheduled the appt.

      Now Dr Lockwood gets crazy. He claims the pelvic is recommended based on expert “opinion” (not science), while at same time admitting it’s limitations of the internal pelvic exam should be recognized. His reason for a “complete” exam? “Shared decision making” And that just because the study says a pelvic is useless, that doesn’t mean it is–as there’s NO evidence saying so. (really?)

      Then it seems Dr Lockwood experiences a brain flash. He admits pelvics are “crude” and that inner anatomy cannot be assessed. He then mandates that a pelvic ultrasound should be shoved in for free (emphasis added). Since we’re often rushed through these “well visits,” do any of you think the ultrasound would be performed with dignity and gentleness? And this is on top of the pelvic exam. This guy’s so addicted to examining vaginas he can’t separate the bad from good nor does he understand “enough.” And where in his fantasy will managed care plans accept the loss of productive time when doctors are ordered into ultrasound expeditions? Like quality of care will increase just because it’s “free?” We’ll look aside from his admissions of how poorly pelvic exams diagnose anything just because we are guaranteed additional ultrasound probing? “The potential benefit of this approach is substantial.” From whose perspective?

      He declares for two decades he’s been teaching this mantra. Why then have none of us heard him speak until now? Because his precious pelvic is being taken away! His “double-down” factor is ungloved yet again. After blabbing again how ultrasound is fantastic in finding the usual targets it was designed for, he must reinforce why the bimanual exam has to stay. It “provides invaluable information…” He names pelvic organ prolapse for one. If you have this, your inner organs will be hanging outside your vagina. A bimanual is hardly necessary. As for a bimanual “helping” identify vaginal pathology like endometriosis? The ultrasound does this nearly instantly without guessing and more intense “examining.”

      Cost, again and yet again he stresses…Not a factor in his proposal.

      His concerns? Overdiagnosis and excessive interventions for benign lesions. “Harm accruing such ‘false positives’ would have to be weighed against the benefits of early detection…” And “incidentally detected endometrial & ovarian cancers.” “Thus, randomized trials would indeed be in order.” So, he’s saying his “life-saving” method might catch a few cancers. While overdiagnosing everything else and causing stress, trauma, pain, and cost. Too bad he doesn’t have the courage twenty years ago, when he figured all this out, to recommend dumping the bimanual altogether. Maybe he’d be viewed as a hero. His message is ambiguous and arbitrary. He can’t let go of dirty old habits that do nothing but subject women to his control and whims. His message is a great example for evidence based medicine.

13. Hi all, I’m new and just looking for some advice if any kind soul has time to give it. I’m in the UK. Twice in the past I’ve had ‘abnormal’ smear tests resulting in colposcopy, which in each case came back fine, but requiring much more frequent smears for the next 2 years, which were also fine. I live near Oban in Scotland, and on both occasions had the colposcopies at the clinic in Oban. After that I kind of let it slide for a few years (maybe around 8) and then in June this year thought I’d better have another smear test, so off I went and had it done and it came back abnormal again. Another colposcopy/biopsy “needed” – but the consultant in Oban has now retired, so I had to go to Alexandria near Glasgow, 3 hours away on the train. This necessitated taking a day’s leave from work. The results of the colposcopy, and I quote, read “the result of the biopsy has shown some abnormality and you will need to return to the clinic for further treatment. I therefore enclose an appointment.” That’s it. No information on the extent of the abnormality (CIN 1, 2 3? Borderline/mild/moderate/severe cell changes?) – or what the proposed “further treatment” entails. The appointment they sent was for 12th August and I actually (genuinely) forgot about it until the actual day, so I called to cancel. They sent me another appointment for 2nd September, which I’ve cancelled again as I have a job interview that day. And so they’ve sent me another one now for 23rd December. Another day’s leave from work required, two days before Christmas, six hours on the train. But in the meantime I’ve been doing some internet research (which has brought me to this site), and becoming quite angry! Is the “treatment” really necessary? How am I supposed to know? I mean, I realise that it’s not possible for anybody to know for sure, but… Surely I’m entitled to more information that I’ve been given, so I can at least make an educated judgment? Also, as the appointment in December would now be more than six months after the colposcopy, could I request another smear test instead to see if the situation had improved? Sorry for the long rambly post – and I know nobody can tell me for a fact whether I should or shouldn’t have this treatment – but…. it’s a dilemma! Has anyone else been in this situation? What would you do if you were me? Thanks…
    Kate 🙂

    • (Just to add to this: I’m 39, have never smoked and have no family history of gynaecological cancer.)

      • Hi Kate,
        In your shoes I think I would phone your clinic where you had the colposcopy, and demand to know more about the abnormality of the smear result and ask them if it is CIN 1, 2 or 3. It’s really bad that they haven’t explained any of this to you, but I think they all assume that women are too stupid to want to know anything, and those who are clever enough to find things out, might not comply with the programme. In your case, living in a less populated part of the country, it is causing you a great inconvenience to have to travel to the clinic. Also you can view your own medical records (and smear history) at your GP surgery. You should be able to view all the slips, which have the results of smear tests going back years, and these might shed some light on what grade of CIN (if any) they may have been graded at. You will need to make an appointment to view them, but I wasn’t charged for doing this recently. It is amazing what they write about you.

        You can only get cervical cancer if you are HPV positive, and if you have a spare £50 in your pocket you can get a self test kit online, which involves sending a swab to a laboratory. Try looking up Tampap or test.me.
        In England they are HPV testing mildly abnormal smears, but only in certain areas: Sheffield, Norwich, London, etc. If these abnormal ones are found to be HPV negative, they go back to normal recall, and not on to colposcopy which is what has happened to you in Scotland. Apart from your period, I take it that you have no symptoms such as signs of blood?

14. Ada has covered it well, love informed women!
    Welcome Kate and so sorry to hear of your dilemma. I’ve never been in your position largely because I’ve never had a pap test, an informed decision made in my early 20s. At 56 the chances are very high I would have had at least one colposcopy and biopsy by now, Australia seriously over-screens women so false positives are quite common…and our excess biopsy and over-treatment rates are high. I’ve only found one research paper on the subject and it put the lifetime risk of colposcopy and biopsy at a massive 77% with our program. The lifetime risk of the cancer is 0.65%, so we burn down the forest to find a few leaves.
    Risk is maximized under our program causing widespread worry and damage.

    I was happy to accept my near zero risk of cc, I knew I was low risk, but now I understand the significance of HPV, I know I can’t benefit from pap testing. Rejecting our program and the official discourse was one of the best healthcare and life decisions I’ve ever made.

    Ada is right, I’d want my results, exactly what is the classification, CIN 1, 2 or 3, what were the earlier results?
    BUT the very first thing I’d be doing is testing myself for HPV, if you’re HPV- then you’re not at risk. It’s concerning that we can now identify the small number of women who might benefit from a pap test, but we choose instead to keep pap testing as many women as possible, doing it poorly, ignoring the evidence (over-screening and screening inappropriately, increasing the risk of false positives) leading to lots of excess biopsies and over-treatment. Most of this worry, damage and inconvenience is avoidable.
    The new Dutch evidence based program will offer women 5 HPV primary tests or you can self-test with the Delphi Screener (which can be ordered online from Delphi Bioscience in the Netherlands) at ages 30,35,40,50 and 60 and ONLY the roughly 5% of women who are HPV+ will be offered a 5 yearly pap test. (until they clear the virus) Those women who are HPV- will be offered the remaining 4 HPV primary or self-tests, those HPV- and no longer sexually active or confidently monogamous might choose to stop all further testing.
    MOST women are having unnecessary pap tests, biopsies and “treatments”. About 95% of women aged 30 to 60 are HPV- and cannot benefit from pap testing. (we shouldn’t be pap or HPV testing anyone under 30, and definitely not 25)

    So I’d be finding out my HPV status and getting my hands on my records.
    It’s disgraceful that screening is “done” to women, you can’t make informed decisions when you receive no information and are just ordered to turn up for another “treatment”.
    Dr Margaret McCartney is a Scottish GP, she has publicly stated that she has declined pap tests, she’s also, the author of Patient Paradox. It’s a great and informative read.
    I think more women are starting to question this testing and their treatment by the medical profession. I’d urge you to do your own research and make informed decisions, don’t allow them to treat you like a body on a conveyer belt.
    I think the Scottish program also, over-screens women, so your false positive/colposcopy/biopsy/over-treatment rates would also, be high. Am I mistaken or did I read Scotland will stop screening women under 25 in the not too distant future? Hope so, that causes a lot of damage, Finland and the Netherlands have evidence based programs and they have never screened before age 30.
    When we ignore the evidence and don’t put the interests of women first…we worry and harm lots of women and miss some of these rare cancers due to inefficient excess.

    This testing IMO, should be confined to the small number who have a small chance of benefiting, (if they choose to take part in the program) and they should leave the rest of us alone to get on with our lives.

    • Thank you for your kind comments. I have just completed my treatment for endometrial cancer, and don’t need to return anymore. I had the total laparoscopic hysterectomy including bilateral oophorectomy last May. It came away cleanly, and in one piece, and tests showed the cancer was confined only to the womb (stage 1B). Normally I think a number of follow up visits would be planned after this, but having imparted my views on gyn visits, they suggested I attend just the one follow up visit 2 months after my operation, and then to monitor myself. I’ll remain vigilant thereafter for any spots of blood or discharge, when I will phone the hospital directly for an appointment. I feel very happy about this arrangement. For the first time in 10 months I no longer feel I’m a patient. If I feel I need to return, I can do so, but I feel a free person again, because I don’t have those appointments to attend. I was very pleased to see the word discharged on my notes. Now that’s what I call patient empowerment!

      • That’s wonderful news, Ada.
        The follow-up appointments can go on for years, they extend the time between visits, but I’ve heard of women seeing their gyn-oncologist for 5 years post-surgery and each involved a vaginal vault smear. (which came back normal) Is it really necessary to keep going back for that length of time, especially when the cancer was contained in the uterus? I’d certainly prefer your approach, but then I hate all things medical. I’ve always felt less is more with the medical profession.
        Look forward to reading your informed comments here and elsewhere into the future.
        I hope to be elderly, feisty AND still “non-compliant”…and suspect quite a few on this forum are destined for the same future.

      • I’m so sorry to hear what you went through Ada, but great that you are now recovered. Congratulations on no longer being a patient 🙂

15. Many thanks for your responses and support – this is a lovely site! I’ve had no symptoms really, other than a very late period (2-3 weeks late, unheard of for me) which just kind of reminded me that I hadn’t had a smear test in a good while. (It hasn’t happened again since.) After the earlier colposcopies I’d stopped going for smear tests because of the hassle, but always felt a bit guilty and irresponsible about it… wish I’d done a bit of research before, I never would have bothered! It’s scary how even perfectly rational and intelligent people (such as me, I like to think!) tend to just blindly accept that we ought to be doing things just because that’s what we’re told by health professionals. You naively suppose they’re motivated primarily by concern for public health and I’m sure many of them are, but the political and financial motivations are concerning to say the least. Dr Margaret McCartney’s article was highly interesting, and great credit to her for being brave enough to stand up as a GP and state her position with her full name unashamedly appended.
    I’ve emailed the clinic to request a copy of my results and more information about the proposed treatment – I initially sent it to the “Enquiries” email address which was included on my original letter, and it bounced back as “delivery failed”! Not impressed. I re-sent it to their appointments department and have been assured “it has been passed to the appropriate department”. I’m going to wait and see what they come up with, and will probably then make an appointment with my GP to see exactly what happened with the past smears/colposcopies for comparison. I do remember one of them at least was associated with a postive HPV test, which the consultant said was very common among the adult population and may or may not clear up on its own. It was the first time I’d even heard of HPV (this was years ago). I’ve no idea if I’ve still got it now, but will look into the test you’ve mentioned – I’ve got plenty of time at least to arm myself with the information I need to decide what to do!
    Thanks again – I really appreciate you taking the time and effort to respond.
    Kate x

    • One thing I’ve mentioned before on this site regarding HPV which never seems to occur to those so-called experts…
      If a woman diagnosed as HPV+ has a current partner of the male persuasion and they have intercourse, there’s a distinct possibility that her partner also has an active HPV infection.
      However, if a woman is deemed to be ‘at risk’ from cervical cancer simply because she has ‘abnormal’ changes and just happens to have an HPV infection as the time, the ‘treatment’ consists of removing the infected skin. The lady will then return home and engage in relations with her partner who will then re-infect her. Rinse and repeat.

      Of course, most HPV infections will be dealt with by the immune system in time, so HIS infection is unlikely to persist. However, her body is not given the opportunity to develop natural resistance to the virus due to these barbaric ‘treatments’.
      Isn’t it strange, also, that if you were to contract an STD and toddle off to the clinic it’s recommended that your partner should also be tested and treated – there’s no point trying to eliminate an infection if you’re simply going to be re-infected by your partner, is there?
      And HPV is now classed as an STD. But there’s no testing or treatment for men. Even though HPV is linked to cancers elsewhere in the body, because no-one gives a stuff about those (no expensive screening program for the others, of course) it’s purely associated with the cervix and thus is a ‘female’ problem.
      Plus, men would never tolerate having their genitals scraped and burned in the same manner as women are, so a screening/treatment program for men simply wouldn’t get enough bums on seats. Sauce for the goose is so obviously not sauce for the gander when it comes to medicine.

      • Oh, Kate, bear in mind if you do manage to look at your smear history that the younger you are the more likely you are to get an ‘abnormal’ result. The ‘smear’ test is just a scraping of skin, after all, and anything that upsets the natural balance of the skin can trigger ‘abnormal’ changes. Infections, inflammation, hormonal changes, chemical reaction (tampons, condoms,)… if we all tested every month I suspect that every one of us would get an ‘abnormal’ result within the year. If this test were as reliable as the health authorities claim we wouldn’t have this conveyor belt of women going through colposcopies.
        Regarding your periods… this irregularity, if it continues, may very well be the peri-menopause making itself known. My best friend was regular as clockwork and started having weird bleeds, out of the blue, at 38. And yes, she went through three years of hellish exams and ‘treatments’ which only made things worse until the medical experts decided her problems were just hormonal and she should try the coil. Luckily that seems to have helped, because the only thing our wonderful NHS could offer her after all their bullshit ‘treatments’ was a hysterectomy.

        Just a thought… if it’s so easy to detect ‘pre-cancerous’ changes in skin cells by scraping them off and examining them under a microscope, why isn’t there a similar screening test for skin cancer?

      • Some good points, Kate (UK)
        The focus is always on the woman, I can imagine a “treated” woman going back and having unprotected sex with her partner, the cervix would be even more vulnerable.
        Some of these treatments are very damaging…
        It would be interesting to know what these women are told, we know condoms give some protection, one study put the protection from HPV at 70% with consistent condom use.
        Even if women were advised to use condoms until the cervix had fully healed…
        It’s a curious thing that HPV is treated in such a hysterical way in women’s “healthcare” yet it’s responsible for some anal, throat and mouth & neck cancers…not much is said about those cancers. The latter group are more common than cc.
        I guess men are not a compliant herd…and harder to capture.

      • Of course, it’s good for business if a “treated” woman goes back to her infected partner, that profitable roundabout of abnormal, treatment, abnormal etc. it also serves to scare the daylights out of women making them more compliant and hopefully, vocal advocates of the program. They probably say, “oh, well, if he infects her again, our fabulous and amazingly successful program (for whom?) will pick it up again, how lucky is she?”…

16. Kate, most women clear HPV in a year or so, so even if you were HPV+ at one point, you may well be HPV- now. Some women believe once HPV+…always HPV+… Not true. Some women are also, led to believe the virus can lie dormant and fire up many years later. I believe these programs and the medical professioj felt that misleading women kept these women in the program, kept them compliant and protected the program. These women would tell others their high risk story etc…
    A woman on a forum told me she was HPV+ and clearly lived in fear considering herself high risk, she tested for HPV and was shocked to find she was HPV- and to find out what that meant, she was not at risk of cc. So this “high risk” woman was actually no risk. (and no longer sexually active)
    The “significance” of HPV has been kept very quiet, most women would be shocked to find out they were not even at risk of cc and having unnecesary pap tests, biopsies etc.
    The Dutch program monitors HPV- women over their lifetime with five HPV primary tests to guard against a new infection, but those HPV- and no longer sexually active might choose to stop testing. I’d also, add those confidently monogamous, but that’s not something you’ll hear from the medical profession, they assume all men may be unfaithful, well, some might be unfaithful, but I believe that’s our call…give women all the information they need to make informed decisions, don’t make assumptions about us or our partners. In my opinion, the “information” that’s available to womem is mostly about protecting these programs and achieving screening targets. We cannot make informed decisions about screening unless we do our own research, that should be a scandal. Screening is supposed to respect our legal right to make informed decisions about screening. I don’t believe that has ever happened in women’s cancer screening.
    Good luck with your enquiries, keep us posted.

17. Many thanks for those thoughts, Elizabeth and Kate. I had a look at the HPV self-testing kit on test.me that adawells suggested – and immediately noticed that “We recommend that only women over the age of 30 are screened for HPV as women under the age of 30 have a very high chance of a positive result that will clear spontaneously.” Interesting! I was in my 20s (probably 26/27) when I was told I had HPV, so it’s maybe gone now. Although to be sure I have had another 2 or 3 partners since I turned 30, so could have got it again. I’m not sure, with hindsight, how the HPV was even picked up from a colposcopy/biopsy, since it doesn’t appear to be something that is routinely tested for and I certainly didn’t ask for it. I never had any symptoms that I was aware of, so it seems unlikely the consultant could have seen anything during the exam – you need a proper test to definitively diagnose it, don’t you? Makes me wonder whether they ran a test on this latest biopsy as well. Presumably this would be included with the results, if so. Hey ho – thanks for all your input, I will keep you posted!
    Kate x

    • Kate,

      It could be that they assumed it was HPV+ because you could not have CC without being HPV+. Then, used that assumption that you (might) have a (pre) CC condition. Catch 22.

      Moreover, it’s come up in the US at least that much of this equipment cannot be sterilized, some is only disinfected once a day, once a week, or NEVER. Some are wiped off, some are rinsed off in the same sink they wash hands and clean other instruments used in the practice. There is a moderate risk there, especially later in the day or week, that you could CATCH HPV from the clinic or the instruments used.

      • Okay, so I requested a copy of the test results from the clinic and got another letter from the doctor saying again that I had “some precancerous cells” and that he would be performing a LLETZ. He enclosed a leaflet about that. I emailed again to point out that I had asked for a copy of my results because I don’t know what “precancerous” means – i.e. CIN 1, 2 or 3, CGIN, mild, moderate, severe, what? I haven’t heard back, but went to look at my medical records yesterday and I see they had a call from Dr Morgan (who performed the colposcopy/biopsy) on 9th September “Kate has high-grade CIN 2 – will have – Dr Morgan will confirm”.
        What is this high-grade CIN 2 which I “will have”? I thought CIN 1 was mild changes, 2 was moderate and 3 was severe. No mention of HPV was made. The colposcopy/biopsy that showed HPV positive (allegedly) was in 2001, when I was 25. I’ve done a home test to see if I still have it now (results should be back in the next week). I doubt it – I’ve only had one monogamous partner since I turned 30 (now 39), parted company from him in Feb 2011 and been celibate since. I had a colposcopy and smear (no biopsy) in January 2011 (much more recently than I had thought!) which showed no problems at all (although an HPV test was not done).
        What are the implications of CIN 2? I’m tempted to not have the treatment if the HPV test is negative. Would this be highly risky, a bit risky, very slightly risky? If the test is positive I probably will have it, I suppose. Any thoughts?
        Thanks!
        Kate x

18. So wait- This Lockwood guy is saying “It’s not useful, but it’s important”? The opinion is supposed to be based ON the evidence, which contraindicates what he’s saying. I’ve noticed a general trait of contradiction with medical personnel- “it’s not this way, so we’ll say it is”/”it’s not safe, so we’ll say it is”/”it doesn’t work, so we’ll act like it does”/”they said no, so we’ll do it anyway.” I’m starting to think their general reaction to outside stimuli is to contrast with it- they feel bullied by whatever circumstances. That, and they’re inclined to affront people- with financial motivations added in.

    Oh, and “shared decision making”? The doctor is self-electively probing people AND is a medically viable source of assistance? That reads to me as: “So the doctor has SOME choices & doesn’t feel like they can’t do something at their own discretion. It’s so the doctor doesn’t feel like a victim.” I really figure there needs to be more submissive people in the allopathic medical fields, because there’s such a tendancy to get dictatorial & at least act like they think everyone else is oppressing them.

    • You’ve got Dr Lockwood figured out. I wonder if he proofed what he wrote before publishing, because he contradicts himself so much. Like, he’s so conflicted he just wants to do everything anyway, just to be safe, and to those harmed, sorry for the inconvenience. Every other site I’ve reviewed lately has plainly indicated the massive amount of false positives in women under 30, but the facts don’t deter this guy. I’ve never met him, but I see him as being very pushy. Anybody challenging him would be deemed as needing a psychiatrist.

      Some of the worst people I’ve met work in the medical field. Personal disregard and disrespect, not knowing boundaries, abusive toward loved ones, paranoia, bullying, and regarding the patient (and family) as if the hospital or office is personal dictatorial domain. Nurses, doctors, office staff. As my psychologist related, there’s no correlation between education and mental maturity.

      Doctors like Lockwood in one sentence rag about the need to provide thorough care regardless of cost. Next breath it’s the load they have to carry regardless of compensation, and then it’s all about controlling costs. The quality of care provided increasingly deteriorates when medical staff are mandated to provide more and more services without being rewarded in finding things wrong which require treatment and in receiving increased pay. We patients become cattle being forced through the system to their amusement. Dr Lockwood is so wrong it hurts.

      • The system has always protected doctors too, that’s why they get a warning, when another man/woman would get a conviction and possibly a jail sentence.
        We had a cocaine addicted neurosurgeon practicing here, he was also, a sex addict.
        Great to know the Medical Board are handling things, isn’t it?
        He harmed some people doing delicate spinal surgery after 24 hour benders.

        He got 4 years in prison, but the system has to be questioned, is anyone actually protecting the public? The medical profession is not transparent and IMO, is all about protecting doctors, even when they are accused/guilty of very serious misconduct or criminal conduct.
        He has destroyed the lives of some of his patients, in one case he operated on the wrong disc in a woman’s back with serious consequences, her quality of life is now very poor. Apart from harming the public, he also, walked off (to party with other escorts) after a young escort used cocaine and suffered a cardiac arrest in his hotel room. The doctor seriously pressured sex workers to take drugs with him and offered them extra money to do so. They found evidence of cocaine in her rectum as well as the nose and mouth.

        I’m sick to death of the medical profession doing a lousy job of monitoring and discipling their own, these people are in a position where they can do enormous harm, even kill us…more needs to be done to protect the public. I think in some cases we’re better off going straight to the Police and forgetting about the Medical Board.
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-24/cocaine-addicted-surgeon-linked-to-deaths-continued-operating/5691768

19. This book looks like a very good read, if it hasn’t already been posted on this site:
    “The tyranny of health: doctors and the regulation of lifestyle, by Michael Fitzpatrick. The section on screening in the UK is available to read on Google Books below:
    http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qpqBAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=ruth+lea+screening&source=bl&ots=Airfk7_QFl&sig=TFIY94hqbcPAUsVyLlRpHqoJY8Q&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q378U4bmNOrF7AaOiIHwAw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ruth%20lea%20screening&f=false

20. Ada, that does look like a good read, I’ve read a few of Michael Fitzpatrick’s articles on the online publication, “Spiked”.
    Here is a good one, he also, wrote an article on the Jade Goody effect. If you do a search of his name in the archive section, all of this articles appear, he’s also, written some great articles on prostate screening.
    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/9669#.U_1BPLySxDE

    • A great article. I’ll definitely be following up his name. There were posts earlier about a “Hall of Fame”, and I’ve decided to compile a list of good people to follow. Perhaps they ought to be given a special roll of honour on this website as medical professionals standing up for women’s rights! It’s good to know we have some heavyweights out there fighting for us.

      It’s enough to make me weep, that there was all this opposition going on against cancer screening,during the 2000’s, when I thought I was the only person in the world objecting to it and fighting a lone battle against the system. So many women out there must have been thinking they were on their own too. It is great to have found like minded people on a site like this.

      I only found this Michael Fitzpatrick book (I’ve already ordered my copy from Amazon) when I was trying to get hold of a document by Ruth Lea of the Institute of Directors, UK. She often appears on TV news programmes, and I discovered that she is totally against these screening programmes and wants to kick them out of NHS funding, and make the brainwashed who believe in them pay for them themselves. She wants to keep the NHS for genuine core healthcare, and schemes which are showing no benefit (such as screening) will be axed in her proposals. In the present financial climate the government is already trimming off parts of the NHS, and with our cervical smear programme costing £175,000,000, and millions of people unable to book a doctor’s appointment, I just wondered how long it would be before the smear test came under scrutiny. Ruth Lea wrote this policy paper in 2005ish, http://www.ejog.org/article/S0301-2115%2800%2900550-9/fulltext
      harshly criticising the screening programme for it’s costly uselessness, and rightly saying that the taxpayer shouldn’t be coughing up for it, but I haven’t yet managed to get my hands on a copy. Prof. Jim Thornton at Nottingham Uni, UK, is a gynaecologist who has written articles against the screening programmes, saying that they are not core healthcare. Another writer is Dr Alison Hann of Swansea Uni, UK, who has also challenged the pro-screening lobby.
      I think the screening lobby are very worried they’ll end up in the health fad bucket soon, hence the demos report to try and delude politicians it can be cost effective.

      • Thank you for finding out all this stuff! If someone scratches the surface it becomes so obvious- this is all about politics.

      • Adawells- I was actually able to obtain the article form Ruth Lea. The link expires in 24hrs, so please hurry up with downloading it http://temp-host.com/download.php?file=ve75ee

      • Hang on, these are only reviews..

      • Ok, sorted out, here it is: http://temp-host.com/download.php?file=bh45nl

      • Hi Karen, thanks for these, but both are about Ruth Lea’s report and not the actual document. The excerpt which appears in Michael Fitzpatrick’s book was from page 77 of the report, so it must be a lengthy document, and is one of the IOD’s Policy Papers. I think I might just have to buy a copy.

      • Yeah, its just some report of some meeting- that was the only thing available under the link you sent. Sorry for false hopes then.

      • Glad you found this. Another problem with socialized medicine and politicians schmoozing with doctors, then arbitrarily deciding what’s good for us, on taxpayer’s dime, not their own money. One major positive aspect is that women as a group have a target to pursue effecting change. Which in itself is better than US; where profits drive decisions like this. Women like us are left essentially with our legs in the air, voiceless. Thank you for changing that.

        This is off subject. Are those of you outside US able to research the professional lives of doctors? Complaints, malpractice verdicts, hospital privileges revoked? Here, I tried to check Ronald D Neufeld MD before he maimed me. The CA state Med Board told me he was clean. In fact, he was on verge of having his license revoked. Later, the local arm of that organization told me they could not truthfully reveal his record due to him suing them for defamation of character! Dr Neufeld was the guy who tried to have another doctor shot on a San Diego freeway in 1994. Government and doctors have a way too comfortable relationship with each other.

      • Ruth Lea, her name sounds familiar. There was nothing here of a negative or critical nature about the programs, so I had to find my gems in the UK. That’s still the case, I’ve found a few articles calling for our program to be changed, but locked behind pay walls.
        Now the change to our program is being sold as “as a result of new evidence we can safely…” when they really mean, we can no longer coerce, pressure and mislead enough women into the current program.
        Everyone here is afraid to criticize the programs, especially cervical screening. I’ve written to several investigative journalists over the years, no one will touch it.
        Cervical screening always escapes scrutiny, most just accept it’s life-saving and essential, including many in medicine. It’s almost a crime to even question the program.

        Only recently has some critical stuff emerged about breast screening, and that’s only a couple of doctors. Most are silent.
        I think that’s why many women dismiss us as ratbags, they’ve never heard a single negative word about these programs, especially cervical screening.

        They’ve created an environment that basically silences us…and pre-internet, it was difficult to do any research. It was hard for some to fight back when they were denied access to the evidence and when doctors were encouraged to ignore both consent and informed consent.
        Most women didn’t even look for the evidence, they just accepted the official discourse. I think isolating and intimidating dissenters and informed women has protected the program.
        I can’t believe how successful their tactics have been, but finally it’s starting to unravel, I’m sure that’s why we’re likely to get a call and recall system, an attempt to round up the herd again.
        Women here seem to be less aware/more accepting of the propaganda, I’ve been delighted to see some of the comments made about US and UK articles over the last 5 years, many more informed women. I think that’s because your advocates have been raising awareness for sometime now, while the crickets were chirping down here, or chirping, “don’t forget your pap test!”.

        I heard last night that the vaccine for meningococchal B will not be subsidized by the Govt, a vaccine for a real killer. Not enough people would benefit to justify the cost.
        Yet we have vast sums available for cervical cancer and no one says a word. It makes no sense, but I can’t see a Govt changing that any time soon, it would be political suicide.
        Our present Govt is looking to cut costs, looking at University funding, healthcare and medical and other research, but they’ll still extend the breast screening program and our new cervical screening program will be excessive. So it’s easier for them to undertake these measures, or try to (in the face of plenty of opposition) than touch these programs.
        The vested and political interests are firmly in control here. No one is prepared to take them on and directly challenge these programs…to the point no one seems to LOOK at these programs, they’re out of bounds.

      • What surprises me is that all this professional dissent from the cancer screening programmes was coming out around the year 2000, only 12 years after our call and recall system had been set up in the UK, so they must have known after a decade that the programmes weren’t working, even then. So what have they done, but throw more money at trying to convince women into coming.

        I keep hearing that screening programmes are popular with the public, so we can’t get rid of them. Are they really, or are women made petrified of not adhering to them? About 90% of people think colorectal screening is a good idea, but only about a quarter take up their invitations. When the UK cervical screening call/recall programme was rolled out in 1988, women chucked their invitations in the bin and attendance levels were only struggling at about 40%. That’s why they had to set up the incentive payments scheme to GP’s in 1990 to get them to pester women into having it done, when attending for other appointments. Is this opportunistic screening the right use of a GP’s time? My own GP took on the dissenters like me, herself, as she knew I’d never turn up to a nurses appointment, so I got caught when I was turning up for antenatal appointments. If my GP was doing smear tests, why wasn’t she paid a nurses salary, if that’s what she wants to do? I don’t want to see GP’s paid all that money to undertake pathetic coercion exercises and nurses work. I’ve actually read in academic journals, (Sasieni, I think), that it is purely the incentive payments to GPs, which maintain the programmes at all. The incentive bonuses are half the cost of the programme in the UK ( about £87 million).
        As Jim Thornton says in his book:
        “Not only are [UK] taxpayers forced to pay for poor quality screening, but they are forced to pay to persuade those, who do not want it, to turn up!”
        I think the 80% screening targets and incentive payments are a violation of our human rights, and are illegal, since it deprives women of making a free choice, and so much of the taxpayers money goes on propaganda for the programme and not on the disease itself.
        I applaud Dr Margaret McCartney for raising the issue of the 80% screening targets and incentive bonuses in her campaign. Without these the UK screening programmes would collapse.

21. Love his opening sentence, “Anybody who questions the value of screening tests for cancer risks provoking the wrath of powerful vested interests”
    Couldn’t agree more…

    • Here’s the book by Jim Thornton:

      Is the cervical screening programme paid for by the taxpayer in Australia or is it private?

22. The Federal Govt pays for cervical and breast screening and for our piecemeal bowel screening program, so yes, the taxpayer pays for screening. Not that I’m promoting bowel screening, but interesting it’s far more common than cervical cancer, yet they can only find money for free testing at ages 50,55,60 and 65. It’s supposed to be yearly or 2 yearly. (if you choose to test) It says to me that women’s cancer screening has a strong lobby and that includes vested and political interests.
    Even those who ask for more bowel screening are careful not to criticize cervical screening, but the fact is most women cannot benefit, but most women end up having at least one colposcopy and biopsy if they follow our program, almost all are unnecessary and caused by false positives/over-screening. We could seriously cut costs with something like the new Dutch program, but too many influential groups and people feed off the healthy cervix.
    It’s not about spending scarce resources as efficiently and effectively as possible, more about politics, vested interests and which cancer has the best lobby group, the “pin-up” cancers (is a term I use)…the media savvy cancers. You need great marketing…like the Pink Ribbon juggernaut.
    Bowel cancer/screening gets MUCH less exposure and funding, I believe because men get it too. The feminists, women’s healthcare lobby etc. have a much louder and more influential voice. The squeaky wheel gets the oil, almost all of it.
    The Financial Incentives Legislation covers the target payments to GPs….and I think it’s handled by Medicare. Anyway, it’s a govt thing and taxpayers ultimately pay for all of these things.
    HUGE sums are wasted on our current programs, while far more deserving projects are under-funded or go unfunded.

23. I was just thinking something: You know how people talk about “lowering the bar”? Do you think low quality of medical situations is related to that? That it’s “okay” for things to get shittier & shittier in general, so that blankets medical situations. I know they usually seem themselves as a cut above & a caste apart, but maybe that’s why they act that way- that it’s a state of diminished expectations, so it’s okay for them to be massively arrogant.

    Another thing is that when someone is arrogant, they usually don’t have good “quality control.” They’re too arrogant to catch their own mistakes & watch what they’re doing in the first place. They also are typically very abusive toward other people & tend to try bouncing the blame back onto the “lesser” people.

    I figure it’s also that people sometimes have a tendancy to scavenge- when something MIGHT be useful, they have a hard time letting that go. The never-ending arguments that doctors present (which basically amounts to “Reality is what I say it is,” “Something isn’t detrimental until I say it is,” and “I’ll do what I want to people & deem it oppression to be stopped”) might sway things mentally a bit, too. That they never waver & they have “unshakable confidence” doesn’t mean that anything is right on their end, it just means that they are very self-supportive.

24. I was just noticing something else that we’ve mentioned again & agin: these people do have the traits of psychopaths & sociopaths (whatever the hell the difference is). I was just reading about if you can tell a psychopath by the way they speak & that article seemed to be, somewhat, a bullshit thing- but the other traits (massive arrogance, constant lying, fucking-up the same way again & again, etc…) hit them right on the head. How often do they try to “keep the lie alive,” even when caught? How often do they try to hi-jack the patient? They tend to be very manipulative & rely on people trusting them: using guilt trips, scare tactics, and trying to dazzle people with amazing stories & with their “abilities” (they passed MEDICAL SCHOOL, wow!).

    I think people have got those kinds (psychopaths or whatever they’re called) wrong, though. They’re bad & all, but I’m talking about the style of them. You know how people always talk about them having an ABSENCE of whatever emotions (empathy, hospitality, guilt, fear, etc…)? I don’t think that’s the way it is with them. I figure that they’re AGAINST these things, not neutral. If someone were to push away in every direction what would they be? Dead still.

    I think it might very well be that some people have a hard time accepting that someone else is evil. Maybe it’s because they try to identify with that someone & they don’t see that in themselves, so they figure someone else isn’t like that? Hearing “everyone’s equal” too much? In the sense that reality doesn’t take a “coffee break” for anyone, that’s true- but there’s no equivalency between people. There isn’t the same instance of person, even with identical twins. Let’s say there was an exact copy of someone, there STILL exists disparity between them.

    One more thing: You know how some people try to have self-determination with other people’s self? That they have a “crawling into other people’s skin” style to them & that they seem to try this a bit literally? I wonder if this theory of “equality” is in the background- like an abrogation of reality through acting like an “equivalent.” That reality is what it is & there exists disparity between them & someone else, but they’re going to reassure themselves that they dictate reality by acting in contrast to that. Can’t very well lie in contradiction to something you don’t know about, though. I guess maybe it could just be malice with elaborate bullshit to make it more fun for them.

25. http://www.dailynews724.com/world/dr-mohammad-tariquezzaman-who-told-student-she-had-a-nice-body-during-examination-is-struck-off-h222742.html another medical sexual misconduct case

    • Doctors fit the descriptions of sociopaths. They are high functioning, high achieving, and totally f****d-up in their narcissistic heads.

      Dr Mohammad T(whatever) would find himself either in solitary confinement to protect his mouth and rear end or he’d be the love interest of every man in whatever US prison he’d be sent to. So much for UK justice. In US he’d be tried and convicted. There have been several here who, eventually (I stress), get caught, stripped, and convicted by a jury of peers he can’t intimidate nor boss around. In San Diego CA there was a doctor who took 15 min to perform a rectal exam. On several patients. He drained his bank accounts defending himself, and the reputation followed him. Just how far I don’t know. Depends whether he has to register as a sex offender, and attorneys for these wealthy jerks get away with things the average citizen doesn’t.

      I like the “devout Muslim” moniker, and the pictures of him published. Reading the Koran, it stipulates that any non-Muslim is lower than an animal, and the “believer” can do whatever “he” wants as the “infidel” is to be treated as trash. Women in particular. Even if a woman converts, she goes from trash to being a subject controlled w/o question by her husband. So Dr T felt in his mind, through his religious conviction, he had all the rights to do as he pleased. Pretty soon it’ll be difficult to freely speak our minds, even here. PC is out of control when one religion mandates it’s to be respected at total cost of everything else free and good.

      I read with astonishment that this guy had been caught enough times in the past that he was restricted to not doing internal exams w/o a chaperone present. He’d escaped a penetration trial. So authorities already knew what a threat he was. WHAT! ! Is socialized medicine so poor or the amount of doctors so low that this is repeatedly tolerated? Accepted? ! WTF?! Where’s Lorena Bobbitt when she’s needed? He’s allowed to watch women undress? I want to puke on him!

      This guy knows no boundaries, no decency, and he cannot be redeemed to become anything good for how he’s coddled and tolerated. Please, somebody explain to me how this animal could be allowed to thrive in the UK? Where was staff, who should’ve been automatically watching him?

      • It is truly shocking that this man was allowed to continue practising for so long, but I’m not surprised. I noticed that this woman was only 20 years old, and as we don’t have any Well woman exams here or smear tests until 25, I can well believe this woman’s story that she didn’t know what was going on, but felt it wasn’t right. Doctors like him can take advantage of young women, who don’t know what needs to be done, and what doesn’t.
        From my own experiences, no healthcare person should watch you get undressed. I have been shown into a room and given a cotton sheet to put over me and told the doctor would come in after a few minutes. The sheet is never entirely removed during the exam. At my hospital, the room was larger and had a curtain in the corner to get changed behind, and a pile of cotton sheets to wrap around yourself. The gyn (a man), went outside while I did this and the nurse waited in the room, while I changed behind the curtain. As far as I know, watching a patient get undressed is definitely not supposed to happen, but this young woman couldn’t have know this.
        Did you see this link about Richard Neale. We’re too soft on people like this.
        http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/struck-off-at-last-richard-neale-botcher-gynaecologist-706772.html

      • In the US, he would undoubtedly be permitted to resume his practice. There are LAWS protecting the rights of doctors to follow their religious mandates even in their medical practice. They were passed specifically to allow doctors to lie in order to talk patients out of abortions OR contraception if those things violated the doctors religion. So, if a Muslim doctor were to treat his “infidel” patients as less than dirt, he would just be following the dictates of his religion, and they couldn’t touch him. He could not be put on the sex offender registry. His license would not be taken. Complaints would have to be scrubbed from his record as violating his religious rights. Even putting it on a blog or warning a friend could be prosecuted against the PATIENT or VICTIM as slander or libel.

        Beth

      • US Bill Of Rights (1st) guarantees one’s Right to practice religion equally w/o discrimination. These laws designed to protect freedom and allow people to change religious affiliation w/o retaliation. Unlike Islamic countries where death is mandated for leaving Islam. It also applies to Expression, and thankfully mothers are relying on it to blissfully breast feed as God intended. Yes, the perv could drop to his prayer mat whenever while in his work office so long as it didn’t offend others. That’s where it ends though. Here one cannot claim a religious right to abuse. Laws stipulate separation of religion from work.

        His track record of complaints mean terrible pre-trial publicity. Trials here by jury means a likely conviction. If not the first time, definitely the second. His attorney can pare many off the panel for almost any reason, but in the end he’s facing 12 regular citizens not appointed pigeons he got there. Cost in defending is $500+ per hour. Many gyns convicted commit suicide. Losing a jury trial means automatic loss of license, and lifetime sex offender registry. You’re sadly correct on much however.

        In negotiating a plea bargain conviction, he’s in effect calling the shots. He can prevent lifetime offender registry, obvious felonies dropped to misdemeanors. Prison time negotiated; and instead of going to prison, he can “voluntarily” admit he’s got a problem and enroll in “treatment.” He might end up as prison doctor with inmates as patients. Some plea bargain convictions result in him practicing while serving out his sentence. The State gets to ballyhoo a “conviction” but no expense of trial nor embarrassment if he somehow gets one juror who sides with him so he can beat the charges (which would mean another expensive trial) or favorable plea bargain. Conditions could include getting partial or full license again after a few years, treatment, admission of guilt, and continuing education. He wouldn’t be considered a violent criminal even though what he did was rape. If he cooperates on a plea, his money can buy a great attorney and the “due process” guaranteed in US would be very good for him. Contrasted to the person with a court-appointed attorney or “paid pretender” as some are referred to (which the defendant still must later reimburse some if not all costs). If he loses a jury trial? Automatically he loses his license, usually permanently, and suffers other penalties. The only break would be if it’s his first conviction. The laws become less flexible to one losing in a jury trial. Only the judge can effect leniency, and that’s unlikely b/c most judges are elected.

        It’s also his word vs hers; and no witnesses. Is she on a vendetta? Psychiatrically stable? Were charges result of blackmail gone bad? This is why I want my husband there whether I’m examined by a female or male. And that we can peek around the sheet or over the doctor’s shoulder. A woman alone with a woman has resulted in lesbian passes or molest, and it can’t be validated unless there’s a string of complaints already on file. A woman knows how to get away with more, I think, than a man since she knows how much she can touch etc. I want these exams done away with, period.

      • I agree with you. I want my husband, or at least someone to be with me who I trust to be on my side as a witness. The last time I was alone in a medical situation, an attempt was made to get me to agree to a scam/sham treatment. The time before that I was assaulted with a catheter which I had clearly NOT consented to. It was my word against theirs. I don’t want to be alone with a medical professional ever again. I would prefer to be alone with whatever random stranger in a dark alley.

        I don’t trust the whole profession. One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. Numerous times, alone, I have had crimes perpetrated on me (or my wallet more often) that would get real prison time if it were proven. Other times, iatrogenic assault. I won’t willingly put myself there again. I’d rather die from LACK of treatment.

26. Being an informed woman is a powerful thing. I had to share this story with you all. The other day, I went grocery shopping with my mother. At the front door, there were two medical students handing out fliers about scoliosis screening and vaccinations. They were vaccinating and screening for scoliosis in the back of the grocery store (which seems highly unsanitary and flat out rude to me, but I guess there are no boundaries). They were only stopping women who were going into the store. I’m not entirely sure why, because men are not exempt from the prospect of vaccines or scoliosis, but I’m assuming they’re much more difficult to coerce – especially in the setting of a grocery store. Anyway, as we walked in one of them looked at me. I raised an eyebrow, had a hard look on my face, walked with my head high, my neck elongated, my feet firmly walking in line, and gave her the side-eye. She put the flier back in the pile. Then, she handed the flier to my mother. Thankfully, my mother is very informed as well and didn’t pay attention to any of it, but she didn’t really notice the med students standing there so I suppose they figured she would be an easy target as she didn’t look the least bit intimidating or put-off. When I walked toward the back of the store, the med student there looked at me as if she was considering talking to me (read: coercing me), I gave her the same look I did the med students at the front door and she left me alone. On the way out, I ripped up the paper and tossed it into a garbage bin by the entrance while side glancing at the med students. They saw me and I flashed a quick smile before exiting. I had mixed feelings as I left. On the one hand, I felt slightly guilty because I always try to be polite and have good manners and be kind. I hate being rude or unkind to people. On the other hand, I felt so completely empowered. I didn’t even need to say anything and they backed down. Being informed and showing it really is the most powerful weapon we have. If you can pull that off confidently (even if you’re faking it slightly, and I will admit I was since it’s not in my character to be cold or harsh), then you will not be stepped on. They may argue at first, but I believer that as long as you stay confident, stand your ground, know what you’re talking about, and refuse to be pushed around, the battle can be won. Right now, I would like to personally thank Sue, Elizabeth, Alex, adawells, kleigh, moo, and anyone else on this site who has encouraged me to stand my ground and become informed. I don’t know if I would have found it within myself to do so without your guidance and advice. I cannot thank you all enough.

    • Believe*

    • You’re welcome, Ro! It’s my absolute pleasure to help bolster someone’s abilities to do things like that. Even if it wasn’t as severe as what they tend to angle for with women, it always could lead from one thing to another- particularly if someone’s

      That’s a good story. I’d imagine they’d be trying to get your shirt off in back (scoliosis screening tends to involve you lifting your shirt in back, but I suppose the overlap angle would be tried for- especially if a woman were wearing a one-piece dress). That’s pretty creepy: giving scolisos tests & vaccines in a grocery store. That’s getting pretty close to: “Hey, let me check out your boobs in the back of my van!”

      • If a woman was wearing a bra, it would have to come off in order to perform the scoliosis exam too. As most women have trouble getting a bra off without taking off their shirt or dress, she would have her breasts exposed. What do you bet that when they’ve done this, they “Might as well do a breast exam, so long as we’re here…”?

        Beth

      • The scoliosis screening programme in schools was discontinued in Canada. There were studies done that showed it was not cost effective. Many children who were referred were normal and some with a problem were referred too late. This is because children seldom go through puberty at the same age. Some parents would not let their children participate due to cultural issues.

        Parents are recommended to either check their child themselves or take them to a doctor to do that. The check does involves removing clothing and girls can wear a bra, halter top or bathing suit so the back is exposed. The check involves viewing but also touching. However this is not done privately as the children are usually taken in to change in gender segregated groups because it saves time. As well why have a strange adult viewing a child without clothing without their parents? Parents had to sign a permission form but I am sure plenty of kids had the check without it.

      • bethkz & Alex – RE: Scoliosis screening. I’m not sure if it’s changed over the past few years, but I know that the last time I was screened for scoliosis (about 7 years ago), I just had to lift my shirt up in the back. Nothing was taken off and I wasn’t asked to take anything off. Of course it wouldn’t surprise me if a situation was ever taken advantage of, because that seems to happen more times than not. Alex, in regards to it being creepy, it most definitely is! It’s scary to think that nowhere is safe or sacred from medical propaganda. I went to the makeup counter about a year ago and everything in there was pink for Breast Cancer awareness and donations were being taken and percentages of items bought were going to organizations. You can’t get away from anything medical unless you stay inside all day and avoid using the internet. In regards to specifically performing medical “care” in the grocery store, I remember that public libraries around where I live were all offering free mammograms about 3 or 4 years ago. I don’t know if they were being held in the actual library or if medical trucks were brought in. What’s especially awful is that they were targeting low income women and the test has a high rate of false positives. Which means that those women had to get the money together to pay for follow-ups which in a lot of cases, were probably unnecessary. I haven’t seen the free mammogram sales pitch at any libraries in recent years, so I’m assuming that, A. not enough women showed up, B. women showed up but were unable to afford follow-up treatments so no money was made, or C. people complained about it.

      • I’ve got to ask where are you in America? I’m not asking your address, I’m just curious if this is west coast, east coast, midwest, gulf coast or what.

        I’m in New York & I haven’t seen anything like that, but then I haven’t been out & about in town for a while (mainly just trips to restaurants, Walgreens/7-11 & the occassional vodka run).

        I’ve noticed that there’s medical commercials ALL THE TIME on T.V. & I’m pretty sure it’s EVERY commercial break/session! It’s always weird stuff, too. It’s always something about catheters & regularity & pills that give guys tits & stuff like that. I think it started when they started getting WAY too informative with toilet paper commercials.

        We mentioned this subject before, but have you seen this commercial where the woman is talking about “Having sam in her pants”? She’s talking to some complete stranger about things she puts in her pants for one form of leak or another! Do women actually do stuff like that?

      • Alex – I live in the west. It’s more heavily populated in the area I live, which means that there are more lower-income families and poverty as a result, unfortunately. I think that’s one of the reasons why things like this are going on. They want to “reach everybody”. Why not give away free fruits and vegetables and all-natural vitamins? Why not provide a free, safe gym or area where people could exercise daily? Of course, that makes too much sense and could potentially prevent health problems.

        Strictly going to places like that is probably part of why you haven’t seen much propaganda, as most of it tends to be geared towards women (which is ridiculous since a good handful of these issues could affect men as well). It’s typically women who go to the library (I always see men there, too, but there are typically more women in general), go grocery shopping, go to the makeup counters, and go to clothing stores. Which, consequently, are all places I go. So I’ve seen more than enough of it. It’s finally gotten to the point where I’m learning to block it out.

        I stopped watching commercials several months ago. I record everything on DVR and refuse to watch anything live so I can fast forward through all that nonsense LOL. But prior to that, yes I did notice. One of the last commercials I saw was the one about boys growing breasts due to ADHD medication. The toilet paper commercials are borderline creepy. Just show footage of the paper, say it works the best, and move on. It doesn’t need to me detailed.

        I have not seen the Sam in my pants commercial. I don’t know if women talk about stuff like that specifically, but I have seen strangers start rattling off health problems to one another or discussing things like that so it wouldn’t surprise me. P.S: Sam in my pants reminds me of that creepy Uncle Sam video about the “affordable care” act.

      • I am a Library Director at a small town library. If somebody wanted to set up a mammogram screening, we would have to bury them in red tape – get it on the library board agenda, get it on the town board agenda, have specific dates and times set up, talk about how they would intend to proceed with a “positive” result – and provide a way for women to be transported 50-70 miles where they could receive those follow-on tests or treatment.

        I don’t think it would get very far.

        There were enough issues with the red tape concerning the rabies vaccination clinic arranged between the town and a local veterinarian – and we DO have laws requiring dogs be vaccinated for rabies – and recommendations for other animals. Wild animals with rabies have been found in the area. I think anything with PEOPLE would just get buried in red tape.

      • Yeah, I remember that one. It was interesting- I don’t know if it was meant to point out an abscense of self-determination or to reinforce it (you know, like those sitcoms that REALLY bash homebirth?).

        So you’re from the west coast? I’m in New York & I’ve got to say: common sense is a bit hit-or-miss here. At the same time as being people that really are not ignorant of scams & do actually look out for them, they have an alignment that tends to make like things real easy- I guess it’s a double-edged thing where they don’t want to be an idiot, but the don’t want to be an “idiot.” Turns into an “Emperor’s new clothes” type of thing.

      • Alex – Yeah, I’d say the same thing typically applies here. It’s hit or miss.

        In regards to the Uncle Sam ad, it WAS about staying in control of your health care. Unfortunately, I don’t think it had anything to do with informed consent, rather it was about keeping government and health care separate.

27. Wouldn’t it be fairly obvious if her spine was curved even with a bra on? I remember the had use guys lift up the back of our shirts when they started doing that in schools.

    It’s not that broad of a strap & I don’t think it would deviate in one small area without being very obvious in sensation. It’s not going to go straight & then be crooked only in one spot & then go straight again, so as to be hidden by something as narrow as a bra strap.

    I think that doctors have a very “doctrine bound” mentality. Not only do they more or less mindlessly adhere to whatever agenda is put before them- but when a detail is not a functional issue, but is still different from the “list,” they adamantly pursue that detail anyway.

    That & the general pervyness/money/malice/dictatorial behavior stuff.

    • I looked up the requirements for a scholiosis exam. The majority say that a sports bra is suggested. They want normal bras removed because of metallic hooks that interfere with scanners. I don’t see how that would matter in a school physical where it’s all visual anyway.

      Others say that you don’t have to take off your bra. Others, especially those talking about having such exams, say that they were required to remove their shirt and bra.

      They don’t need to remove bras, or remove any metal to do a visual exam. There’s no “scanner”. It’s an excuse. The claims that it doesn’t have to be removed are to put other people at ease. It’s most likely what happens is not what occurs.

      I remember them taking the 8th grade girls off to be examined for our “high school physicals”, 6 at a time. They had us undressed, and they examined our backs. I don’t remember that much about it, except declining the pelvic exam even with pressure.

      • Wait, they had you girls naked & they were doing pelvic exams on girls in the 8th grade?! That’s fucking appalling! Didn’t any of the other girls clash with that?

        Someone trying shit like this with one of my descendants (because it’s not not just my own children) is a big part of why I’m looking to get the hell out of this country. It’s getting more & more closed-off and nazi-like, plus they’re pissing off the rest of the world- allies included.

        You know there’s actually a “tax” on renouncing your citizenship? AND that you’re still charged taxes even if you don’t live in the country? So someone would be paying for Obamacare, even if they live in Europe where they don’t fuck up health care so much.

      • I was in the 8th grade during the mid-1970s. This is hardly some “new” thing.

        They had the girls strip down to our panties to give us the scoliosis check – and, I presume to listen to our lungs. Theater to get the girls naked. There was a female teacher in the room.

        Then, they had the girls go in “privately” to see the doctor – with the female principal. He went through some more theater, “offered” a pelvic exam. When I said “no” to it, I was pressured by the doctor, the teacher, and the principal because I “had a boyfriend”. While it was true that I had a boyfriend – and had for a couple of years by then, he and I NEVER were intimate with each other. We weren’t ready for sex. We knew it. By the time we were, our lives had gone in different directions.

        BTW, the boys had the same thing, except they had to strip naked in groups of 5 brought in together, given a “hernia exam” by the same female doctor, in front of the female teacher and principal.

        I talked to other girls who had it. One thought it was “important” because she had “such a hard time with her periods”. Another thought the doctor was “cute”. They were ahead of me, so I knew to keep my guard up.

        I don’t remember if our parents gave permission, were told it “had to be done”, were not informed of what they were doing.

        On Obamacare… nothing will change because it’s still insurance companies paying doctors or healthcare facilities anything they want, for anything they did or claim they did. The difference is that there are limits on copays and no upper limit on the amount the insurance company will pay. There are limits on the profits the insurance companies can take. Insurance companies are just middlemen – they add nothing of value. Now, everyone has to pay them! The medical providers will still be playing around, experimenting on well people, spreading disease, convincing the well that they are sick and the sick that they are VERY SICK, and missing or refusing to treat the actual problems of people who really are sick or injured. Iatrogenic injury is the #3 cause of death in the US. Medical bills are the #2 cause of personal bankruptcy – right after credit cards. Since medical bills are sometimes charged to credit cards, it could be the #1 cause of bankruptcy. It’s no wonder that the US has the lowest life expectancy, the highest infant mortality of any industrialized nation FOR THE HIGHEST COST.

        This welfare for insurance companies isn’t going to change much about what actually occurs. My hope is that they’ll go back to the drawing board when it becomes evident this does not solve many problems (except allowing people with pre-existing conditions and previously stolen medical identities to get healthcare insurance. After that becomes apparent, socialize the whole darned thing, put the health insurance companies out of business, pay the providers a SALARY, and as employees, insist that they practice medicine that is EVIDENCE BASED, not traditional – like bimanual pelvic exams that serve no medical purpose.

28. Well, the scare-mongering has started, an article appears in the MJA today and elsewhere, by a pathologist concerned about our new screening program. Her main complaint is starting HPV primary testing at age 25…of course, we know screening those younger than 30 is a goldmine for vested interests. (and is NOT supported by the long-standing evidence)
    Thankfully, a senior doctor has challenged her assertions and pointed to the evidence. Interesting some of our doctors are now aware of the evidence…now it’s been accepted our program must be changed. The evidence was denied for decades….”keep having your 2 yearly pap tests from 18 until you’re 70 or you’ll die an early and preventable death”.
    Sadly, I can’t link the articles, pap walls apply, don’t want any non-medical prying eyes here.

    I wonder whether vested interests will go public with their “concerns”…they stand to lose a lot of money with these changes. I don’t think we should offer HPV primary testing until age 30…as it is about 40% of those aged 25 to 29 will be HPV+…and we know what that probably means, immediate referral. If we waited until age 30, only about 5% would be HPV+, almost all of these transient and harmless infections have disappeared by then.
    But no, that would never do, too much money is at stake…

    • Ah the magical age of 30. Where does it come from?

      Not every woman is going out and having their “sexual debut” in the late teen years. Some women might not be sexually active or get any HPV infection until they are older. Not all women’s lives follow the same timeline that the screening programmes use.

      I know a woman who married whe she was over 40. She had a LEEP as recommended but another women pointed out to her that she had not waited long enough to clear the HPV infection. She actually might have been a virgin until that relationship that resulted in marriage.

      The whole HPV, Pap test and treatments, mammograms, and IVF business has to be revamped and more focused on informed patient choice not one-size-fits-all protocols. I am tired of every medical consult being all about tits and ass.

      • I agree, Moo, but I really think the only way we’ll force change is for more women to reject the “mass” information, as you mention, we’re not all the same. It should be about the individual, not the female herd.
        I also, hate the emphasis on “tits and ass”…this message that the female body cannot be trusted and must be closely watched by the medical profession needs to be broken down. I hope more women start to trust, respect and protect their symptom-free body.
        I believe the symptom-free female body is viewed by the medical profession and others as a commercial opportunity. I don’t worry about rare cancers, I understand the real threat to my health and well-being is the medical profession and these programs.

29. Just noticed I wrote, “pap walls” not “pay walls”…freudian slip

30. WOOT!! Finally found a home HPV test you can buy in the US…so excited!! https://www.udotest.com/tests $140 isnt really much more than they would charge my insurance for the normal bullsh*t drs do…no lying naked under a sheet with someones hands inside, no out-of-line comments or assumptions or coercion and no creepy horrible (possibly contaminated) metal gadgets being jammed in. And best of all if anyone so much as thinks the word PAP around me I can say “I had a home HPV test and I’m negative so f*ck off!” 🙂 However I’m also willing to accept the alternative where I go to my dr and say “hey this home HPV test came back positive. Should I get this looked into to see if there’s anything bad going on?” and y’know what? I’m perfectly happy to do that because it will be MY CHOICE.

    drs (not to mention all the sheeple) always go on about how important a PAP is but after all the research I’ve done and people I’ve talked to I can’t seem to find ANY serious problem a pelvic exam can diagnose that no other test/tool can. Is there anything?? I supose there’s fibroids and cysts but those don’t seem to harm women most of the time and everything about BV and those other infections is a bit muddled but apparently those don’t even really get diagnosed from a pelvic. And various STDs and reproductive cancers can be diagnosed through A)blood B)urine C)ultrasound…which leads me to the conclusion that I and all other women should not be subjected (if not outright bullied/coerced) to a painful, degrading and psychologically traumatic test IF IT DOES NOTHING.

    There’s all this buzz about “Get screened! Get screened!” but where the f*ck is the demand for better testing?? You never see women with cute little stickers and undies that say “Choose smarts over speculums” or something like that. You never hear them say “we refuse to do it until you make it more acceptable” Well guess what- THIS girl does. Not only will I refuse pelvic exams I will in fact boycott them. Even if I am completely alone and everyone else thinks I’m stupid, reckless and childish. My dad always taught me to make my own choices- to stand up for what I think is right despite the people higher up the ladder who try to tell me how to do things based on whats best for them. He was right. My choice is to stand against this useless invasive traumatic test.

    • Wow. Thanks for putting up the link to the UDoTest. This is going to be so useful for many women here. It is also shipped to Canada.

      I do think that it is too expensive at $140 since the HPV test that is done with a pap is $70 in Canada. The UDoTest also gives a result of HPV16/18 or other High risk strains of HPV that is useful for women who have been vaccinated. The test done with the pap only gives positive to high risk strains limped together.

      It says that the results are sent to the customer and their doctor. I am wondering if they have to report to the government registries. What if you do not have a doctor, can you still buy it?

      • Looking at the how-to-do video, it is a swab that is put into your vagina like a tampon so it could miss some area but it seems accurate. It is processed in your own country? Must how long would it take to get transported?

        If anyone tries this product could you please tell us about how you liked the service.

31. Emily, are you 30 or over? (Sorry if you’ve already mentioned your age elsewhere)
    HPV testing can cause issues before age 30 as HPV infections are fairly common in young women, usually transient and harmless infections that clear naturally over a year or so. About 40% of women under 30 will test HPV+, about 5% from 30 onwards. CC is very rare before 30. (and the early rare cases occur whether you pap test or not)
    HPV testing women in your 20s can lead to not only worry, but take you down the path to pap testing, false positives, biopsies etc. Some women worry or panic if they produce a positive test result.
    I’d say to any woman under 30 to be very careful with pap and HPV testing, neither is recommended under an evidence based program.
    If you’re 30 and over and want to test for HPV, then go for it. I’m not familiar with that test though, but have heard good things about the Delphi Screener and know a few women who’ve used it. I’ll send Delphi Bioscience an email and get an update on distribution, I know Aussie women can order it from Singapore. Delphi Bioscience were also, setting up a local distributor here, not sure whether that got off the ground, I can’t imagine they’d be welcome here. (or in the States or Canada)

    • Elizabeth, I was considering publishing a post related to the Udo site but decided against it for two reasons:

      1) It wasn’t made crystal clear what would happen if you were to test positive for HPV, but the information section about Udo stated that if you test positive “You will be referred to a doctor, who will conduct a thorough examination and recommend regular screening”. This statement indicates there may be some type of monitoring regarding your actions if you were to test positive. And as you’ve stated Elizabeth, a positive test result is common in under-30s. Given you need to provide a name and address I would be leery about ordering a test.

      2) If you test negative, according to Udo: “This indicates very little or no risk for cervical cancer for the next 6 months to 2 years, depending on your age and other risk factors”. My understanding is that a negative HPV result indicates no further testing for the next five years – but according to Udo you are only covered for the next 6 months to 2 years. I hope the reference to testing more frequently than every five years doesn’t become the newest bid to increase business. https://www.udotest.com/resources/faq#what-if-i-prove-positive-for-hpv

      • Sue,
        I think you’re right, the temptation to make money is ever present in women’s “healthcare”.

        The reasons used to block self-testing options, “women won’t use it properly”. “They’ll use it too early or too often?” “What happens to those who test HPV+?” “How do we ensure they are monitored?” All of this says one thing to me: the need to control women.

        If women are given full and accurate information, I’m confident HPV self-testing could work for most women. The problem is the system doesn’t want it to work…they want to control women, decide when and how they test and how often. It’s the same paternalistic attitudes at work.
        If you choose to do the FOBT (bowel cancer screening) you can opt to have the result sent to your doctor or not, if you test positive, they recommend you see a doctor for advice, to re-test or have a colonoscopy. The system gets complicated with cervical screening because they fear losing control of the herd and oh, dear…what about that expensive program? And the profits for vested interests? The political brownie points…

        The HPV self-testing kit will only be offered to women here (under the new program) if a woman declines the invasive version of the test for 6 years, and it must be arranged by a doctor who also, participates in the program. So they have 6 years to work on you and if that fails, they still retain control by providing the test, you go back to the doctor for the result etc.
        Sadly, there is misinformation everywhere. I know Tampap is advertised in the UK as something to provide peace of mind and a way to get informed, but they claim you still need pap tests, regardless of the result. That’s absolute nonsense, that’s clearly using women to make money. HPV- women can’t benefit from pap testing, but they’d rather pap test you unnecessarily than interfere with the program.
        Tampap doesn’t really threaten the program, if women think pap tests are still necessary, and if young women use it, lots will be HPV+ and be scared into the pap testing program. Some women believe once HPV+, then always HPV+
        I’ve heard women say, “I’m HPV+ so have to be careful with pap testing”…then you find out they were HPV+ 15 years ago. Chances are they’ve been HPV- for 13 years!

        Women should be VERY careful using any form of testing before age 30, and if they choose to test early, ask yourself before you test: what will I do if I produce a positive result or abnormal pap test?
        The evidence supports HPV primary testing or self-testing from age 30 (for those who want to test) and I think the new Dutch program is the best in the world (again, for those who wish to test) The Dutch will be offered just 5 HPV tests in total, that sounds about right to me, at 30,35,40,50 and 60. I know some women prefer to test 5 yearly, the 10 year gaps scare some women, especially after decades of scare-mongering.
        If you’re HPV- then get on with life, you might choose to test again for HPV in 5, 7 or 10 years time. The Dutch program ends at age 60, our new program will end at 74, that sounds excessive to me. I’d also, say that HPV- women who are no longer sexually active or confidently monogamous might choose to forget any further testing.

        The roughly 5% who are HPV+ need to consider their next move, under the Dutch program you’d be offered a 5 yearly pap test. Most HPV+ women will clear the virus, it’s only the rare cases that develop into a real problem. Nevertheless, this 5% are at risk, even if it’s a rare event.
        I don’t think the Australian women who used the Delphi Screener had to nominate a doctor, some women might not mind their doctor getting the result, but that might also, mean having your details entered on a screening register or being visible to Papscreen. Again, control of women. That’s no doubt why they’ll only provide the HPV self-screener under our new program through a doctor, so you’re part of the official program.

        There’s no need for it, if you give women accurate and complete information, something they’ve never been able to do. They don’t have a problem with FOBTs without a nominated doctor, and they can be ordered online, so it shouldn’t be a problem with HPV self-testing. (Bowel cancer is a bigger risk by the way…but then the cervical screening program is very expensive and vulnerable, it needs serious numbers to survive) Interesting all these problems involve considerations other than what’s best for women. Typical…

32. By the way the Dutch are doing a trial looking at the feasibility of providing all women with HPV self-testing kits.

    • Actually Sue, I was just chatting to an “informed” colleague who uses a self-test kit to screen for bowel cancer every year, she’s rejected colonoscopies after a relative had a life-threatening experience. (an infection in his bowel) She goes through a private company and pays about $40 for the test, they cannot supply it unless she gives them the name of a doctor to also, receive the test result. I suppose this is a govt requirement, and a more acceptable arrangement than HPV self-testing with something like the Delphi Screener, because our bowel screening program is underfunded. At the moment there is only funding for testing at ages 50,55,60 and I think 65, but it’s recommended you have the test annually or 2 yearly from about 50.
      So I guess it’s similar with bowel screening, you accept the free kit sent by the Govt program and end up in the system or go through a private company, pay, and provide your doctor’s details. Either way they’ve kept track of you.
      I suppose they argue it’s a legal liability thing, there’s been at least 2 cases of women committing suicide after getting a false positive mammogram. Keeping track of the women didn’t help there, did it? If she’d provided informed consent for the test though, she would have had a greater understanding of it’s reliability, and may not have agreed to the test at all.
      If I planned to test for HPV, I wouldn’t have a problem with my doctor also, receiving the result, but wouldn’t want my details handed to the Pap test police. If I was HPV+ she’d probably recommend pap testing, but would also, respect my decision to re-test in a year etc.
      This is why self-testing has to be approached with caution, it can land you in the same position: what now?

      I’ll make some enquiries, but certainly the women who used the HPV self-test device in Singapore did not provide the name of their Australian doctor, one hasn’t seen a doctor in years due to an early traumatic medical experience, she lost trust in the medical profession. The women who ordered it from Australia using an online facility, I’ll double-check with them.
      Re legal liability, what if you used the test, it came back positive and you ignored the result, but how is that different to having a pap test, getting an abnormal result and ignoring that? Perhaps, the argument would be the company didn’t do enough, a doctor would try to contact you etc. I would have thought providing some written instructions and asking the woman to sign and acknowledge she’s read them and has no questions, would be enough. You could do the same with a positive result, this means you’re at risk and should discuss your result with your doctor. (this is why these tests should not be used before 30, doctors would do pap tests and we know the rest…ugly) I think this issue only becomes incredibly complicated because it’s about cervical screening.

      • I agree Elizabeth that the issue only becomes complex because it’s about cervical screening – their special interest cancer. It’s where all the fun and money is for them. I’m interested to hear about other women’s screening experiences using the self-test. I might be overly cynical, but I wouldn’t be surprised if HPV results began to be regulated in a manner similar to HIV results, which must be reported to the state health department. Maybe once they have enough names on file they’ll drop that one on women. And of course there would be further testing required – most likely mandated. I can see them also ramping up the fear about HPV, publishing prolific propaganda that would present HPV as an Ebola-type of virus that is likely to kill you instantly.

      • I’ve sent off a couple of emails asking for more information on the Delphi Screener. I also, asked for an update, can UK, US and Canadian women now order the Screener over the net or by fax?
        Do you have to go through a doctor or provide your doctor’s details, who’ll also, receive your test results? The other issue: if an Australian or American woman tests HPV+ and this information ends up with her local doctor, you can imagine the pressure to have a colposcopy and biopsy, when the only thing that will be recommended to HPV+ Dutch women is a 5 yearly pap test. (until they clear the virus) I pointed out this dilemma to them, and that confidential testing is important when women live in a country where excess and non-evidence based testing is the norm. I also, mentioned some women might like to test, but that coercion, excess etc. has driven many away from not only testing, but all medical care.
        I’ll get back to you, hope it’s good news.

33. I’ve got to ask: are these self-tests any BETTER at detecting something that would indicate a problem? I get how it wouldn’t be worse, seeing as someone else couldn’t cause problems for whatever reasons (money, malice, incompetance, etc…)- but isn’t the testing method, itself, unreliable? Or is this only for HPV?

    This obviously isn’t going to apply to me, specifically- but seeing as it could apply to someone I get attached to & it’s good to know what the general situations of the surrounding environment are (ex: medical antagonism or general incompetance could be a hell of a warning sign on different levels than THAT specific problem). Also, being as a few people close to me have run into various problems with medical situations, it’s something I’ve learned to not deliberately block.

34. I’m curious about something: Have any of you noticed how there’s usually a massive aim on the frivolous as far as medical things go in this country? I’ve heard CVS won’t sell cigarettes anymore-yet, they’ll sell all kinds of food & drinks with various additives & modifications as well as PRESCRIPTION DRUGS (which are, apparently, the 4th leading cause of death in the USA). If you google that, you get a fairly interesting bit of information on collective-evolution.

    Doctors are after various things with women & we’ve discussed things like that before, but they have more & more of a tendancy to just make shit up or actually cause something! They do something, then react to it. It’s like someone “feeding themselves in a circle,” if you catch my drift.

    • It’s true that CVS won’t sell cigarettes anymore, but WILL sell any number of things which are at least as damaging.

      Prescription drugs are not only the 3rd or 4th leading cause of death in the US, but since some of them cause the person taking them to engage in actions they would not otherwise, it puts others and the general public at risk. Columbine, Von Maur, and other similar incidents come to mind.

      I too, have noticed an increasing tendency for doctors to make stuff up, treat their made-up quasi disease, and then treat the side effects of the unnecessary treatment they gave. It’s a great business model! Cause Disease => Cure Disease => Cause Disease => Cure Disease…. make money at every step!

      It never ceases to shock me when random others – acquaintances and strangers even – tell me how many prescription drugs they’re taking. Even fairly young, mostly healthy people seem to be taking more drugs than my stepfather was in the early 1970s with diabetes, tuberculosis, a couple strokes, and a few heart attacks! There was a recent article in Navy Times that the number of young people taking maintenance prescription medications is such that it’s adversely effecting recruitment into the military.

      • You know, I was reading a few things about how they put soldiers on drugs more & more. It’s basically this generation’s Agent Orange.

      • It’s more than this generation’s Agent Orange.

        It poses a security threat if the supply lines of those patented, prescription drugs is interrupted. In the past, someone taking a maintenance medication could not enlist in the military. That was due to national security reasons. Now, according to a recent issue of “Navy Times”, they have personnel sharing medications when supplies get short. They may be a different size, or even a different drug, or since they are not kept in environmentally-controlled conditions while in the field, they may be of unknown effectiveness or turned into a different molecular substance with an unknown effect. Then, there are the occasional instances of someone really going nuts while taking or withdrawing from one of these drugs, and causing a great deal of unnecessary casualties to other US troops, allies, or civilians.

        It won’t be nearly as big of a problem when they come home as were the Agent Orange survivors. They are still in the system. Psych drugs, OTOH, has people dying on average 25 years earlier than they would have otherwise. If the average age (for men) is now 78, take 25 years off of that, and you’ve got 53.

        That is one reason that all of the complaints about how much money it costs for each average person to die at a young age because of alcohol abuse, obesity, high-fat diets, smoking, or whatever. It may cost more NOW to deal with a 53 year old with a heart attack caused by one or more of the above. If that person dies of a heart attack at 55, they will not cost the system for Alzheimer’s care, or stroke afftereffects, or osteoporosis issues when they’re 80.

        It’s a good instance of “figures don’t lie, but liars can figure”.

      • True, misuse of prescription drugs is an issue.
        Interesting this is one of the arguments used to keep the Pill on script, when you can walk in and take many things off the shelf that will kill or harm you if you misuse them. No big deal made about that fact.
        The concern about the Pill is losing control of women, income producing units for the medical profession and others, and that also, threatens the hugely expensive screening programs they want to force onto us. We have to protect those screening programs.

        Our Govt goes on and on about smoking, but keep enjoying the enormous taxes generated by sales. Not too much is said about gambling, nice taxes there and a powerful lobby. Personally, I don’t really believe they want us to all go smoke-free and stay away from the pokies and casino. We get lip service and half measures, but the reality is they want the tax and the business activity. (that also, generates taxes, jobs etc.)

        Yet I’ve watched a couple of feature programs on our casualty departments being clogged with people who’ve abused alcohol, especially binge drinking, now ice is a major problem.
        Not much will ever be done about alcohol, it’s legal (if you’re 18+) and the Govt makes a packet, once again, from the taxes and license fees.
        So Govt is prepared to go in hard when it doesn’t hurt their back pocket too much or when powerful vested interests are not interested in whatever it might be.

        Some argue that smoking costs our health system a fortune, sure, but then so does obesity and abuse of alcohol. Why the focus on one or two and not the lot?
        It says to me that at least part of the reason is that vested interests are in the ear of politicians and that different lobby groups have different levels of power and influence. The women’s health lobby, loaded with vested interests, is very powerful and so we continue to spend the most to screen (badly) for a rare cancer. It doesn’t make much sense. (and on breast screening, which I believe is harmful, the risks of screening exceed any benefit, but rest assured, it will go on for decades here)

        We’ve had some high profile cases of people losing their life savings due to reckless advice from financial planners. We have a powerful financial services lobby group, like most developed countries. We have never received decent financial advice so decided the only people who really cared about our hard earned money was us, so 6 years ago my husband and I took over.
        I did a few courses, have spent a lot of time reading and a few accountant colleagues have helped us, our returns are so much better. I’m not sure how we could trust someone who makes money selling certain financial products. (when there is probably something a lot better out there…but there is no commission or the commission to the adviser is not as good) Poor training, churning and conflicts of interests are an issue as well. (and flat out crooks)
        Increasingly, we have to protect ourselves from these influences, whether that’s our body or our savings/superannuation.

35. Oh yay! Here’s some more lovely propaganda from the Daily Mail. I doubt these statistics are even slightly truthful. I’d like to know who exactly they “surveyed”. Also, I love how they keep stating that women avoid their GP and gynecologist because of humiliation – give me a break please. That may be part of it, but lots of women are informed. Besides which, even if humiliation were the only reason, it should be respected. They’re really reaching now. I suppose that means the number of informed women has had a steady increase. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2739552/Just-HALF-women-locate-vagina-diagram-female-reproductive-system.html

    • Why would someone even say “humiliation”? Something being “against the grain” in this way I’m pretty sure is called “sexual dissonance.” Something being of a problematic composition, in whatever way that happens to be meant, is frequently dodged as a reason I’ve noticed. Even simple pain is kind of omitted- which, of course, can mean argued with (since it’s affirming that something is not there by presenting non-existance).

      I’d think “self-defense” works well, simply because this type of things is so frequently imposed on people. Also, “self-preservation” would work- since even if it’s not imposed, there’s the ramifications of the risks & inaccuracies.

      Also, what’s the difference if they can locate one of their own parts on a diagram? I don’t know if I could pick my house out on a satellite map, but I DO know my own address & can find it on the ground!

      • Alex – I don’t imagine many women actually use the word humiliation. I figure words like: “uncomfortable” “awkward” and “invasive” would’ve been used more frequently, but doctors, the media and/or anyone else involved in things like this chalk it up to humiliation (which is interesting considering they’re the ones trying to make these things look glamorous and good). I think self-preservation is an excellent term, as it would be very difficult to argue that one. It would be interesting to watch how frustrated they would get over every woman saying that when asked why she doesn’t do this or that.

        That’s a very good comparison you used! It’s also good to keep in mind that everyone’s body is different and there isn’t a set formula for what any one body part must look EXACTLY like. Example: different eye shapes, different heights, different skin tones, etc. (Which pretty much goes along with what you were saying.)

    • If I look at that diagram of women’s reproductive organs, unless I read it and look at the diagram in perspective, I might point to the uterus in the diagram as being the vagina, and the length of the vagina as being the anal opening. The question is whether someone interprets the drawing as a woman’s internal reproductive organs or interprets it as an external female genitalia.

      That doesn’t mean that I couldn’t point to them on myself, another woman, photograph, or a realistic doll. It means the drawings are poor.

      • bethkz – I agree! The diagram was reminiscent of something in my 5th grade health book (which was pretty shoddy all around). It’s possible that they purposefully left it vague so as to confuse women and throw of the statistics. I wouldn’t put it past someone to do that, sadly.

36. Well, well, well, haven’t they kept this quiet? I just found a local web address for Delphi Bioscience. It says “your doctor can order a Delphi Screener for you”…so the Screener will be locked behind doctors. Now why doesn’t that surprise me…
    http://www.delphiscreener.com.au/

    Women who don’t want to go through a doctor might be able to get it from Singapore, I’ll let you know when I hear from Delphi Bioscience.
    A few interesting things:
    “Will the Delphi Screener only be available through prescription?
    This depends on the country. The Screener can be offered for free through the government, or can be bought at the pharmacy, or be provided by a general practitioner or gynaecologist.”

    “Where is the Delphi Screener available?
    We are currently using the Screener in many countries around the world to collect local information on the use (Netherlands, Finland, Italy, Germany, Malta, USA, Singapore).”

    • Researching a bit more about Tampap, I came across this from the UK Advertising Standards Authority. It turns out that a GP complained to them that their advert implied that women could drop pap testing if they got a negative result, and also implied that cervical cancer was related to getting a positive result. A bit more research revealed the GP in question to be Margaret McCartney.

      http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CC4QFjAB&url=http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2012/10/Home-Test-Direct-Pty-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_203992.aspx&ei=HP4PVMqWD4PmaOTWgqAL&usg=AFQjCNEY3jMog05CHHTfGtNFdXW3zWufWg&bvm=bv.74649129,d.d2s

37. It’s not really related to this subject, exactly- but did you hear about doctors in the U.K. trying to get KITCHEN KNIVES BANNED?! They are so into micro-managing people’s lives that they think somoene shouldn’t even have kitchen knives.

    Supposedly, it’s because they are used in attacks- but what is someone supposed to grab if they get attacked? As it is, guns are a huge controversy & so are regular knives (but fixed & folding). For some reason BOWHUNTING is illegal in Britain, too. Better amputate people’s hands because they could use those to protect & provide for themselves!

    What happened to England? I don’t know if Scotland or Wales is like this or if they’re blanketed by all this “rubbish” (as they call it), but it’s getting to the point where it seems like they or someone else wants them to curl up in a ball & die! For fuck’s sake, it’s things like this that people went to outright WAR for! This wasn’t even always against a foreign enemy & after at least 1000 years of history, you’d think the lesson would be learned.

    I’m only a little Irish & English, but it still gets me a bit cranked-up. One of my cousins is in London right now, actually. I’m starting to get worried that she’ll get all kinds of shit aimed at her like she would in America. Maybe she’s got too pointy of a pen or something.

    • Alex, you’re 100% right! Not only in UK, but also in Australia. Back when the “do-gooders” in Australia got guns banned, and ordered all be turned in and destroyed, the next thing on “protect society from itself” menu was, you guessed it, knives. These were also described as “killing machines.” Laws were discussed which provided police access to knock on anybody’s door and inspect that all knives were placed under lock and key.

      What is society coming to? The lawmakers and police disarm us, claiming it’s how we need to be protected from ourselves. Hundreds of people die each year waiting for help on 911. Meanwhile, the same police beat, abuse, kill, and loot the people they are protecting. Laws are regularly violated by those who enforce them. And the media rarely covers these stories, unless there’s fresh bloody film. And the cops make sure to destroy cameras and film if they can. If you want real news on this, check out http://www.nranews.org. At least the US NRA is truthful.

      Meanwhile, Islamists everywhere are torturing, raping, murdering in the name of their religion. I just discovered the Islamist child drugging and molest network in UK. And in the Middle East, there’s talk of bringing back sex slave markets, where captured infidel women are sold off, to be used and disposed when no longer desired. It’s in the Koran… If there is a new ten-state Islamist union formed with Turkey as its head, this is the beginning of End-Times Prophecy. Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, John, Revelations are being played out before our lives. Within 10 yrs, immigrant muslims will have voting majorities in Europe. Multiculturilism does not work when the immigrants do not want to assimilate. Happens in US, everywhere. And nobody dare report it in the news.

      • Will they come to people’s houses and and chop their food for them? Thought not.

    • Hi Alex,
      I just wondered how your cousin got on in London in September. I hope she had a good time.

      • Sounds like it went well for her. She actually went to a bunch of places (I think she said Germany was cold- socially speaking).

38. I keep up-to-date on politics via different political blogs as I find those to be the most unbiased. Today, however, people were discussing health care on one of those blogs and the following conversation was in the comments:

    Comment 1: “I’m a medical student. Most of us are, in fact, at least partially motivated by money. A MD/DO is a straight one way ticket to upper middle class at least. Sure, we want to help people, but we also want the money. Anyone who tells you different is lying through their teeth.”

    Comment 2: “That’s what I figured. I work in the medical field and the doctors who aren’t in it for the money are few and far between, and there’s nothing wrong with that.”

    There you have it ladies (and gents). Straight from the horse’s mouth. People wonder why there are those of us who think that doctors do things for incentives or more money. People wonder why we think their primary focus isn’t to actually help people heal, but to make money. Maybe because it’s true and they even admit to it. I’m so aggravated by this. I know we’ve all discussed it here before, about money being a big deciding factor in how doctors handle things (and these comments only serve to validate those assumptions), but to actually see those in the medical field admit to it is particularly awful. I am so horrified by this. And in regards to “there’s nothing wrong with that”, there’s SO MUCH wrong with that. The fact that they think there’s nothing wrong with doing something that involves the well-being of others for money just goes to show how twisted the “logic” in the medical field is. Good grief.

    • Yes most people do work for money.

      The car mechanic, the hair stylist, the medical doctor all provide services for which they get paid. They can recommend services that I do not want and I feel that I can decline. They all deal with safety issues such as a car machanic can deem a car unsafe to keep it off the road, a hair stylist might refuse to colour a person’s hair with a known allergy to hair dye. But is this all similar to the medical profession? A doctor could ask a few screening questions that lead to a sleep study and someone is diagnosed with sleep apnea. They are told they have to attend further appointments and purchase an expensive CPAP machine (though no way of determining if they are using it) or the doctor will have their driver’s licence suspended. For many people taking their ability to legally drive means much hardship.

      Anyway I am really sick of MDs ranting on about how long and expensive their education is. It should be paid for by public funds as all education should be. Any number of professions such as hair stylist, car mechanic also has to be licenced and pay rent etc. there is really no excuse for the medical profession to give such lousey customers choice and bad customer service.

      • Moo – I personally think there is a huge difference between hair stylists/car mechanics/etc. and doctors. The first big difference is that car mechanics and hair stylists do not directly affect the well-being and health of any human being (I say they don’t DIRECTLY affect people because while a mechanic could make a mistake and mess up someone’s car creating potential dangers, and a hair stylist could potentially dye someone’s hair which would cause them to have an allergic reaction, neither of these were done for money or ulterior motives, they were just unfortunate mistakes as everyone is human). If they include more than what is necessary to get more money, no human being has actually been harmed in the process. Furthermore, when is the last time you met a car mechanic or hair stylist whose main motivation was money? I can’t remember. Every one that I’ve encountered has been passionate about and enjoyed those things, then decided to pursue them as a career. Of course they need money to sustain themselves and of course everyone works for money to an extent, the point is that their motivation to enter into those specific fields was NOT money. It was their interest in the field. If they were in it for money, hair stylists and car mechanics would have entered a more lucrative field such as law or the medical field. In the case of a stylist refusing to dye someone’s hair because they have an allergy, that is common sense. Besides which, it is perfectly legal and possible for someone to dye their hair on their own accord. There isn’t any barrier one must go through to get the dye. You can even buy professional grade dye from beauty supply stores. If a mechanic deems a car unsafe to drive, you can trust that it really is unsafe to drive. They don’t make money off of someone not driving. If everyone was off the roads then they would be out of business entirely. That is just my opinion on the matter though.

        
        I agree that the medical field gives lousy customer’s choice and bad customer service. However, there seems to be a sense of entitlement that comes with the degree, because they were in school for so long and did spend out so much money.

39. A surgeries a procedure that repairs the cervix and even treats cervicla cancer. It is largely ignored. This article also explains why freezing, burning the cervix and cone biopsies which are done after a bad Pap test result are so damaging and really not necessary.

    http://cervicalrepair.yolasite.com/summary.php

40. Herbal treatments of the cervix. What LEEP actually does and the cervix does not grow back. The damage is permanent. See these photos.

    http://www.drnick.net/index.php?p=341255

41. There is some talk of urine tests for HPV becoming available soon. If this is a doctor office only test it is actually worse. The standard unrine test (just leave the little cup there with your name on it) is going to mean more nonconsented testing that is reported to the government registry for women where I live. It is going to be more harassment for further “investigations” and reporting of cancer cases (no vacation travel insurance, job security etc). I already had one doctor do unconsented STI tests on my sample that I left for what I thought was a bladder infection.

    So what I can do is take the lab form and the bottle home and deliver it myself to the lab. Or just totally not go to doctors at all.

    We need private confidential testing and treatments by our choice. Not forced coerced tests.

    • Moo, yourself and Elizabeth are just amazing in the info you discover and medical practices you elucidate us to knowing. I am forever grateful to the efforts made here. This reminds me of Joan Rivers dying due to things being performed that she never gave advance consent to do.

      Could you please remind me how you know that HPV cannot be latent? My husband has mouth cankers all his life. Now and then I get a cold sore; these are caused by a herpes virus. The herpes virus apparently lives somewhere in either our mouths or nerve system and attacks…

      Where does the HPV virus hide out? Just in the area where it chooses to infect? And if our bodies beat it off, or if it’s otherwise killed by medical treatment, it it truly gone forever?

      I’m going to make my gyne appt soon, and see if I get the Delphi or something else. There won’t be a pelvic done. The doctor already knows and has agreed… Thanks in advance!

      • Wow I have to keep repeating the same information.

        I could not find any published scientific study that proves that HPV can be a latent infection in the genitals in the way that the Herpes virus stays latent in the nerve cells. There is only a paper that was published that suggests a theory of latency of HPV. A theory that was not proven.

        There are over 100 strains of HPV that infect humans. Some give people foot warts and some only infect the genitals. Some people might have more than one strain of HPV at one time or have serial infections with different strains at different times in their life. The theory is that immunity against a particular strain should be long lasting otherwise how would the vaccines work? But then I have read that the vaccines really do not work as well as they should be and the there are the side effects.

        HPV tests are either positive or negative for certain high risk strains all lumped together or with separate test results for HPV 16 and 18 since those are going with the vaccine.

        Often the body’s immune system will fight off the HPV infection within a few years. Sometimes the viral DNA will get into body cells and change them into cancer cells which will divide until they are tumors. Some herbs do help fight HPV infection. Diet, exercise and stopping smoking also help the immune system. The medical “cure” for HPV infection is either cutting out tissue, burning with laser, heat or chemicals or freezing to destroy tissue. However this “cure” does not kill off any random infected cells or cells that have turned into cancer cells unless they are removed by the destruction. Some women will have LEEP more than once and their cervical dysplasia comes back. Some ointments are available for genital warts outside the body but drugs for internal (such as inside the vagina or cervix) are only at the experimental stage.

        Being immune suppressed puts a person at risk of getting any type of infection and dying from it. These are organ transplant patients, cancer patients receiving conventional therapies, HIV victims, very old or young and sometimes pregnant women.

        The interesting fact is that young women tend to have HPV infections while the cancer in women over 50 is higher. So what is happening that women get reinfected or get different strains when they are older that their immune system cannot fight off? HPV infected cells turned cancer cell grow quickly or not since this maybe has not been studied. If the cell DNA was changed then there is something that turned on the cancer genes but no one understand this.

        I do not know your situation. Just decide what you want from a doctor. Get the facts and if you feel that a Pap test, HPV test or pelvic exam is right for you then do that. If you do not, then don’t. It’s your body.

42. Taken from a web page of a GP surgery in the UK…….

    “Under certain conditions we may be able to issue repeat prescriptions of the contraceptive pill without the need to see a doctor or nurse.

    You may apply for a repeat prescription of the same contraceptive pill if

    you are aged between 18 and 35
    you are currently taking certain contraceptive pills that have been prescribed by a GP at our practice. The list of pills is available on the application form.
    you have had your blood pressure and weight measured in the last year, either in the practice or by a health professional, and these are within safe limits.
    you have had a cervical smear test within the last three years.
    you are happy with your current pill and have no problems or side effects”

    It would appear that the doctors and nurses at this surgery missed the day at medical school when informed consent was discussed.

    • Mint, I found something similar on a website here, so it seems some doctors are still using the Pill to mislead women into pap testing. I tried to lodge a complaint and was shuffled from one place to another, they make it as hard as possible. Instead I sent my complaint straight to the Clinic, received no response.
      Everyone in medicine knows this goes on…and everyone ignores it, it protects the program, helps reach the target securing target payments…and it’s “for our own good”. Incredible that respecting women’s legal rights and adhering to proper ethical standards appears to be too difficult in women’s healthcare. No one has clean hands here, the GPs have often received tips from the Govt/screening authority on ways to increase coverage, achieving a target will clash with informed consent. So when coverage is the only consideration, all of these tactics are over-looked or justified as necessary to save lives etc.
      Mint, I’d send the UK Medical Council a link to the website and make a formal complaint. Discussion and concerns about informed consent in women’s cancer screening are more advanced in the UK, I think they’d be forced to take action.
      It’s only when doctors are challenged that they’ll change their behaviour. Sadly, they’ve been getting away with this sort of outrageous conduct for far too long.
      When a woman is led to believe a pap test is a clinical requirement for the Pill, she’s been misled into the test, that IMO, negates all consent and is a serious matter. Doctors are so bold and comfortable flouting our legal rights they even include the evidence on their websites. It will take a long time to change the current thinking and conduct, but it starts when we challenge, report, complain and reject.

    • We only have a choice of 2 GP surgeries in our area, and I am sure that before about 2010, the wording on their websites always said “all new female patients will be given a smear test”. After my smear test from hell in 1997 I repeatedly looked to change doctor, but was trapped by only being able to select surgeries in our catchment area, and both said that all new women patients would be given a smear test. As we have the larger practice near us I stayed where I was, as I started to realise that if you saw someone who wasn’t your named GP, they never bothered you for smear tests. It may have been because their 80% target had to be from only those on their list, and they gained nothing in screening someone elses patient.

      I’ve noticed that both practices have since updated their websites and this has now been taken off. However, I did recently get an application form for another practice, which asked when my last smear test was, so the pressure may still be there, but just not on the website anymore.
      I’ve also noticed that surgeries are switching to online appointments and repeat prescriptions, and I do not know what would happen if a woman tried to book repeat pill prescriptions without a smear test. Maybe the doctor can set it to refuse a renewal if the smear test hasn’t been done? Perhaps other posters can let us know?

      I’ve also noticed at my practice that there are no leaflets or even a mention of cervical screening, even on the well woman noticeboard in the waiting room, anymore.

      At the gyn department at the hospital, I have recently had to attend, one whole noticeboard had been covered in a ghastly bright pink promotional display for cervical screening. It looked like a load of pink vomit on the wall. Buried amongst it were the small words “Informed consent”, which annoyed me intensely, because once informed you may decide not to consent. Always they assume consent will be given. However, at my last appointment, this wall display was looking decidedly scrappy, with a lot of bits missing, and someone had changed this little notice to read “Informed choice”.

      Change is definitely in the air.

      • I’ve now sent a complaint to the Medical Ombudsman about that statement, “women on the Pill need pap tests”. We’ll see what they have to say…but I think we’re a long way behind the UK. A spokesman for the AMA said last year that he doubted many doctors would prescribe the pill without a current pap test on file. No one challenged that statement, basically a doctor still tying the Pill to elective cancer screening and I assume refusing the Pill if a woman exercised her legal right and declined the test. Coercion = no consent at all.
        No one, as far as I’m aware, (and I looked!) had a problem with this statement coming from the AMA. So hardly surprising GPs are happy to promote pap testing as a clinical requirement for the Pill. It seems some doctors are still treating women like second class citizens, while others are far more respectful. I also, doubt most of our doctors would share the opinion of the male doctor speaking for the AMA. I’ve heard from a few women who’ve faced pressure here, have been misled, but coercion is risky, if a woman complains, you’re in trouble, you cannot refuse the Pill simply because a woman chooses not to have elective cancer screening.
        My GP does not have breast or cervical screening brochures in her waiting room, they were removed many years ago.

43. http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/women-risk-their-lives-skipping-biannual-pap-smear-test-while-they-wait-for-a-new-five-year-test/story-fneuz9ev-1227064479561

    Women here are apparently waiting for the new program to start in 2016, so we’re being told we’re risking our lives “avoiding” 2 yearly pap testing.
    Honestly, the lies will continue, it doesn’t take much research to find 2 yearly pap testing just fills up day procedure, I suppose they want to “treat” as many as possible before the program is changed. They’re still likely to do well under our new program, lots of young women will still be referred, biopsied and “treated”.
    Who could ever trust these programs? They promote what they KNOW is BAD medical advice, that can only end up harming and worrying a lot of women.
    Needless to say, you can’t leave a comment.
    Thankfully, many women will now see straight through this self-serving nonsense, they can no longer assume we’re all trusting and sensitive to their “warnings”, we’re no longer putty in their hands. More of us know exactly what’s going on….

    • So, somoene actually says that they doubt that a doctor would prescribe this without having this exam on file- yet, if someone were to say: “I doubt any doctor would prescribe this without trying to coerce women into all kinds of invasive tests,” that’s someone misrepresenting them? Ever notice how they play victim all the damn time, too? I guess they DO feel persecuted for the shit they do.

      Cops do the same shit. Actually, I remember an article where a cop was basically saying “You know, people don’t trust us but doctors kill WAY more people than we do.” He’s probably right, but they both play all kinds of “woe is me” shit when THEY do something.

      Another thing is that they always claim massive amounts of expertise, yet nothing is their fault when it doesn’t go right. What is everybody supposed to be? Dupes? They have all kinds of knowledge one minute, then they didn’t give bad information when it works out as a fucking catastrophe?!

    • This is so typical of tabloid news stories. So women are “confused” are they? Sounds to me like Aussie women are better informed than this reporter is about screening and the press are the ones who are confused. They write about how this woman’s cancer was picked up by the pap test, when the woman’s doctor says it was a good job, she didn’t wait for her pap test or she would be dead. So in other words it wasn’t the pap test at all which found her cancer. Her case completely contradicts the news story.

      This happens all the time and makes me so angry. Some people develop rare agressive forms of cancer, which no amount of screening would have found, but they then go on a moral crusade, often getting lucrative contracts with the tabloid press to promote a screening test, which is nothing to do with their type of cancer. The breast cancer charity Coppafeel is the breast equivalent of Jo’s Cervical Trust, and targets the under 30’s petrifying them with terrifying stories of extremely rare cases. It’s disgusting that young women are targeted in this way.

    • There is a link to another headline “urine test for cervical cancer” but it is a urine test for HPV. Having an HPV infection is not the same as having cancer.

    • The article quotes a doctor saying that women find Pap tests intrusive but they go for bikini waxes every 6 weeks. Sorry no comparison. and anyway I have never had anyone wax my bikini line.

    • This item came out 3 days ago, and Julia Brotherton seems to be saying that Aussie women can take the vaginal swab themselves in 2016. Am I reading this correctly?

      http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2014/s4089315.htm?

      • I read that piece too Ada, if that’s the case they’ve kept it very quiet. I suspect they’ll do everything to pressure women into the program, and self-testing options will only be offered as a last resort for very “hard-to-reach” women.
        Of course, I’m not interested in testing at all, so they can “offer” what they like, no deal.
        I doubt my doctor will even mention self-testing to me. She knows if I’d wanted to self-test, I’d have done so years ago. I work in Singapore now and then and the Screener has been available there for a few years now.
        The problem here is they point blank refuse to view screening as a choice for women, I’m sure we’ll see the argument, what objection could you have to self-testing?
        Note if a woman tests HPV+ here (and we’ll be testing women from 25, so lots will test HPV+) they’ll be pressured to have a colposcopy and biopsy, when all they should be offered is a 5 yearly pap test. (until they clear the virus)
        I think we should always view screening in a broad way, not as a test, but as the possible beginning of a cascade of further testing, biopsies or treatments or even being over-diagnosed and facing unnecessary chemo, radiation etc.
        It is never a simple, life-saving test, it can be the start of an absolute nightmare and may even take your life.

      • Clearly, there are going to be major overhauls to cervical screening in 2016 by a number of countries, but we’ve had very little news about any changes planned for the UK system. We have a general election coming up next May, and I think this is part of the reason. There was a good article from the Metro newspaper about the urine test for HPV. I’ve been trying to find a link, but I can’t find the article online. It was a good article, because it was honest that the invasive test was unacceptable to women, and there was no propaganda input from the cancer charities saying it’s quick and painless and could save your life, etc. I am sure the UK is keeping things under wraps, because knowing something better was on the horizon, would cause the present programme to collapse.

    • HI Elizabeth!

      I saw that article as well. I sent the writer, Amy, the following email, but of course, as usual, there has been no reply. They’re always eager to ‘tut, tut’ about women missing pap smears, but present them with real facts and first-hand information, and the silence is all too familiar.

      “Hi Amy,

      Your article on pap smears is very interesting. I’m a woman who has weighed up the facts and figures and decided not to have pap smears. Do you realise that women have the right to choose NOT to have a pap smear? That they do not need to have ‘excuses’ not to? I am not participating in a screening program which is searching for a rare cancer, using an inaccurate – and highly invasive – test.

      The line in your article says, ‘Ninety per cent of women diagnosed with cervical cancer have not had regular pap tests’. That is a regular and highly false ‘fact’ rolled out by screening authorities and cancer organisations, and is definitely not true!

      The other side of the coin is that women who DO have regular pap smears CAN and DO die from cervical cancer regardless (at least fifty per cent of them!), because the test cannot detect all forms of cervical cancer (such as adenocarcinoma, the common type), particularly when it is too far inside the cervical canal to be ‘brushed’ for a pap smear, or is not of the correct type to be easily picked up.

      I am angry because women are being lied to. They are being given little or no scientific information about pap smears, only pap smear propaganda to co-erce them to screen. Women think that cervical cancer is incredibly common, and that we might drop dead in the street if we don’t get pap smears! It is incredbly rare – not comon at all!

      As an ex-government biologist (B.Sc. Bio. and Ass.Dip Bio Techniques) who knows an awful lot about the whys-and-what-for’s of the pap smear regime, I am disgusted at how women are led around by their nose by articles such as yours, by organisations, Papscreen, the Cancer Council, and the government. Cervical cancer screening via pap smears has never met the full requirements of a national screening program; the requirements being-

      1. Is the problem common? No, cervical cancer occurs in less than 0.72% of the total population. That’s approx. 500 to 700 women in Australia per year. More women die from brain tumors in australia (600 to 800) than from cervical cancer, yet doctors scoff when we worry about brain tumors, telling us they are too rare to worry about.

      2. Is the test reliable? No, the pap smear is highly inaccurate, which is why doctors recommend testing at two yearly intervals, in case they miss it the first time! Most studies give accuracy figures of less than 50%. The CSA blood test (Cervical Specific Antigen) has a reported accuracy of over 90%, yet we’re still forcing women to chuck their underpants and spread their legs for a highly invasive, inaccurate and humiliating test because the AMA and Australian Government refuse to seriously consider the use of the CSA test. Pap smears have a high false positive rate – at least one in three abnormal smears (most often in younger women) are false positives! It is also know that the pathological labs are ‘pushed’ into upping their ‘abnormal smear’ return rate. In other words, they are looking to declare as many smears as possible as suspect because of financial and government pressure, leading to colposcopy, biopsy and cervical damage.

      3. Is the test easily accepted by most of the targeted population? Not really. Telling a woman to remove her pants and allow a stranger to sit between her spread open legs and forcibly and painfully spread open her private parts is not in ANY way acceptable.

      4. Is it low cost? On this one, financially yes, but the physical and mental cost is far too high.

      5. Can it be applied without using specialist equipment? Another yes. Any doctors surgery can do it.

      6. Is there a financial incentive? YES. Doctors do NOT disclose their financial interest in getting women to have pap smears. Under the PIP (Pap smear Incentive Program) doctors recieve bonuses to test women regularly, and they receive an even higher bonus if they get a woman to screen if she hasn’t had a test for the last five years. Conflict of interest, much?

      Why am I writing all of this? Because I have come across so many women – including myelf – who have been ridiculed, physically abused, threatened, ignored, denied medical treatment, had their cervix mutilated beyond normal correct function when there was nothing wrong with them and it was justified as ‘just in case’, left psychologically damaged, and carried feelings similar to having been raped all over the subject of doctors and their weapon of choice in womens healthcare – the pap smear.

      And yet, the pap smear war machine rolls on….

      Thanks.”

      • An excellent letter. Thank you so much for posting this. It is wonderful news that so many Aussie women are making their feelings felt and are steering clear of screening.

      • OzPhoenix, you write very well, your words are music to my ears. I love to meet informed woman and you’re Australian as well. I have to say I sometimes despair, so many of our women just accept the screening “story”. Critical discussion is non-existent here, we’re a long way behind the UK, The Netherlands, Finland etc.
        Can you imagine one of our female GPs publicly stating she doesn’t have pap tests or mammograms? What?? She’d be torn to shreds.
        Well, the Scottish GP and advocate for informed consent, Dr Margaret McCartney, did just that…amazing.

        Why is it so shocking for women to speak honestly about this subject? Why are we viewed as a herd to be screened at any cost, rather than individuals with the legal right to real information and informed consent, and that includes a No, thank you to pap testing and mammograms. (with no need for further explanation, no “excuses” necessary)

        It speaks volumes for me, if this test is so great, why the sensitivity, the secrecy, the pressure, hysteria, deception and unethical and illegal tactics to get us screened? Why is there no respect for informed consent?
        IMO, they KNEW this program could not work IF they respected informed consent, too many women would say No…and then they found even consent itself got in the way, so they ditched that as well, and tied the test to the Pill, pre-natal care and introduced target payments. I consider this medical abuse, not cancer screening.

        Is this really the way the medical profession and others treat women? Hard to believe, but yes, it is.
        Welcome to the forum, keep stirring the pot…more and more women are starting to listen, let’s face it for decades there was silence when it came to critical discussion or even honest life experience that cast pap testing in a poor light. I think these programs must be worried, more and more women are onto them, they can stop us commenting on their sites, but they can’t silence us anymore.

      • Ozphoenix,

        Wow – what a great letter! It’s wonderful to see such a concise, clear, and accurate dissection of the propaganda/misinformation campaign. I wish I could write something that does even half as good a job of putting facts out there to counter the myths.

        I agree the financial cost appears relatively inexpensive, but perhaps there is an argument to be made that:
        * the cost per/person needs to be multiplied by the continued overuse of the test x amount of physician billing fee/test (+ incentives) x number of false positives leading to additional/more expensive testing x physician costs associated with these tests = ridiculous amount of money spent
        * the cost/person might be much less if self-test options were made available
        * the costs should include a cost-benefit analysis that factored in the harm-related costs of direct negative impacts from using this inaccurate test on women as well as the indirect costs to the effectiveness/efficiency of the health care system that spends so much physician time/money on this that it lacks resources to take on more common and treatable health care concerns.

        Anyway, as you say, regardless of the financial cost, the mental and physical costs are far too high. Your letter was just awesome and I’m not surprised there was no reply or rebuttal – what could Amy say in the face of the facts?

44. Was just thinking that you should make a Tumblr. I have trouble finding any skepticism of the gynecological field to reblog, only “omigod that hurt and was humiliating BUT gotta do it again next year”. Tumblr has a massive audience that needs to be reached. Dx

    • I don’t get something: Why is it that women are able to think in terms of whether or not they’ll get married or have kids, but think “need/must/have to” when it comes to problematic things with doctors? It doesn’t only have to be things that are against the grain on a sexual dissonance level, it could be because of pain or low utility- it could simply be not being conducted by someone else.

      I don’t get that. I’ve been told that women are usually raised differently than men & are more or less taught “not to make waves,” but what sense is that? She’s not making waves in order to NOT have problems- it’s like pouring gas on a fire in order to make it smaller. Isn’t it women that generally point those things out? I don’t get why a woman is down-trodden if she cooks, cleans, or does any of the other “traditional” things that women would do, but it’s somehow mature & sophisticated for her to be of the mind that other people make their own decisions about what goes in where on her.

      • You’re right Alex. It makes no sense whatsoever that women somehow think they’re modern, liberated, and sophisticated to give over the decision over what or who goes in here or when on her, while they think that it’s demeaning and old-fashioned to allow someone else who they chose to put in that position to make the decisions over how or where she lives, where she can go or how she can go there, what she can buy, how money he makes will be spent. The very same people are for marital rape laws – where this person who is making all of the rules cannot decide FOR HER when or how to penetrate her as are the ones demanding their “right” to have “women’s health”, where their doctor is deciding for her when or how to penetrate her.

        Either a women has the final decision over what or who goes into her body or she does not.

        Beth

      • Most girls are taught not to look down there or to “touch themselves”. The proper names for body parts are not taught to them just bum and “bum front” or ” dink” or “cookie”. Maybe more liberal parents taught them “vagina” but not any other part’s name.

        Why do other women say “ehhh, gross” when I suggest that they purchase a speculum, get a flashlight and mirror and some vinegar and look at their own cervix. I even found a link for a speculum camera that hooks up to for closed circuit tv for vagina/cervix viewing. It could be that medications and simple treatments be made available for women to use at home in privacy as well as for testing kits.

        There is no reason why everything done there be viewed by “professionals only”. I find from hair removal to child rearing everything is promoted as needing a professional to take care of it. The more professional we involve in our lives the costs are high to our bank accounts and privacy.

        Marketing exploits people’s needs and often creates a needs when technology or a product is available. What role should marketing play in the medical field?

      • I’d rather it not be viewed by anyone, including myself. The “real” terms for things make me gag. They’re too stuffy, reminiscent of that abstinence class we had every year at my school. Humanity could’ve thought up better names for our body parts. I can’t even bring myself to say “vagina” out loud without feeling like a prude, only “vag”, and I NEVER say “penis”, “anus”, or “testes”. Dx I don’t even like typing them out.

      • I have no clue. I personally enjoy those “traditional” tasks; sewing, cooking (not so much cleaning), sewing, gardening, soapmaking, and friggin basket weaving all soothe me. But I also do 160 each pushups and situps a day and I will be damned if any man, woman, or “authority” figure tells me what to do or not do to my body. “Oh but you NEED to be violated by a medical beast in rubber gloves or you’ll die from a relatively rare form of cancer that I should know by now that you wouldn’t seek treatment for anyways because you don’t believe in manmade medicine. It’s selfish if you don’t because people don’t want you to die but it’s not selfish of them to look down on your beliefs.” One of my friends thinks mammograms, pelvic exams, prostate exams, and colonoscopies should be required by law. We aren’t talking much lately.

      • Bethkz,

        There’s one place where doctors feel they have the right, and by law they do. It’s the delivery room. The instant a woman or parents-immediately-to-be question a decision, they have the rug ripped out below. The husband is made to leave. Automatic report to CPS. Baby won’t go home. Then lesbian social workers who view every family as malignant. Lawyers, foster care “erring for the child,” divorce, bankruptcy. A family dependent on the system. Unfortunately, at that moment women are full of oxytocin, and that makes us compliant and wanting to stop conflict so we can soothe and nurture our babies. Leave it to do-gooding doctors and nurses to ruin it for both parents. And the law encourages it. We’ve all read here how a woman refusing paps finds herself, father too, in this situation and worse.

      • There are no laws that require that all babies be born in the hospital, nor can there be. Women don’t always get to hospitals in time – labor goes faster than they think. Lots of kids are named after the cab driver who delivered them. 🙂

        Certified Nurse Midwives are legal in all 50 US States, and all nations in the EU have “Midwife Corps” that deliver most babies at home. Certified Nurse Midwives give prenatal care, delivery, and postnatal care – which can include things like help with breastfeeding issues. Midwives consistently show lower maternal and infant mortality rates.

        Birth certificates can be issued without a hospital involved. So can birth announcements be taken by newspapers by individuals.

        There are no laws requiring paps for pregnant women. Anyone who tries to tell you that there are is BSing you. For one thing, even the manufacturers of those products used state that they have high numbers of false positives in pregnant women. Pap testing has been associated with miscarriage.

        Sure, medical professionals can call CPS. There is no reason for it, and CPS is catching on. If they remove the child for the ONLY reason being that he or she was born at home without an obstetrician, with no other evidence for abuse or neglect, the parent has grounds for a HUGE lawsuit.

        Medical people like to use the laws as they are NOT written, and threats of various sorts of legal actions in order to get their way. Most of their claims are devoid of facts.

      • Cat & Mouse: Honestly, whether or not she’d have the baby naturally is a big concern for me as far as prospective wives or girlfriends go. These reasons are big parts of it. There’s a million things that can make the kid deformed or retarded (or both), that can give her injuries or infections (or both), and any or all of this can be from something that was against her objections or from objectionable situations.

        I remember an article I was reading about a woman that had a QUADRUPLE AMPUTATION because she caught something in the hospital (don’t remember exactly what it was, but it was something that people get from being in the hospital pretty frequently- some type of strep or staph infection). She was in the hosptial to deliver a baby, they wanted her to stay an extra 12 days or so, then she came down with this & wouldn’t tell her how it happened!

        Sounds to me like they were trying to cover their ass- maybe it would be interesting to know for a lot of women & the men they’re with that infections can be introduced by all kinds of procedures & that plenty of them are worthless, anyway. Maybe checking dialation (which doesn’t actually mean when the baby’s coming- it’s just bullshit that made it’s way into tradition that they don’t want to change) introduced bacteria into her system? Maybe they decided to start slicing & there was a problem from this?

      • Bethkz, Alex,

        If I had my choice, I’d do water birth. Incidentally, it’s also the one method that doctors hate most, and that offers women the best chance at a natural birth.

        This year in PA USA there was a couple who had their baby at home this way. Days later they decided to have the infant checked out. Their mistake was going to an ER. Quickly, they were isolated away, and the mother was not allowed to nurse the screaming baby. Staff refused to provide the papers for a birth certificate. Then an ambulance called to transport the baby to a children’s hospital. Many hours later, they got home. Then the bills came in. $3,200 for the ambulance alone. Then CPS comes knocking. The SW threatened additional actions if she wasn’t allowed in. Her cause for concern? That non-appropriate birthing was performed and that the kid was at additional risk… Another case; of delivery room staff gone berserk. Calling CPS when mother refused to automatically sign over permission at admission allowing c-section. Doctors felt they weren’t fit parents. The baby was held from going home until CPS ran the parents through the system.

        Sure, both parties had excellent cause for suing CPS and the hospital. However, reporting parties are immune from civil suit. And up front attorney’s fees of $500 per hour on new parents?

        Regarding hospital infections. Like Joan Rivers dying due to a mistake, you’re exactly right how infections get going. Staff cuts and lousy cleaning regimens. Dirty doorknobs. Poor hand washing. I think I wrote here of my hubby’s hernia operation. He was sedated but not out. The nurses came back from lunch and removed his gown to shave etc. Only we did all that at home, and cleaned everything using Hibiclens. Can’t believe the nurses didn’t notice that right away.

        He says one took out a razor anyway, and proceeded to drop it twice. The first time it hit the tray, she just picked it up and kept going. The second it bounced around onto the floor. The nurse joked about the three second rule and picked it up to reuse anyway. When we’re unconscious, God only knows what happens and what we get infected with.

      • Certified nurse midwives are legal in all 50 US States. Most other civilized countries have midwife corps, which deliver most babies, since hospitals are rarely needed in connection with childbirth, and in and of themselves pose risks to mother and baby. Also, there are always births which end up being without medical personel present – often by error in timing, inability to transport, or the rare case where women painlessly give birth in their sleep.

        All States, and I don’t know the law of other countries, require that silver nitrate drops be put into the baby’s eyes after birth – and there’s a timeframe in which that is required. Failing to do that MIGHT run you afoul of CPS, but it does NOT have to be done in a hospital. It can be done by a health department nurse or any physician.

        Births are required to be registered within a period of time. It is NOT the hospital’s responsibility to file this paperwork on a birth that they did not oversee. If they did, it would be them making false official statements. That is done by county and state bureaucrats, and someone who was present at (or near) the time of birth, who has actual information, makes out the paperwork in a county office. They may have some problems with it, since most of them are done by hospitals, who make out the paperwork and deliver it in batches to the county. You might have to push them, but it will be done.

        Babies can be checked out by doctors or other medical personnel outside of hospitals. As it’s NOT a medical emergency, that is not an appropriate use for medical services. If someone has a problem with a newborn baby which requires emergency services days after it’s born, there may BE a problem with medical neglect. In emergency departments, they’re going to be on the lookout for it, and are more likely to suspect something than if someone goes in to an appointment or a walk-in clinic.

        Medical personnel are infamous for making false threats that have no basis in reality. While they cannot be sued civilly for making a false claim, making false official statements is a federal crime which includes prison time. Most of these statements are not an error in judgement, but are knowingly false.

        New parents might have a stretch in hiring a lawyer, but as making false official statements is a CRIME, those are prosecuted by prosecutors on the State payroll. If they want a civil suit too, most of the attorneys that pursue civil suits do it on contingency – there is nothing owed until and unless they get a settlement. The amount/percentage the attorneys take is often quite substantial, but that’s a different problem.

        Assault is assault is assault. It doesn’t change just because the woman is pregnant or in labor – although it might become an aggravating factor, and if injury occurs to the foetus, the baby may be a second victim after its born. A doctor going after a pregnant woman with a knife with her screaming, “No No No” is not different than a robber or other criminal going after her with a knife – it’s assault with a deadly weapon.

        Another avenue is to turn birth-rape or assaults or false official statements surrounding a birth over to an investigative reporter at a TV station or newspaper. Then, the rules, laws, and practices will be brought before the public. If it’s obviously wrong, the public will demand that things be changed.

        I learned some time ago that (I) get nowhere trying to convince the medical industry or their employees that something is just wrong. Object, refuse, don’t even deal with them. If something goes wrong, use the other avenues which are available – including the legal system and bring it to public notice.

    • Kai: You do 160 push-ups & 160 sit-ups a day?! Wow. That’s impressive. I might suggest increasing the intensity, but decreasing the number. You know why? It’s because adding reps at the same intensity will only give you DISTANCE at that level. If you add intensity, you get that distance (because the lighter stuff is easier), and joint solidity (hugely important for not falling apart as you get older, but also for wrestling & fighting- because these things come up unexpectedly). You won’t get all big & Vin Diesel-looking, because women don’t have as much testosterone & she won’t

      You want to know about something? There’s a series of books by Paul Wade (the Convict Conditioning series- I know, it’s a gimicky title, but “Progressive Calisthenics” doesn’t sound as good & he DID supposedly learn all this in prison). AWESOME! C-Mass is actually more for guys, but it mentions a bunch of things about bio-mechanics & such. If you go on Dragondoor.com, you’ll notice quite a bit about it in the forum & there’s a new one coming out in 2015 (about January, I think).

      There’s also the Systema Manual, but I don’t have that yet. If you look up Systema & Systema exercises, you’ll probably get a good idea of what the book gets into. I’ve noticed that that art hits the “diagonal strength” as well as the regular stuff (all the in-between things that don’t always get hit, but do tend to get injured). It also gets into how to use it (styles of breathing to not get tired, coordination, smoothly going from one thing to another, etc…) . It’s interesting, but hard for me to explain & I don’t actually have the book in my hands (I’m waiting until they come out with the new DVD in October on how to deal with Mass Attacks & such- keep in mind that the DVDs are good, but give more of a summary than an A-Z).

      I know this is MASSIVELY off-topic from what’s usually talked about on this site, but I figured you’d be interested. I’d definitely take less time & wouldn’t be as tedious as I remember 100+ of anything being. You’d also be able to knock a lot of this out without equipment, a major plus.

45. https://youtube.com/watch?v=dQXYXY5GCi4 Someone suggested that I watch this, and I haven’t made it all the way through yet as I’m personally not one to spend a long time in front of the computer. That being said, so far, this is a great documentary about yet another safe and effective cancer treatment being battled by the medical industry and covered up. If you’re interested in this sort of thing or just want to become more informed, I definitely recommend watching it.

46. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/24/state-farm-drops-rob-schneider-over-anti-vaccine-v/ And so it continues. Anyone who goes against the grain will lose their job if they have any sort of interaction with the public. So much for free speech and all that, right?

    (Also, a side note for Sue: for some reason, two of my comments from September 3rd seem to keep jumping down to the end of the discussion forum for some reason. Would you mind deleting them? As I’m sure it’s aggravating for not only me, but everyone else who comments.)

    • Thanks for the link Ro. Regardless of one’s own stance on vaccines it affects us all when freedom of speech is taken away. You might already know about this Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/My-childs-vaccine-reaction/372638272814622 and this one: https://www.facebook.com/pages/SANEVAX/139881632707155 I wonder why no correlational studies have been done between vaccinated and non-vaccinated children, as it seems it would be fairly straightforward and would probably help to put some minds at rest.
      I deleted your two comments from Sept. 3rd. I have no idea why they were jumping down, thanks for the heads up.

      • Thank you for sharing those links! I had never come across those sites before, and there was a lot of really great information. It is interesting that no correlation studies have been done, but if I remember correctly, apparently the pharmaceutical companies have some sort of protection act in place for vaccination manufacturers. Still, that would only ensure that the parties involved wouldn’t have legal action taken against them. It would not protect them from a study being done to find the true cause. However, vaccinations seem to be a big money maker. So as long as someone’s pockets are being lined, I’m doubtful that the truth will come out.

47. Ok – now I am getting thoroughly annoyed.

    A few weeks ago on a Friday night at 6:45, I was at the bar with my boyfriend. We were finally getting relaxed after a long week at work. My boyfriend stepped out to take a call – and then my phone rang. It was a number I didn’t recognize, so I let it go to voicemail. Since my bf wasn’t back yet, I decided to check the message.

    It was a long-winded message from my Health Insurance Company telling me about the importance of “Pap Screening” and “Well Woman Exams.” Since then – I’ve received two post cards in the mail with the same messages on them. Barf.

    When he came back in, I threw my phone down so it skidded across the bar and I go “You won’t BELIEVE THE VOICE MAIL I JUST GOT!” I then, ordered another tequila.

    I also blocked their number.

    It’s interesting to me that the American Insurance Companies are so vested in these Well Woman exams. I am assuming it’s because of the belief (not that I share this belief) that early testing saves lives and therefore will save them money in the future. But is that really the motivation? Does anyone else know why the Insurance Company would be so interested in my cervix (and the cervix of every other woman under their care?)

    They, after all, would have to foot the bills (or a portion of them) for testing, follow ups, “treatment” etc.

    If you have any thoughts or info on this – it would be appreciated!

    I also wonder how far this harassment will go. Will they threaten to drop me unless I spread my legs? Can they? I would imagine not – but I am also not in the mood for an argument.

    Thanks so much! I look at these boards every day – I just don’t get the opportunity to post as much as I like, but I admire all of you.

    Have a great weekend.

    • Depending on what is on those post cards, it could well violate the HIPPA laws. A post card is not private mail. It is public in that it is readable by anyone who looks at that post card. If they are putting ANY identifiable information about you, any (potential/presumed) health information on that card – even that you have failed to have a PAP test within some period of time, they have broken the law. You can have them prosecuted, and possibly sue for damages.

48. HMMM Something interesting I found – a woman went to get the Well Woman Exam and had to sign a form – and an interesting tidbit on the form said…(oh, btw – this is under the new ACA/Obamacare rules)

    “If a problem such as a breast lump is found at your ‘annual exam’, the exam is no longer considered by the AMA guidelines as an annual exam.” Such an instance would constitute a “problem visit[s] and will be coded accordingly.”

    Also, if a woman asks questions during her Well Woman exam – the exam could also turn into a “Problem Visit” and be coded differently – she would therefore get billed for an exam that is supposed to be free.

    Don’t quote me on this – but if you go in for your exam, and the doctor finds something suspicious, then the “free” well woman exam is negated and she therefore pays a good chunk of change because they found something they wouldn’t have found otherwise. Therefore, the “free” exam to help her “detect things early” is already costing money. How many times are things found that turn out to be “nothing” or totally benign?

    AND forget asking questions during the exam – the cash register will start to ring again!
    I could be wrong on this – so please don’t quote me and please ask for clarification if you do go to the doctors.

    But wow -if I am understanding this correctly…I am really shaking my head.

    • Thinking back, I remember how Democrats like Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein all demanded ObamaCare be approved before any review & discussion of whatever it was occurred. Many tries died printing the stacks this bill represents. Many miscreants thought free boob jobs would soon be coming down the line. Then reality hit.

      Doctors refused to sign up on the plan. Deductibles of $8-10,000 cash up front would have to be paid before any plan benefits would kick in. No doctor wants that robbery bait in their office, and no patient on ObummerCare has the cash to get the care. Bait and switch. Lies.

      What you found does not surprise me in the least. Thanks for sharing. Unfortunately, this will not make the evening network news, nor any magazine like Time as USA’s media is totally entrenched supporting this platform. Another juicy tidbit, 70% of illegal aliens Obama encouraged to jump the fence have avoided reporting to the government. There’s a terrible new upper respiratory virus going around which originates from South America. This is nothing like the refugees USA took in from Vietnam and other places that want to be American. Instead, where I live one can find signs saying “Aztlan” which represents the name illegals will call the desert SouthWest USA states after they take it back.

      It would be one thing if my current government was truthful in its representation and dealmaking. But for 8 yrs now, it’s one new nauseating revelation after another. We are seeing USA go through profound changes, and none of them are good. The Isaiah Harbinger comes to mind.

      In an earlier message, I talked about the gynecological tests & treatments I’ve had. No informed consent, no alternatives, just rushed through on fear of a painful death. Retrospectively, so much pain I’ve endured, fear I’ve felt, and arguments about what to do next. I feel betrayed. Thank God for this sight, that I can do something so others may not have to follow in my footsteps.

    • This article might explain the difference in billing and why the push is for paps and breast exams. The well woman exam is different from another type of physical exam.

      http://www.capturebilling.com/medicare-billing-well-woman-exam-g0101-q0091/

49. That’s why these sites are viewed as a real threat, not only can you access real information, this site is full of survivors of medical abuse, this group of women have been shoved into the background…..until now. This huge group is not good for business.
    This sort of site is still rare, almost all sites are propaganda based, full of “if not for that pap test I’d be dead” stories or “every woman in my family has had cervical cancer”…I consider these sites an insult to our intelligence. The scary wolf story is still the preferred way to sell screening to women.

    The Blogcritics thread disappeared, we were reassured it would return, still nothing. I now believe they were pressured to close the thread, or rewarded for doing so, or threatened, perhaps, warned the site was dangerous and might lead to deaths. We always hear those arguments…it says a lot, open and frank discussion on this subject is a major threat, it may inform women and we know what happens then, we can take control of our bodies and make informed healthcare/life decisions.
    We’ve always been “managed” as a herd, that doesn’t work when women are permitted to act as individuals, that triggers informed consent, as we know, this testing would fail if women were treated legally, respectfully and within proper ethical guidelines. Take away the propaganda, coercion, pressure, vested interests, targets…and these screening programs/wellness programs fall over. (that includes well woman exams and breast screening)

    • Thank you so much to Elizabeth and Cat and Mouse!

      Elizabeth – regarding these sites – you are so right.

      This leads me to the story of why I came here.

      A year and a half ago, I went to the doctor for this hideous looking skin tag (please excuse the TMI). I had no idea what it was, so I wanted to get it looked at.

      I go in, and the nurse who checks me in (notice the nurse or medical assistant who checks you in asks the same questions the doctor is going to ask 5 minutes later…what is that?) she goes “You haven’t had a pap since 1996 (or some year a long time ago)” I say “Uh…yeah I have” And this nurse seems frustrated and disgusted by my lack of pap. Me, thinking that these tests are still important take her frustration as somehow caring about my health (at the same time I did find her bitchy and distasteful)

      Then the nurse practitioner comes in. Before we EVER get to my skin tag – she goes “well, you’re not really a frequent flier here and you need to make an appointment to come back for your pap and breast exam and you know – all of that girly stuff” (ew) She then begins a litany of questions about my family history of cancer etc (which I dutifully answer)

      THEN – she cuts me a deal. She says “If you come back for your pap, I will remove the skin tag for free and any other ones too. If I do it today, I have to charge you” I agree to come back for the pap and free removal…but then I start to think…what is the big deal about the pap test?

      It was when I was in that very room (I don’t know where the nurse practitioner had gone – but she had left) that I googled “Unnecessary Pap Smears” on my Smart Phone…and the Blog critics site came up. I then proceeded to read all 10,000 comments (which took several weeks)

      A couple of days later – the skin tag fell off! I think ti was committing suicide after the ridiculous conversations it heard between myself and the nurse and nurse practitioner.

      A few weeks after that I get a bill for $200+ dollars! TO look at a SKIN TAG? Seriously? It turns out because of the litany of questions that the nurse practitioner asked me that the appointment got “coded up.” I found this out after asking a friend of mine who has been in medical billing and coding for a long time. I called the doctors office and had the code changed and saved about 100 bucks. That being said, 100 bucks is a lot of money to look at a skin tag that was going to jump to it’s death anyway.

      Fast forward – our health insurance changes and my doctor changes. I make an appointment to go in about a dark spot on my face (which also turned out to be nothing and disappeared after awhile) I have an appointment with another nurse practitioner. Being a new patient, I was willing to tolerate some health history and question asking.

      Well – what is the FIRST THING she asks me? “When was your last pap?” I say “2009” She says “Well, you are supposed to get it every three years” (yes, the phrase “Supposed to” was used) I looked at her and said “I am a low-risk woman who has made an informed decision not to get one” She said “Oh. Ok” I was blown away at how easy that was. She then says “Well you will want to make a yearly physical to get a breast exam etc” I didn’t argue that point…I am simply not going to make an appointment like that unless I suspect a problem.

      I would like to thank the women on boards like this that not only informed me – but let me know what to do in this situation.

      So – this moves me to what I should do next. I requested all of my medical records from my last doctor in hard copy. They were no problem to get. I had two abnormal paps and I am certain it’s because I had sex too close to the test! (Do you notice they never tell you not to do that too close to the test?) I had one colposcopy where they found nothing.

      On my digital records that I can access online it says the 2009 pap was abnormal – but I swear it was normal (so I am wondering if they don’t have the most current one there?)

      I like the idea of the self administered HPV test…but if I have HPV…what do I plan to do about it? The idea that the HPV could develop into cervical cancer seems like a rarity, based on my research. I have NO symptoms of cervical issues either.

      I am inclined to continue to decline tests (inclined to decline!) But any thoughts on this would be appreciated as well.

      WOW I am long winded today! Sorry – my apologies! It’s my first evening to myself in a LONG time!

      • I’m not sure what you CAN do at this point about the past so-called abnormal pap tests.

        This illustrates one danger of having these tests. If they come back abnormal – as 77% of women can expect to have happen at least once in her lifetime – the “fact” of your then being at “high risk” for cancer trumps every other health concern for which you may see a medical provider for the rest of your life! They will have an additional set of rhetoric to give you to pressure you into having another pap test.

        Such information will likely be put in databases such that it will be difficult or impossible to get certain other insurances – like life insurance, disability insurance, possibly turned down for a job for which you are otherwise qualified for. If you’re “noncompliant” with their “watch and wait” ideas on your potentially having cancer, as evidenced by the previously-positive pap tests, it goes even more against you.

        If somebody really wants to hound you, they can use your “noncompliance” on things which will certainly “save your life” as evidence to show that you’re depressed, (passively) suicidal, and somewhat unhinged and probably mentally ill – and certainly in need of hundreds of dollars per month in mental health drugs which have their own sets of life-threatening and violent side effects – and probably in need of some in-patient care – for which they will be paid handsomely.

        These are MORE risks of having these tests!

      • IMBS
        It’s interesting to hear what triggers women to look for answers or a safe place to vent, often it’s being sick to death of bullying tactics, after being coerced into testing or denied the Pill or non-emergency medical care because they declined a pap test. Also, after a bad pap test experience, an excess biopsy or “treatment”, being left with a damaged cervix and having a miscarriage or premature baby or simply working out the focus and hysteria about this cancer and testing makes no sense. I’ve heard them all over the years.
        Of course, the official discourse provides us with no real answers, that’s a deliberate strategy, we get a screening “story”. They know it’s much harder to fend off medical pressure when you don’t have access to real/balanced information, when choice/informed consent/consent is not respected for women.
        If women could access the information they need before this testing starts, I believe we’d have a lot more healthy and happy women. The damage caused to women by these programs is common, awful and mostly avoidable.

        I think you’re wise considering the consequences of a screening test at the very beginning, we’re told the pap test is easy, simple and reliable, oh, and life-saving, but they don’t tell us the cancer is rare and the test often leads to grief. So many women over-treated and left with permanent damage, both emotional and physical.
        The so-called simple CA-125 blood test for ovarian cancer is anything but, it’s highly unreliable and can lead to unnecessary surgery. No thanks.
        The invasiveness of the pap test and the fact almost all doctors were male in the late 70s prompted me to go looking for answers, what sort of risk was I taking rejecting this test? I fear if the test had been non-invasive, would I have been sucked into the pap testing abyss? Once you get that “abnormal” result the conveyer belt starts and at that point many women are scared to death…so it’s colposcopy, biopsy, perhaps, a “treatment” and then more pap testing etc.
        So I’m cautious with all screening tests. We should remember even self-testing options can lead to the same ugly and harmful places. Some people choose not to have a screening colonoscopy for bowel cancer, but might self-screen using the FOBT, IF however, the result is positive, the next step is the colonoscopy. So you have to really think about these tests at the outset.

        My advice: ask yourself: is this test in MY best interests? What happens if the test is abnormal? (or I’m HPV+ or blood is detected on the FOBT) These issues cut across all screening tests. What now?
        If we don’t have a clear plan in mind, fear and uncertainty may push us down the path to day procedure, surgery etc. So IMO, we should be “prepared” for negative test results IF we choose to have these tests and exams. Know what you’re accepting and where it can lead, it’s not an exaggeration to say that a simple screening test can end up taking your life. (for example: breast screening can lead to over-diagnosis, and over-treatment can lead to heart attacks and lung cancer)

        If a woman tests HPV+ here (under our new program) and there will be lots, about 40% of those who test aged 25 to 29, and about 5% of those aged 30 to 74, (we plan on HPV testing from age 25 when HPV testing should not be used before age 30) she’ll probably be referred for immediate colposcopy and biopsy.
        HPV self-testing may be viewed as a better option, but can still land us in the same place, HPV+, what now?
        So even HPV self-testing should only be used appropriately (the safest course IMO, is the new Dutch program, HPV primary or self testing at ages 30,35,40,50 and 60) and with a clear understanding of what you’ll do if you’re HPV+
        The Dutch will simply offer the roughly 5% of HPV+ women aged 30 to 60 a 5 yearly pap test. (until they clear the virus)

        The rest comes down to risk, how much risk, and type of risk, are you prepared to carry in your life or accept with testing? For me the risk of cc is so low, I’m simply not interested in accepting much risk at all to screen for a rare event, others may feel differently. (I’m also, confident I’m HPV-) I’ve never had a pap test and won’t be testing for HPV. (and I’m 56)
        Here the lifetime risk of cc is 0.65%, the lifetime risk of colposcopy/biopsy is 77%…I rest my case. Easy decision, and when you’re informed, the propaganda bounces off you. Fear, uncertainty and confusion often makes women screen AND keeps them in these programs.

        You’re right, most HPV+ women will simply clear the virus in a year or so, so only a small number of the 5% who test HPV+ between ages 30 to 60 would go on to develop invasive cervical cancer, but these are also, the women with a small chance of benefiting…so it depends on the individual and how comfortable they feel carrying risk…from the disease and testing.
        Certainly women worried about this rare cancer have an alternative to frequent pap testing and most will find they’re not even at risk and cannot benefit from pap testing. Those who want to test should at least establish their HPV status before agreeing to pap testing…and if they’re HPV+ avoid over-pap screening and being rushed into colposcopy and biopsy.
        If a woman is HPV+ and ALSO, produces an abnormal pap test, say CIN 2 or 3, then she can consider her options.
        The best approach IMO, is to think ahead, there is no such thing as a simple screening test. (aside from perhaps, blood pressure screening and even then, we have to be careful taking medication we may not need, that may produce side effects etc.)
        Don’t worry about being long winded, I take 1st prize every time, especially when we’re talking about these subjects.

50. I was just wondering something: I know women are generally more conflict-averse than men, but doesn;t getting hounded like this come off as threatening? I’d think it’d be like a guy getting very bossy on the street. Kind of a “Hey, you’re coming with me” type of thing that isn’t meant as a joke or flirtation.

    I mean it gets to the point where someone DOES actually have to worry about them trying to work their will through whatever agencies they decide to call up & connect the dots to. I could see them trying to take someone’s kids away if those kids having had all kinds of probing done- they deem anything & everything an unsafe environment, so I’d imagine the doctor trying this angle, then getting shut down & calling for help.

    Have to say: That kind of base-minded style of thinking (that they’re trying to exert themselves & someone else blocks it- so now they’re all offended in some weird primal way, like a fake life-or-death concern) is something that is the same as a drunken rage or an egotistical nutjob with a gun. It doesn’t matter if every fiber of someone’s being is behind them trying to start shit with other people, they’re still of low-quality & are an enemy for it.

    At the end of the day, there’s no way to say something so that you can “prove” righteousness or not. This is because there’s no way to say anything so that somebody else can’t lie or twist your words & at some point language has to connect to something. Ultimately, someone can just say “I know it’s a problem, but I like problems” or just engage in an action without saying anything. I’ve developed a saying: “Fucked-up shit grows BEETER in the darkness- but it’ll grow in the light, too.”

    • Meant to say “better”- guess I should spell-check when I type things in all capitals.

51. ” I am married, twenty years old, and a graduate student. I go to the student health center for my annual exam. As I walk up to the door and place my hand on the handle, I feel this intense, visceral reaction in my body of wanting to run away. For a few moments, I can’t open the door, instead I think only of fleeing. The thought comes to me: I’m going in here to volunteer to be assaulted. Having to undergo a routine pelvic exam and pap smear as a condition of having access to birth control pills feels like a routine humiliation, like a ritual of physical invasion and “punishment” designed to shame young women who dare to have sex.

    This is MY BODY.”

    Found this powerful account…I wonder how many women feel this way, but suppress or dismiss these feelings because we’ve been told we MUST find invasive exams and testing acceptable, it’s important for our health. If we don’t agree, we’re immature etc, there is something wrong with us.
    I think we should listen to our bodies.

    Pap Smears I Have Known by Molly

    • Another great article, thanks Elizabeth! She certainly wrote that in a hit-the-nail-on-the-head kind of way. Brought back some awful memories . . .

      • Sue, with all the articles making clear pap tests, breast and pelvic exams are unnecessary for the Pill, do you think more American women are becoming aware? Surely more of your doctors are ditching these requirements. I would have thought a doctor being challenged would struggle to justify these exams and test. I wonder if more American women are pushing back and even though it’s more difficult, trying to find a doctor who doesn’t use coercion to force excess.
        If woman say nothing and suffer in silence, then I’m sure many doctors will stay with excess/coercion, I wonder if it’s now a question of business as usual with some woman and accepting the evidence/change with informed women, the Pill with a blood pressure check.

      • Elizabeth, it does seem that way. It’s frustrating to see the backlash in response to the American College of Physician’s recommendation to ditch pelvic exams in asymptomatic women. The ongoing ‘debate’ continues. Of course the ob-gyns (and other doctors) are defending the practice, claiming they ‘care’ about women so they will continue to ‘protect’ them. Probably many women still put the ultimate authority in their doctors hands, willing to follow their recommendations. Some probably believe their doctor is caring because he or she is willing to go to the extra effort and expense. As for the doctors, they seem to have grouped together to problem solve their way through this one. The doctors who follow the evidence may even be reprimanded in some way, it’s hard to know what’s going on behind the scenes.

        I remember reading an article (can’t remember the title) that compared priests to doctors. The author claimed you would never be able to change the behavior of the priests, no matter how wrong they were or how much you disagreed with them. The priests would never change. Your only, and best, course of action was to leave the church. It seems some women have done just that by refusing to go to doctors.

        The pill dilemma though is another matter. They have women over a barrel with that one. I wonder how the online bc pill business is doing. I also wonder why there have been no lawsuits in relation to lack of informed consent or to harms of misdiagnosis. A cervix damaged for no reason should be worth something.

      • Elizabeth – I do think American women are becoming more aware. I was minding my business going to the grocery store a few weeks ago, and lo and behold there was a billboard advertising pap tests and an office where you could get one done. Also there was something tagged on about having STDs and not knowing it because there are no symptoms. The typical stuff. But I think the fact that they’ve resorted to buying out billboards to advertise proves that they’re really having to reach these days. Also, I had a thought when I drove past it again the other day. What if a child has just learned to read and asks their parents what an STD means? I learned to read when I was 4, and as you can imagine, I was very curious. Had I seen the billboard at that age, I know I would have asked my parents what it meant. I really do not think that sort of thing is appropriate to have out where children can read it, but that’s just my opinion.

52. Just had some thoughts I’d like to share that might be useful in countering mind games. It’s a bit long (two minutes of talking amounts to A LOT of typing), but I think it’s a pervasive thing that is somewhat rarely addressed. Keep in mind that there’s no way to say anything so that someone else can’t lie or twist your words on their own, because a lot of this can be flipped in an argument.

    We’ve talked about this one before, but it’d be easier to refernce one thing to help explain another:
    You know how sometimes people present things as a fixed situation? Like there exists no capacity for reality to “unfurl” any other way & saying things like what they “will” be doing or what someone else is “going” to be having?

    Well, this tactic more or less entirely relies on people presuming honesty & accuracy out of other people. Not in a deduced “I trust what comes from them” kind of way, but more in the sense of someone looking at their watch & you believing it’s what time they say it is. This isn’t even usually a bad thing, since it IS fairly bizarre for someone to randomly lie like that. However, sometimes people take advantage of the situation (and usually act very innocent or even like they’re helping someone “get sharper”). in this case, the way that they phrase something implies that there exists no capacity for the situation to develop any other way- because the conditions would have to be this way to provide this result. I guess this could be called “implicit reasoning.”

    Here’s what I was thinking about:
    I figure that the same things occur with someone saying “need,” must,” or “have to.” It’s more complicated though. What happens if a need is unfufilled? The situation doesn’t happen. I think that some people tend to instantly presume the answer to that question is “You die.” This isn’t articulated, it’s just kind of a “back of the head” thing.

    Another thing I think is at work is the concept of nothingness. Nothingness freaks people out. There was actually a book on Amazon about that (I wish I’d bought it & now I can’t remember the name, but it was about the theory that the fear of nothing has been used to cause all sorts of things, from general scams to war).

    Remember Robin Hood (the Russell Crowe version)? When King John is talking to the crowd before the end battle starts? He says that “Without the king, there is no kingdom- there is nothing.” Before that he was standing face-to-face with a guy that was just talking quite fervently about killing him & King John gives him the opportunity. He even offers his sword to do the deed- the guy doesn’t do it, though. I think that’s because it’s kind of weird to go after someone when they’re not coming right at you or running away like someone that knows they’re the enemy.

    He’s using nothing as both a shield & a weapon. Saying “there IS NOTHING” is something that can sink in literally, even if it’s typically used as a figure of speech (from there, someone might be looking to steer clear of this situation by whatever suggested methods). That “poker face tactic” is frequently used to convey that they’re so dangerous that they’re unworried (a common thing when two guys are about to fight), but it can also be used like I said earlier.

    When someone says “need/must/have to,” that idea of nothingness can apply, whether it’s that knee-jerk presumption that death will result from a need going unfufilled or by the “death” of the situation that doesn’t occur- because death frequently is thought of as nothingness. Now it gets the idea of nothing in their head (which is a spooky thing for them) & they’re trying to wrap their heads around this (which keeps going & going, like when someone tries to picture infinity)- because of this, the fear will build & build until they finally snap from that. Not necessarily going on a rampage or running around screaming, it could just be that they give way/burn out.

    In this case, specifically- it would probably mean doing as directed by the doctor, whatever that happens to amount to.

    • The book you’re talking about is _Fear of Nothing_ by Rick Aster, published 2009, ISBN 978-1-891987-14-7 It’s available from Amazon and many other book sellers, both new and used, or you can borrow it from/through your local library, or perhaps through Interlibrary Loan.

      A description and reviews are available on Goodreads at http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7958347-fear-of-nothing?from_search=true

      It looks like a worthwhile book. It also goes into just why and how this fear of nothing is the underlying cause of the 2008 financial crisis, and just why and how it is that we willingly give as much as half of our money away in interest so that we can have more things right now, and, for that matter, why these payments to banks are called “interest” in the first place.

      • Thanks, but I don’t think that’s it. The one I’m talking about talks about a lot of different subjects- it’s kind of like a crowd psychology book. You know, like the ones that talk about how propaganda works & information cascades & all that?

        I can’t find it anywhere. This is going to make me nuts! Anyway, I figure it’s actually “thinking by adjucation” (as I call it) that really causes, or at least camouflages, most of the problems in the world – that’s why I didn’t buy the book. I definitely remember it being one of those “root of all evil” type of things.

      • Hello, this is for all of you/us. Whatever you can do to help sort though it. Elizabeth, as usual your wisdom shines re tests of any kind; here referring to CA-125. You advice think ahead, try to plan. I concur {don’t I sound smart?;)}. i regard any test as a step, a piece of info never the whole answer. Thanks to you and others here test error rates are being discussed. I never imagined tests having such error rates, and false-negatives/false-positives.

        We, should I say hubs, talked again to my gyno. I’m not comfortable on the phone in these situations. If I could read everything for myself w/o going into pain, like what happens after 5 minutes on the phone, this would be easier. We know chronic pain and spinal injuries. But we’re still on the learning curve here. Learning what to ask him. This guy likes talking, is easy going, and is willing to answer questions. That doesn’t mean he’s right though. This is also his learning curve. He claims not to have access to nor knowing any alternative to pap. Further, he claims that cc can occur w/o HPV! Adding it can happen anytime in life.

        He said HPV was never discussed until Big Pharma developed the vaccine, and Big Pharma drives almost all developments in medicine, even treatments. He said the vaccine is useless in adults, further no matter the circumstance he won’t recommend for adolescents, the target customer. To him it’s false protection with added issues/problems. He said it’s all about the money; it costs $100 x3 injections, compared to $10 for TDaP. Specifically, before the vaccine, HPV was never discussed. [however, no HPV test, not much reason to talk about it; we already knew it caused cc, agree?]

        He said cc can happen “de novo” (on its own), whether or not HPV is present. [how, genetics?] He said pap gets the top layers that HPV infects, plus layers below (where alternative pap tests do not sample, therefore being non-effective) where this non-HPV cc originates and migrates upwards. He didn’t indicate specific cause here, while explaining that some women harboring it [extreme slow growth] [not at all detectable?] experience cc attack late in life. [contrary Moo’s research that HPV isn’t latent but cleared within 2yrs & no other cc etiology exists] So he’s saying the pap is unique that it catches organic cc coming up from below. [looking fwd to reading our research re this] [we’ll send letter to 88yr old aunt w/cc; she received radiation & surgery] Then he states cc is a young woman’s disease, striking most women around 30yrs; risk diminishing by age 50 so I’m too old for it… [Then why pap me? For what can grow deep within?] [I deeply despise this degrading test, hating the scrape most, finally my husband tells me he has reliable info (from here) stating I never need it again has mobilized every fiber within me to simply not see the med period. However I need my Estro-Test, and guess what? I had a period after 5yrs of bliss…]

        Dr worked in Tiajauna Mexico 1970’s-style clinic during residency. He saw many women who’d birthed 6-10x, lacking care, and many developed prolapsed uterus. He described epidemic cc in these women. These women were grateful and so was he. They received a vaginal hysterectomy; he got experience. [to me, the cc prevalence represents HPV spread due to the grossest lack of sanitation imaginable, men transferring HPV from prostitutes.] [would there be vaginal warts plus cc in advanced HPV?]

        We asked about literary proof that cc occurs w/o HPV. He said it’s discussed in med school books back in the 70’s-80’s. [Why not now?] Now to research that aspect. This is not over. Although he prefers pap, if we can find alternative he’ll go along. Next, we’ll be making calls to labs & Delphi manufacturer to get their side and see what it takes to obtain. My knee requiring total replacement gives me good reason to pursue alternative, given if it locks or fails I could go from pap to ER to surgery. No thanks.

        Dr explained a period can still happen even with low-level Estro-Test therapy. He may request I have a sonogram done to measure my uterine thickness, although the vaginal probe provides a better view. We’re also going to research estrogen vs progesterone. Someone remarked the latter is preferred during my phase of life. Thanks to everybody for reading, I’m looking forward to responses, and advice for the next phase in this adventure.

      • HI C&M
        “Further, he claims that cc can occur w/o HPV”

        I’ve found over the years that quite a few doctors have a poor understanding of this subject, on one forum a gynecologist told us that adenocarcinoma is not linked to HPV, wrong! He was provided with some references and admitted he was incorrect. How many women has he misled over his career?
        This is the argument used by some US doctors to justify doing pap tests on women who’ve never been sexually active. (and they also, assume all women have been sexually active by a certain age, claims of virginity at 23, 25, 30 etc. are not to be believed…there is so much wrong with that thinking, I barely know where to start)

        He may be referring to some fleetingly rare cervical cancers, neuroendocrine carcinomas of the cervix: small-cell and large-cell. This type of cc “may” not be linked to HPV, although some/many believe they are also, linked to HPV.
        BUT these aggressive cancers are usually diagnosed when the woman is symptomatic. I think women diagnosed with these very rare cancers are likely to get a false negative pap test result, and we all know that can cause issues, false reassurance.
        I think about 200 women in the whole of America get these cancers so I wouldn’t be spending too much time worrying about them.

        The pap test was designed to prevent/detect squamous cell carcinoma, which is more common than adenocarcinoma. (but still rare)
        So even if he’s right and these cancers are not linked to HPV, a) they’re VERY, VERY rare and b) a pap test is unlikely to help these women anyway and may disadvantage them. (false negative)

        If women want to test, I don’t think you can do better than HPV primary or self-testing from age 30. IMO, pap testing should simply be offered to the roughly 5% who are HPV+ and aged 30 to 60. We could scale this testing WAY back to 5 HPV primary or self-tests and only 5% of women offered pap testing, that means colposcopy, biopsies and treatments would also, plummet.
        Of course, that also, means a LOT of money lost to vested interests, so most countries will stay with excess and drag as many women into unnecessary and excessive testing as possible.
        HPV wasn’t mentioned initially because they didn’t want women knowing the cancer was linked to a STI, they felt that might put some women off testing.
        Then IMO, they worked out it could be used to scare more women into pap testing, “HPV is common, if you’ve had sex even once, you must have pap testing etc.”
        Of course, a fortune is being made in this fight with an always-rare cancer, population pap testing, liquid pap tests, over-screening, re-testing, excess biopsies, over-treatment, women left with damage to the cervix so infertility, miscarriages, premature babies, high risk pregnancies, the need for c-sections and cervical cerclage etc and of course, Gardasil.
        A vast industry has been built around one always-rare cancer. (that was also, in natural decline)

        “The major problem with early accurate diagnosis of SCC is the limitation of routine screening, namely the Pap smear.”
        “It has been observed that HPV18 is the most prevalent type in Small cell cervical cancer. Like other types of cervical cancer it seems to be associated with high-risk (e.g. 16, 18, 31) HPV Infection.” Ref: Atienza-Amores, Maria. “Small cell carcinoma of the gynecologic tract: A multifaceted spectrum of lesions”. Gynecologic Oncology (Elsevier).
        So this is one author who believes small cell carcinoma IS linked to hrHPV.
        Hope this helps, good luck.

53. Small cell cervical cancer is extremely rare but the case is not known. It is not caused by HPV and even more rare that those types caused by HPV 16 and 18.
    http://www2.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/2011/11/qa-focus-on-small-cell-cervical-cancer.html

    Apparently as we age we lose our abilitiy to fight off HPV infections. The only way to know if an older woman had a new cases of HPV infection ( from a pelvic exam for example) is to know exactly what strains she had before and compare. Some women could have persistent infection with the same strain for years that developed into cancer.

    What looks like HPV might not be HPV because a lab test needs to confirm it. Everyone is told that they have genital warts when sometimes it is not. Back when women were given paps tests and the metal speculums used were never sterilized between patients just soaked in water and bleach and then put into hot water. No wonder they all got cervical cancer. Wow Pap tests is so great but the methods for it just spread it and made it worse. So years of experience and doing surgery in 1970’s would not impress me.

    Your choice to get your cervix scraped. Your body. Doctor will not give your meds without it? Either get another doctor or find a way to do without the artificial hormones.

    Hyperplasia in perimenopause is just a made up disease. Fall for that one and you will get a hysterectomy and maybe be told that it was all a false alarm.

    I do not expect people to agree with everything I post up here as I am not putting myself beside doctors and scientists. I just like to do my own research and I am capable of understanding much.

    • Believe me, I came here b/c I knew the women here combined have the latest knowledge about these diseases, and I’ll get the truth and not some vaginal car-salesperson hipe or half truths which you can see he gave me. Same old thing. A contradictory story, followed by a helpless to change but I can save your life you better come see me bit. This is not over. The worst he said I could be in for re my uterus would be a D&C if the lining got too thick.

      The next time we converse our side will go to him in writing. He’s not expecting anybody to actually verify anything. We’ll gather things from here, do our own research, and get back to him adding where and how the “alternatives to pap” can be utilized. He said if I find it he’ll go along. I did come out of this with three sample tubes of Estrace cream though. That’s good.

      What bugs me, is when I first saw him, I had zero hormones on labs (all of them) and had atrophying organs. I couldn’t climax either, something never a problem. He claimed I looked normal, all things were normal, did I try lubes etc? Never needed them. We begged & got the Estro-Test plus Estrace cream for topical use. It took a dermatologist to understand the atropy issue and she wrote me testosterone cream. She was more understanding than he and my female internist combined. This pisses me off royally. No follow up labs. Also, if any of you use Estro-Test, the blue tabs don’t work at all. Stick to the green ones. There are only two generic brands so this should be easy.

      A PSA. If any of you use meds by Apotex out of Bangalore India, there’s a major problem. Canadian government is refusing 30 meds from Apotex. Personally, I’ve found every med made by Apotex to be total junk, and we refuse to accept this brand from the pharmacy. Thank you for helping me on this issue with info.

54. Not exactly an “up-lifting” article, but if you Google “Afghanistan Surge In Women Jailed For “Moral Crimes” it DOES actually mention their imposing virginity tests on women as an abuse.

    The thing is, it seems like they kind of had a “useful is not wrong” tone, though. Like if it was an accurate method of diagnosis it’d be fine- big suprise, right? Something doesn’t have to be useless to be a problem & this IS imposed penetration- which they kind of mention as a problem in itself, just not in a point-blank way like that.

    It really is suprising how often the term “iatrogenic attack” id dodged. The term “medical attack” would work fine & should probably occur to someone right off the bat. An unconventional attack can be called as such, too. I see someone dodge it like that & I presume they’re a supporter of the situation.

55. This is a little off topic, but I really have to speak my mind.

    Abuse, deception, power-plays and overcharging for un-necessary treatments is not just confined to human doctors.

    I’ve had cats ever since I was little, and we really need to open our eyes to the behaviour of vets, not just human doctors.

    My cat required emergency treatment on a public holiday last weekend. He’s diabetic, and he was lethargic, appeared to be in pain and would not eat anything (meaning I could not inject him with insulin). Called the local emergency vet. Yes, I can bring him in, and the fee for just walking in the door was $280.

    Fine. My cat needs help, I’ll pay.

    Get to the vet, the diagnostic dance begins. Blood work, physical exam, lots of ‘Umming’ and ‘Hmmming’.

    Blood results come back. His liver enzymes are ‘1000’ instead of being in the ’30 – 100′ range. They think he might have something wrong with his liver, they’d like to do an ultrasound.

    I ask how much the ultrasound would cost. They keep saying they need to do it. Go back and forth for a few minutes with they ‘need’ to do it. I keep asking about the cost. Finally get a stubborn answer – $500 for the scan, plus $350 consultation fee with the specialist vet.

    I refuse the ultrasound. I get disbelieving looks from the vet and them wanting to know why. I say the cost is too high.

    “Yes, but he needs it”.

    I consistantly decline, despite strong pressure.

    My cat stays overnight at the emergency vet. In the morning, they insist on the ultrasound again. I refuse. Grumpily, they suggest that perhaps my cat can go to his own vet for monitoring.

    This I agree with. Then I pay the $800 bill for 12 hours of care.

    Cat arrives at his own vet, and begins being monitored. His liver enzymes are begining to drop. Down to 700, then down to 500. He is on a drip and has various more diagnostic tests done.

    I ask how he is. He’s eating and bright. We decide he is on his way to getting well again and he probably does not have cancer. After two days I ask if I can bring him home. They want him to stay for one more day, to stay on the drip and his recovery rate will be faster. The charge for ‘one more day’ is $250.

    I decline, and tell them I’m bringing him home now. Vet isn’t happy, but she concedes.

    Pick up cat from vet, am told that vet wants to see him in another week for another consultation ($100) and a week after that for a full diabteic workup (3 years ago that cost $350, so it must be over $400 by now).

    I’m refusing the full diabetic workup, and will instead drop him off for blood testing before breakfast, and again in the afternoon, which means they cannot charge for the whole day, and my cat is less stressed.

    My previous vet used to insist on the ‘full’ day diabetic workup, do one day (at $300) and then insist they do the next day as well because they’re not fully happy with the results (meaning another $300). I sacked thet vet. They also used to prescribe the wrong insulin (they gave him a type which would have kileld him if I had noticed that it was’nt the ‘usual’ type, and he was always getting the wrong medication at the front counter because the head vet was too cheap to use vet nurses at the front counter, and he put work experience girls there instead), they left injured and in-pain animals in the waiting room while they continued flea treatment consults (I had a feral bunny with his intestines hanging out, and they kept doing a flea treament regime with a labrador and ignoring the bunny while the poor bunny was moaning and fitting in pain. I demanded they not keep him waiting, and got told off and glared at by the vet) and used to take urine samples directly from my cats bladder through the abdominal wall without using a local anesthetic and sedative (making him absolutely scream in pain until I realised what was happening and demanded that they stop). That vet would also charge $190 for an insulin vial – when the local human chemist charges $73.

    Misconduct, coercion and overcharging is not just confined to human doctors!! At least they haven’t thought of doing pap smears on my female cat…. yet.

    • I always say: anything allopathic is psychopathic. Not that long ago, we put the dog down (she just crashed & would have basically been a prisoner in her own skin) & the costs were unbelievable!

      Also, didn’t like how they do rectal temperature-taking & didn’t know they did that. I kind of figured it was with some kind of ear monitor thing. Don’t know exactly how to express that- I guess you say everything you’d say with people, just saying “I know it’s an animal, but that is imposed probing- whether it has utility or not.” If you where to kick the dog in the face, that’d be cruel.

      • Thanks, Ro.

        Didn’t know there was animal pap tests! I guess the antagonism to life really does run broadly. I know this sounds fanatical, but I really don’t see medical personnel as anything different from those priests in King Arthur (the Clive Owen version- it seems there’s more than one).

        People have gotten away from seeing a group as “them” & even say “we” when it’s things that they don’t even support- it’s a weird thing. In an effort to not be unfairly prejudiced against someone (which, if they cared about in the first place, probably wouldn’t have even come up) they’ve left themselves unable to be FAIRLY prejudiced.

        They are selected, trained, and certified- it’s more or less a suprising exception when they don’t act like assholes & then everyone else is wrong for thinking that they’ll act alike? Holy shit! The don’t think that way with the “gangs” that they’re all seemingly so worried about.

    • Ozphoenix, sorry to hear about your experiences and interesting points about vets. You mentioned your cat was diabetic and I was just wondering if he is on steroids. The reason I was wondering is because I recently found out about steroid induced diabetes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steroid_diabetes This might not apply to your cat (and you might already know about this) but it does seem so many pets are put on steroids.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they did start doing pap smears on female cats, let’s hope they don’t think of it!

      • 

        Woman Fights Back Against Pap Test Marketing Tactics

      • Sue – The photo you posted while fantastic and satirical reminded me of a story I read on the old blogcritics article. One woman posted a comment sharing a story about some lady who was a veterinarian or what-have-you and decided to give her dog a pap test after she was symptomatic. The lady ended up being charged with animal abuse and yet when humans do this to women (even asymptomatic women, no less!) it’s “saving lives.” Talk about double standards. I don’t think I’ll ever understand that one. I’m sorry to hear about your dog, Alex. Ozphoenix, I’m sorry your cat had to go through all that run-around, but I’m glad to hear he’s doing better now!

        I’d like to add a side note to what Alex said about anything allopathic being psychopathic : I had cats when I was a child and we always got them de-clawed. I didn’t think or know that there was anything wrong with it and neither did my parents. Recently, I found out that de-clawing a cat is animal cruelty to the extreme (point blank: it’s mutilation), and worse, it’s legal. When a cat gets de-clawed, they cut back the bone to remove the entire claw. Essentially, it would be the same as having all of your fingers cut off at the knuckle. Thankfully, if you have a problem with cats scratching or clawing, there are alternative methods available. They actually have these little slip-on nail covers (you can even get them sparkly or different colors to make it look like they’re painted LOL) that you place over your cats claws and replace once in a while. If I ever get another cat, then I’ll use those. However, they are usually not recommended by veterinarians in the US as de-clawing is still big business here. What’s interesting to note is that many other countries have actually outlawed it. It seems that the supposedly “less advanced” countries have more respect for life (both humans and animals) than our “advanced” countries. I guess with “advancement” comes a whole lot of greed and not much care.

      • In the UK we don’t have declawing at all. I’d never heard of such a thing to do to a poor animal. I was horrified when I found out about it a few years ago. We had some Canadian guests pay us a visit, and seeing our own cat with all it’s claws outstetched, they were surprised British cats have claws on them. When they explained that in Canada the claws are taken out, there was a dreadful and embarrassing silence on our part. We did not tell them our thoughts, but I think it was felt, and we had no further contact with them…

      • RE the vets: it really depends. The vets I have for my cats have always refused to do declaw surgeries. Instead they will always trim cats’ nails for free and they will teach owners how to do it if they’re interested. To me that is a vet that truly puts the needs of the animals over $$$$.

      • Adawells – I’m glad to know that they don’t declaw in the UK! It really is a horrible thing. I just wish that my parents and I would have known what it actually was when I was younger. I feel guilty about it at times, but it’s over and at least I know now and can warn others if I know they’re considering declawing their cat.

        Diane – I’m glad to know some organizations and veterinarians here are stepping up on the issue! Unfortunately, the vet I took my previous cats to was not one such vet. He was all for declawing and even encouraged it. I’m disgusted. If I ever get another cat, I will find a vet who does not declaw period. Upon request or otherwise.

56. i think that declawing is a great example of how something very harmful can become status quo, and how hard it can be to change that. The vast majority of rescue groups, animal shelters et al in America condemn declawing (I’m pretty sure both the ASPCA and the Humane Society have taken a formal stance against it), but there are still some vets that do it, and there are still some people who think it’s acceptable or even necessary. As far as I know, the AVMA hasn’t formally condemned it yet, and perhaps that is because they know it’s $$$ for some vets. The only way to get it to stop would be to ban it outright the way it’s been banned in Europe and most other places, and that hasn’t happened yet. HOWEVER, there are cities and municipalities that ban declawing, so we’re making small steps here.

    For what it’s worth we’ve never declawed cats in our family; we just learned how to gently trim their nails and give them lots of places to scratch around the house. When I adopted two kittens from a cat rescue a few years ago, the contract I signed actually stipulated that I had to promise never to declaw my cats. And IIRC the rescue refused to adopt to anyone who had ever declawed their cats in the past. Good idea, there.

57. Something that I didn’t think of until right now (oddly enough), it’s pretty common to neuter various animals, too. You expect a dog to protect you after you’ve cut it’s balls off?

    Spaying is, perhaps, a little bit broader- seeing as doctors have sterilized women, too. This was something that happened to Native American women in America until at least the 1960s (I’ve heard until the 1980s, as well). This pack of vermin then teaches the new doctors & nurses (who, apparently, will follow a doctor’s suggestions even if it means the patient’s life).

58. I’m really impressed with this breast cancer organisation, Breast Cancer Action; it supports evidence based research and works towards less toxic treatments, aids research into environmental causes, and warns women of the risks and benefits of screening, they’ve even got a leaflet on screening facts (the real ones!) BCA also openly challenges the public pink campaigns; such as negative and unhelpful messages to women, and the advertising language used, myths about the disease, and apparently it refuses funding from pharmaceutical companies and corrupt companies cashing in on the think pink campaign.
    http://bcaction.org/our-take-on-breast-cancer/screening/

    • I finally got around to checking out that site. What a breath of fresh air! I never gave to any of those foundations because I believed they were pocketing money and none of it would actually go towards finding a cure anyway, because it’s far too profitable for those behind the organizations if there isn’t a cure. It’s a disgusting, horrible, twisted truth. Some of the things they’re doing are ridiculous and it’s all a money making scam. It’s so disrespectful to those who have suffered at the hands of such an awful disease. Anyway, there is so much good information there. There’s no condescending tone and women’s choices are respected. So lovely! Now if only there were sites like that for the other screening programs out there…(for both men and women)

59. Today I found out that someone I know of went to the ER for an unrelated cause and was told that she has an ovarian cyst which needed to be removed because it was, “larger than average”. That seems like a fairly flimsy reason to me, especially in an asymptomatic woman. Correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t that similar to saying, “well your big toe is larger than average so we’ll need to amputate it, even though it isn’t causing you any problems”? All women are different shapes and sizes, so it would make sense that their internal organs and ovarian cysts (which most women get every month) would be different sizes as well. Then, I caught wind that the women around her were talking about how being a woman is such a hassle and it’s so awful and our reproductive parts are useless if we don’t have or have already had children. That’s such an awful way to view the female body. It honestly makes me tear up a little bit as I’m writing this. I don’t want to go through life like that, viewing the body that God has given me as some sort of enemy or villain that must be controlled and vanquished. It’s so sad that women feel this way about their bodies and it’s awful that so much unnecessary action has been taken involving the female body over the last century. When things like this happen, I’m so thankful that I’ve found a place with like-minded women where I can vent about this. I’ve said it before and I am aware that there truly are women out there with problems involving their reproductive organs, and that is awful and heartbreaking. But at this point, the female reproductive system has become a commercial business in its own right. There is so much unnecessary treatment and over-treatment taking place. Especially in the US and countries with similar programs and incentives.

    • Yeah, I’ve noticed that a lot of women seem to want to be men & a lot of men act gay as a Broadway cowboy. It’s bizarre: The men either act useless or like enemies, the women at the same time as praising self-governance & not being kicked-around are adamantly supportive of people pushing women around, and the kids don’t seem to have much of anything to learn from (plus, there’s the added danger that someone will prey on them in a subtle way).

      I always look at men that broadly dislike women & only want to be around other men as fruits with an attitude. It’s even worse when they view the woman’s body in the way you said. Someone that thinks this is something to be controlled or vanquished is twisted & probably at least a little bit gay. Not for nothing, but outright making that point if a guy goes on a tirade tends to cut shit short.

      For a woman, I’d think just saying “You’re so self-hating!” would probably generate a personal review. Saying “What? Do you want to be a guy?” might be useful, but I truly do think a lot of women are very bitter about their own lives (anatomy included) & might just be something like a black hole.

      • I don’t think that either gender truly wants to be the other (save for those who are actually transgender). I just think that, overall, society has warped some of the best parts of femininity and masculinity into being something horrible and awful. For women, it’s basically everything I mentioned in my previous comment and then some. For men, it’s typically to do with how they present themselves. If they want to provide for their families or if they have a protective nature, a lot of the time they’re told that they have internalized misogyny. While that may be true in some cases, that a man does those things or wants to use them as a form of control, I think that most of the time men want those things because it’s just part of they’re make up as a whole. They have the desire to provide and protect.

        I think most women aren’t actually self-hating, they just believe that the medical merry-go-round is something they MUST do and that there is never a choice. So then they feel trapped and fearful of their bodies. That’s just my opinion, though. I can understand how feeling like that would eventually make someone bitter. It’s an awful feeling thinking that you have no choice in what’s done to your body.

      • I agree, Ro. The irony is that the way “well woman exams,” Paps and so forth are presented by the medical community and the media – and by other women – make women believe that they’re being proactive and caring for their bodies. If you love yourself you’ll get a Pap. That kind of nonsense. Women are led to think they’re taking the bull by the horns and looking out for their health when they go for these tests. I don’t think it’s self-hatred; I think it’s proof of very effective behavioral conditioning.

        And then, as we’ve all seen, women are also led to believe that there are dreadful, fatal consequences if they don’t get these GYN tests. They’re too frightened to break out of the conditioning and they’re not supplied with correct information that could help them make an informed decision. If you look on the average medical site for laypersons, it just gives the standard party line about how you need a Pap or you’re going to die on the spot. To find the true information one has to be willing to dig deeper and read those medical journal extracts and such. Most people can’t or won’t do that. They trust that those basic medical sites are giving them complete and accurate information so they don’t look further than that.

      • There is no doubt in my mind these programs use advertising companies to sell pap tests and mammograms. We currently have a journalist and high profile sportswoman urging us to have breast screening.
        Sure…I’m going to dash off and do it because a couple of high profile women think it’s a good idea. It’s an insult to our intelligence, if it was such a great test, they wouldn’t have to resort to celebrity endorsement to get us screened, they could rely on the evidence.
        BUT as they told Professor Baum in THAT meeting about 15 years ago, “Professor Baum, we can’t give women all of the information and give them a choice or they won’t turn up for screening”…he resigned from the Screening Committee, and the coercion, lies, unethical tactics etc. continues.
        How could anyone call this screening?

      • Someone put me on the spot the other day about how “wonderful” this pink ribbon campaign stuff is, how wonderful that some semi-local companies are to be sponsoring it, and a 5K run for it. No, this “pinkwashing” – companies putting up an insignificant percentage of their profits to be permitted to put the pink ribbon on their product – even if their products have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer. She went on to tell me, “You know, breast cancer is the #1 killer of women.” HARDLY! Heart disease is. Cancer is 2nd or 3rd. That’s ALL types of cancer. Several other cancers come up higher, including lung cancer.

        Moreover, this bikini medicine focus detracts from women’s actual health care. Women are more likely to die of their first heart attack than men are. If a man goes to an emergency room complaining of chest pains, he will likely receive an EKG and treated as a possible heart attack victim. If a woman does, she’ll likely be given this quiz about when she had a pap test or a mammogram, shamed if it’s longer than recommended, someone listen to her heart via a stethoscope, encouraged to have a(nother) mammogram, perhaps referred for evaluation of her “anxiety” condition. Rarely, even if they decide she’s having a heart attack, will it be treated as aggressively as a similar situation is for a man. Women with heart conditions just don’t fare as well.

        I wonder why….

      • Elizabeth: What meeting? I’d like to be able to bring that up, if an argument ever came up on the subject.

      • Oh ye Gods, yes, Bethhz. The lack of attention that is paid to heart disease in women pisses me off like nothing else. It’s a serious concern and it’s just brushed under the carpet. I’ve read that cardiac issues like heart attacks manifest in women with very different symptoms than they do in men, and that management of heart disease in women can have different challenges. But do we ever hear about that? Do we ever have doctors who address heart disease in women with the same vigilance as cervical cancer? Noooo…

        And it’s very true that whenever a woman seeks emergency care, she is less likely to be taken seriously and much more likely to be immediately assessed for GYN issues – and that wasted time could cost her. I remember that when I had my appendix out. The ER doctor’s first response was, “oh, you’re just ovulating!” I was sitting there thinking, “Um, I’ve been ovulating for a while, THIS IS NOT AN EGG BEING RELEASED, guys.” The ER doctor did admit me and run tests anyway, to his credit, but the fact that his first response was to trivialize my condition by thinking that it was just a silly female problem, and that I was just overreacting and exaggerating about my pain, bothers me to this day. Especially since I had pretty classic appendicitis symptoms.

60. I heard of some hospitals giving all woman a pelvic exams when they come in for anything. Standard of care its crazy. And so sad. Also theres a new show in the US were a virgin goes to a gyn for a pap smear and the gyn impregnants her. Im seeing more and more gyn exams being shown as a normal part of woman lives in tv and movies. Its so sicking like there trying to send a mesage and yes us doctors do paps on virgins its sick as soon as you turn 21 hear no matter what they want a date to record of your last pap it infuerates me that woman healthy woman see this as normal.

    • Kleigh – That is disgusting and horrible. I can’t believe that’s a show here. I say we start a petition against it. It is awful that they treat all women like patients who must be constantly monitored from a certain age. The woman I was talking about didn’t get a pelvic when she went to the ER, but she did have a CAT scan which detected the cyst. So that proves the theory I had that they can detect symptomatic ovarian cysts without being invasive. But I doubt they’ll ever offer it.

    • Wait, the show is about docotrs that impregnates women or that’s just the plot? Creepy, either way. That’s another things I’ve noticed: T.V. tends to make all the official-types out to be friends & everyone else out to be enemies.

      You’re right that they do seem to still send this downtrodden message that instead of “your body , your rules” it’s “the doctor does as they chose.”

      I have to say: I’d throw a woman out of my house for trying to convey that to my daughter. Don’t know how this would happen, being as there’d be very serious compatibility issue there- but sometimes you get suprises after 15 years of marriage.

    • Oh yeah, there’s always that question on the medical forms when you go to your doctor: “When was your last Pap?” I’ve had doctors ask me that and get mad when I tell them I’m there to talk about my knee pain, or a sinus infection, or whatever. It’s unreal they focus so much on that test and cervical cancer that they make it a basic health question.

      And of course it’s always right next to “When was your last period?” FFS, my period isn’t such a damn banner event that I know the date off the top of my head. I’ve actually been chewed out by nurses when I haven’t answered that.

      • Ah yes, the “When was your last monthly period?” question that comes right after the pap question – as if it’s some major event in the month. Heck, I don’t know when I paid last month’s electric bill, something that has real consequences to me, without looking at my check register! I haven’t been treated so condescendingly for not knowing, but I’ve had them strongly recommend a pregnancy test on the spot when I don’t know off the top of my head. That was even when I could not be pregnant due to having both a tubal ligation and a sexless marriage! This seems like a ridiculous thing to go through when I’m there for an infected wound, or knee pain, or a serious fever. It takes away from real medical care to the problem at hand, costs more money, and often leads to failure to diagnose or treat the real problem at hand. That is put off for a next appointment, when the same set of questions will come up, and no care is offered then either.

        That is why I almost never go to the doctor, even for real problems, because it is so pointless.

      • I’ve had the nurses press for a pregnancy test when I didn’t know the exact date too. Such BS. The fun thing is that the birth control I take stops my period altogether, so I could always tell them “oh, I haven’t had a period in ten months or so…” and watch them implode. LOL. I don’t bother, though. I’ve had so much drama with that question that I just completely make s**t up now.

        In thinking about it more, it’s another example of how women are supposed to focus on their reproductive organs above all else. We’re all apparently supposed to be so preoccupied that we know our menstrual dates off the top of their head. Forget birthdays, or important dates at work, or when your car payment is due, or dates you did something fun – nope, ladies, just remember that period!

        And I’m with you on doctors. I honestly wish I could just order all the tests I need and write my own scrips. I usually get it right more often than the doctors do, and with far less drama.

      • Today, in San Diego CA, Jeffrey Abrams MD was arrested for taking pictures of women in various states of undress and of their genitals. He had 1600+ photos in his phone. I know a woman who used to treat through his office. She said he was “very thorough” in his exams. He was caught doing this where else? At a Medi-Cal (low income) health clinic.

        This is an example of how warped our system is. These f****** become so toxic from the god complex they actually believe it’s their right to take pics, and that they can and will get away with it. The next newscast will try to answer how long it’s gone on, and what his “fascination” or picture speciality was.

      • Just out of curiosity, who tends to come at you all harder: nurses or doctors?

        It sounds like the nurses are kind of like the master’s dog & bark quite a bit on that master’s behalf, then the doctor acts like master of the world after all the softening up by the nurses.

        I’ve said it before, but if they feel enslaved by not having a choice in whether or not they do penetrative things to someone else, maybe they should ACTUALLY be enslaved. As it is, they seem to have a great problem with being told “No” with anything. Maybe their protests shouldn’t count for anything because of that.

        Just musing about the general idea, because I’m sick & fucking tired of them acting like Spartacus about being dictatorial. They go on all kinds of angles about how “they are not people’s slaves” & “they don’t do what they’re told” & “they know more about these things than other people”- yet none of this makes reality take a coffee break. What they do is still what happens & what happens is what occurs.

        The things that they have so much “expertise” in are sometimes even contraindicated by their own damned profession! Yeah, they know so much. They know when they’ve done something that caused a problem, too- doesn’t mean that they’ll tell anyone about it.

      • Want all you to know. Per 10/20/14 KGTV-10 “10 News,” the San Diego CA ABC affiliate, reported on its evening & late night tv broadcasts that Dr Jeffrey Abrams, a very prominent, well-respected, well-liked endocrinologist, has been arrested after being caught (finally) by a (brave) patient as he took a picture of her vagina. He had 1,300+ (I previously typed 1,600 in error but who really knows-other phones other pen cameras?) images of women in various stages of undress or naked, breasts, buttocks, vaginas, on his cell phone. Bet he kept his phone regularly updated! The CA Med Brd has NOT suspended his license however b/c they have no evidence that he’s a direct threat to his patient’s well-being. Explain this reasoning anybody? The patient was seeing Dr Abrams while he volunteered at a free clinic in a low-income area in El Cajon, a suburb of San Diego.

        This hits close to home. I know a woman who’s treated w/him for years. She’s said he’s “very thorough” and makes sure pelvics etc are kept up to date. There’s a very good chance I’m going to be referred to an endocrinologist, and he’d have been on my short list.

        Ro, I agree. At some point in med school, doctors willingly take on a god complex due to their high education, how they’re told their intelligence and decision making is better than us peasants, then they learn how to bully their way across the world. This year I had an epidural steroid injection in my back. The doctor was going to treat his wife next, and had her in the room watching. W/O my permission. They won’t let my husband watch; and this really pissed us off. However, should we file a HIPAA complaint, I’ll lose him. When we simply inquired about HIPAA policies, since this Dr is part owner, he blew a gasket. We’re fucked no matter what.

        Alex, re nurses you put it best. As I’ve written, we’ve seen best and worst. The best respect the patient and accept the family or husband as an advocate and partner. The worse are insecure psycho Stalins. They are suspicious of everything. They chase people out when visiting hours close. The ugly is a nurse in a divorce who also sees a female therapist. She thinks every woman needs her as an advocate, as she doles out assertiveness advice and reassurance that we can make our decisions. Forgetting that we delegate responsibilities to husbands when we feel like shit and don’t want to think if we don’t have to.

        The irony? Hearing a nurse talk about how important paps are; only for my husband to ask when her last one was. The answer she gave? Three years ago. “I don’t like them…”

      • On one US health forum a woman said she writes down, “currently menstruating” so she can’t be pressured into a pap test on the spot. Of course, she still gets serious pressure because she hasn’t screened in years, she gets the lecture about taking care of her health. So now, like so many women, she uses the pharmacy to manage her asthma. It makes me furious that this nonsense prevents some women from getting medical care for ACTUAL health issues.

      • With doctors vs. nurses, it varies. I find that in a lot of cases, the nurses can actually be really, really great allies if you’re in the hospital or the ER. They’re typically the ones who are interacting with patients on a daily basis, and they put up with the stupid doctors too – so they’re in your corner. When my mom was in the hospital and the doctor was being an asshole – he wanted to do a procedure on my mom without pain meds – the nurse was the one who stood with me and battled the doctor until he agreed to do things our way.

        On the other hand, some of them make Nurse Ratched look good – they can’t be bothered, they’re not very well trained, or they hector patients (like the ones with the pregnancy tests). When my mom was hospitalized there was also one nurse who was very annoyed that at least one family member stayed with my mom 24/7 and wanted to know what was going on. Tough, lady. 🙂

        Doctors in contrast are a lot more likely to have a God Complex thing going on – they’re right, you’re wrong, and you’re obviously too stupid and uneducated to have a discussion about your care, etc. Unless they’re actually PAs, in which case they WILL talk to you and be very much into collaborative efforts.

      • It is a valid question to ask if a women thinks she might be pregnant. Pregnancy could affect what medications or tests are prescribed. Some prescriptions have more risk during pregnancy so other medications might be prescribed instead or warnings might be given to discontinue if a woman finds out she is pregnant later.

        Asking when a women had her last menstrual period is just a lead to pap/pelvic exams. If the woman says she is menstruating then she is asked to come back in “two weeks”. It might be assumed by the woman that she is being asked back to follow up in the original reason for the consultation but I find this was not happening to me. Test results were not I and the doctor did not ask a out the previous condition. I was pressured at the next consult for a Pap test. I refused and there was arguing and his attempt to “educate” me a about cervicla cancer. All he had to do was ask me if I would be more comfortable with a female practioner and arrange for that. Since then I educated myself about the whole gyn industry and decided to avoid most medical care totally. This has destroyed any positive relationship I have with my doctor.

        I did have a heart attack before. Also I find Chinese herbs more helpful for my lung condition that anything else I have tried.

      • Pre conception care is being pushed as standard of care now. I bothers me alot. If you read the acog stance on this they advise all woman to be asked if they are trying to get pregnant or if not what birth control do they use? I dont use hormonal bc and i dont want to be asked about it as tho its the only way to prevent pregnacy. there is so much wrong with that i dont know where to start. they want use to all be vacenated and pap smears ready to conceive a baby at any time. its scary.

61. Something I just thought of while arguing with my mother (about different stuff): People simply using logic & lying. For example, if someone was wrong about something & they simply say that someone was doing that- they, LOGICALLY, can’t be the one doing it. “It’s not me, because it’s them.”

    Not to bitch about my family life, but I had a moment of realization on that “Logic & Lying” tactic & I figure that the way she acts has a lot of common themes with other people that play mind games. See if you notice this as a repeating theme (and she does, by-the-way, work in a hospital- not as medical personnel, but I figure maybe she picked a lot of things up the way that people pick up accents in foreign countries).

    With her, she acts like anything she does is totally justified if someone else has any flaw at all. And if she actually is totally wrong & there’s no “Well, what about you?” rescue angle- she just shuts down. It’s like playing dead, but verbally. She’ll just get quiet.

    As for doing things for other people (particularly the things they can’t do for themselves), she makes a big point about NOT getting to it when THEY want. Instead, it’s whenever the hell she feels like it.

    Trying to make someone wait until the desire dies is a thing with her, too. Either being coercive or simply getting a rush of feeling “influencial” is very common & she mainly pulls shit like this with people that she figures she doesn’t have to worry about. If they don’t have anything to safely threaten her with, she doesn’t give them a second thought.

    Another thing (and I think it’s liely that she picked this up from the hospital), is that she seems to think that her affirmation of a situation is the final ingredient to something actually being that way or not. I’ve had arguments with her about the measurement on a pair of pants, showing her where things line up on the tape, and she STILL kept aruging!

    Overall, there’s lots of “Thinking by Adjucation,” passive-aggressive games, “doctrine bound” behavior (once she commenses on a course of action, it’s like she can’t go in a different way), guilt trips, and that “Logic & Lying” combo I mentioned earlier.

    Again, I’m not trying to go on & on about my family dynamics, but I’m very curious if any of you have noticed that behavior in people that aren’t strictly medical- but do work in hospitals or some such. I’m wondering if there’s a link, because the only two things that have changed AND remained constants are how much times she works in the hospital & that she stopped smoking (possible Parkinson’s link with that- supposedly smoking does things to fix & prevent Parkinson’s).

    • I’ve noticed that behavior in those who work in/used to work in the medical field. I’ve also noticed it in people who have jobs totally unrelated to the medical field or anything directly involving people’s lives in that manner. I think when it comes down to it, there are people who like to believe they’re always right and always know best. I think it’s more prominent within the medical field because of the lengthy education they must go through first. Even though I’m quite young, I think one of the most important lessons I’ve learned is that you acquire book smarts from school, knowledge from communicating with others and learning from their experiences, and wisdom from living life and your own experiences. There is a large difference between them and I think people who think they know the best and know everything often times confuse the three.

      • Very insightful, Ro! Especially, the second-to-last sentence.

        On the last one, I think another thing has to do with schooling equating with points like in a score. Like they have some kind of ammuntion against someone. They are usually very arrogant (those that are educated, particularly in things that are fawned-over), so they’ll remain unconvinced that their level of information accumulation does not generate a superiority over other people & that it actually does NOT warp reality so that what happens is NOT what occurs.

        This is a major part, I think, of why these “nerds” tend to get beaten-up: they start fights & then try to re-define the situation out of existance & don’t stop until they GET stopped. That’s another thing: they keep trying. It comes off almost whiny, you know? They’ll have lots of endurance with an endeavor of starting shit & lying about it.

62. On another forum I’m chatting with someone who – from the sounds of it – went in for a smear test and unknowingly had a biopsy done instead. They say the nurse didn’t use a brush, they used a metal clipper. I don’t see why a biopsy would be done when the smear hasn’t even been analysed yet, and of course the patient deserves a full explanation and options before they just go taking a sample.

    Because of that discussion I went over to the NHS’s colposcopy information guide. They have comments from the public underneath and one just goes to show how women view their reproductive organs and chances of having cancer/female health issues. One commenter says she didn’t go for a smear until she was 37. The smear shows abnormal cells. Her response? “I kind of expected this given that it was my first one.” Why on earth is it expected? It sounds like she pictured her reproductive organs festering away for years on end, just because the health service wasn’t keeping an eye on them.

    • Well, there can be somewhat of a knee-jerk belief that if something isn’t verified, then it doesn’t exist. Like if they didn’t take someone’s pulse, that means that they don’t have a heartbeat.

      That actually happens quite a bit. Look at what sometimes happens in martial arts: people will learn exact moves & answers to problems and feel like they have control over that situation. Of course, just because they mentally encompass something doesn’t give them control over it. That false concept is something that shows up frequently & is not limited to the martial arts world in the least.

      (Just to make a point of how stupid this belief is: It would amount to someone thinking that if they know how a gun works, they can stop themselves from being shot at will!)

      As an after-thought that I just had: A lot of these things are very characteristic of OCD or OCPD (it seems that the first one is something of an “implosion” & the other one is more of an “explosion,” as it’s more or less the technical term for being a pushy control freak). Not just being dictatorial & trying to hi-jack other people’s lives, but things like having a Thought-Action Fusion (where someone thinks that thinking about something & doing that action are the same thing).

      Maybe the foundation of that “thought-action fusion” is a point, in itself. They, more or less, seem to feel that reality is a mere mental construct (as they figure that these thoughts ARE the situations) & that they hold total sway over it. The thing is though, is that someone can’t think reality is what they say it is & notice when things don’t go their way.

63. I’m now on the Jo’s Trust forum where someone was told they had “high grade” abnormal cells, booked in for colposcopy, worries for several weeks, then is told they don’t know what grade the cells were and labelling them as “high grade” was just to cover their backside.

64. Further news from the UK here. I was trying to find out about the future of pap testing in the UK and when we are likely to get HPV self testing and I came across this document:

    Click to access IOSC_3rd_Annual_Report_-_Proof_version_-_9_December_2013_v2.pdf

    Flick to the bottom of page 36 and it says that the HPV test for primary testing is likely to be rolled out in 2017-18. A whole 2 years after the Dutch programme. Very disappointing. It also does not say how they will get the HPV samples. Will they let women self test or will they still keep the speculum test going, I wonder?
    Paragraph pasted below:

    4.42 HPV Testing as Primary Screening (HPV TaPS)
    The UK National Screening Committee has given its support for a pilot to assess the value of using HPV TaPS for cervical disease, rather than the currently used cytology test. The pilot programme began in May 2013 and is now operating at six sites: Liverpool; Manchester; Northwick Park (Harrow); Bristol; Sheffield; and Norwich. This is potentially a huge change to the programme, so the pilot will run for at least three years in order to determine a safe and practical pathway for the programme. A formal evaluation of the pilot will take place and, if results show it is successful, we will roll out HPV TaPS across England, probably from 2017/18. Cancer Research UK have estimated that, when fully implemented, HPV TaPS could prevent an additional 600 cancer a year.

    So, if they rolled it out now it could save about 1800 cases of cancer in the UK, but then they wouldn’t be in control would they?

65. I’ve just noticed that historical Parliamentary debates from the UK government are all online and show how ardent our politicians were, and still are, about pushing women through the screening process, safe or not. I found this interesting report from 13.3.1987, about the state of British mammogram centres very revealing.
    A member of Parliament, Mrs R. Short revealed that:

    A conference of the Royal College of Radiologists was recently told: “Some existing centres are so bad—they have so many false positives and false negatives—that they positively do harm. We must improve or eliminate these centres or they will threaten the whole screening programme. If word gets around that the tests are inaccurate, women will not take up screening and the cost per patient will rise.”
    She then goes on to say:
    The role of general practitioners in persuading patients to accept screening is important. Experience shows that screening for breast cancer is much more likely to be accepted if encouraged by a GP. The response rate has been found to be highest when patients are sent a personal note with a provisional appointment bearing the GP’s signature. The signature was found to be a real motivating factor. The Minister should encourage GPs to do that.

    The link for this is:
    http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1987/mar/13/cancer-patients-treatment-and-care#S6CV0112P0_19870313_HOC_18

    • Did you realize this linked document was from a meeting in 1987? I think far before those registeries and letter recall systems were started in some places. Really were women not taking advantage of cancer screening because “doctors were too busy”?

      Digital mammograms are supposed to be more accurate but how would one know what equipment was being used unless they asked. Also differences between who reads the X-rays.

      • Yes, I’ve been researching how screening targets came to be forced on us by the government in the UK at this time (late 1980’s era). Our call and recall system came in during 1988, but even with this, uptake was only about 40%. In 1990 our then minister for health, Kenneth Clark drew up a plan to incentivise doctors to reach an 80% target for cervical screening, which many people including doctors said was impossible to achieve (ethically), and there was great resistance to these plans. However, after a meeting lasting some 10 hours, on 4th May, Clark, in his own words, bulldozed the plans through, and 80% of British women have been bullied and pestered into pap tests ever since. I would love to know what was said at this meeting, but it was secret. 4th May 1990 was the day British women lost their human rights, and their bodies were put under the medical surveillance of doctors.

Comments are closed.