Why do you think so much more attention is paid to breast cancer over Prostate Cancer?

The US Government spends double on breast cancer research over prostate and the corporate disparity is much greater. Campbells soup doesn't have Prostate awareness soup cans! Although deaths from breat cancer are 1/3 higher there are far more cases of prostate cancer, over 240,000 per year. The funding and awarness differential is 300 or 400%. So is it a gender issue, an age issue (tends to be later onset) or What?

Why do you think so much more attention is paid to breast cancer over Prostate Cancer?
Truthfully, I think it comes down to this: "the squeaky wheel gets the grease." Women have aligned themselves behind this cause and worked together- socially, politically- to bring attention to and fight for the research money. They have banded together to raise money and awareness. They've gone through the necessary steps to make sure that this problem is not ignored.





Men should do the same for prostate cancer.





This is one area that men could learn something from the example of women. I'm not saying this to be sexist. I'm saying it because it's the truth. Men need to band together and fight for what they want. Things aren't just handed to any of us on a "silver platter." We had to struggle for what we wanted to achieve.





Prostate cancer indeed does deserve more attention. Men have the power (same as women) to bring this issue to a level of heightened awareness. But I wouldn't stop there. Awareness is a great first step- a necessary one, but take it further: join in force and be political advocates. Don't stop until you reach your goals! You'll find out, along the way, that as others gain awareness, more people will join in the fight for your cause...not just men, but women, too.
Reply:people like boobs more than butt holes
Reply:It's "sexy", for one thing. I know that sounds horrible, but anytime the word breast is involved, a cause gets more attention.





Another reason is for the lobbying and activism of many, many people. Both types of cancer can generally be dealt with quite well by early screening, however, even that is not failsafe.





Personally, I think we should move on to other causes. "Awareness" in particular is such a waste of funds! We're aware already - now let's use money to reasearch diseases that have no known treatment. Autism, for example, is sorely lacking in research funding compared to AIDS, but we all know how to avoid AIDS - not so for autism.
Reply:that's a really good question. maybe because stronger women are more interesting then stronger men?


it's not a good answer, but it's all i can think of =/
Reply:I do not believe your stats are right that there are more prostate cancer cases. One in seven women will contract breast cancer in her lifetime.





And if we aggregate the amount of money spent over the years on studies exclusively devoted to men, what is spent on breast cancer research (i.e. women's health) is still a drop in the bucket. It wasn't until recently that researchers even began including women in their trials.
Reply:Perhaps because women are viewed as the "weaker sex" who apparently require more attention than men do, rather than equals whose issues both deserve equal effort towards awareness... or maybe our society has progressively been "feminising" (you know that I dislike using that word), as has some aspects of our court system, where the woman is typically favoured in cases of divorce and child custody... or there's a conspiracy for world domination on behalf of women...


hehe, I keed.





Whatever it may be, it isn't right that women would be the primary focus of any form of awareness, and in health particularly, men tend to suffer more health problems than women do (and die younger).


I think that we should be treated equally. This is my opinion.





Edit: Excellent point Glo. It didn't occur to me, the convenient politics within social awareness.
Reply:For the same reason that women's heart disease is just now coming to the forefront... For the same reason there is very little talk about testicular cancer, which onset is between 13-25 .... Money! Public awareness is whatever is clever at the moment... God bless****
Reply:Women are more apt to openly discuss issues regarding our organs. We're more huggy, lovey, support kind of beings. Men tend to be more embarrassed about their prostates, testes, etc. I think that's at the root of this whole thing.Whereas women would rally together to get breast cancer noticed in society, men would rather not talk about their prostates.
Reply:Breast cancer is not JUST a woman's issue, whereas prostate cancer is. About 1,700 men will be diagnosed with breast cancer, and 450 will die each year. Not a huge number in comparison with women, I agree, but still something for you guys to think about.
Reply:What about heart disease? It kills more women than breast cancer, and is a silent killer.
Reply:Your statistics are inaccurate. Only in a few developed nations does prostate cancer come close to killing as many men as does breast cancer kills women worldwide. There has been very little money ever spent on medical research related to women's health. Women were not typically even included as research subjects. Medical science is playing desperate catch-up right now, especially related to enormous, until only recently acknowledged, physiological differences between females and males in regards to chemistry, pharmacology and nutrition and so on.





Breast cancer typically kills a larger percentage of women worldwide than prostatic cancer kills men, except in highly developed nations such as the U.S. where diet largely is to blame and where the percentages are about the same. The etiology or causes of prostatic cancer are much better understood than are the causes of breast cancer. We do not know what causes breast cancer in 95% of the cases. That greater mystery requires greater funding and research focus than does a better understood disease.





Also, because prostate cancer does not usually occur until later in men's lives and because it affects African-Americans more than others has led in the past to some disregard for prioritorization based on ageism and racism, certainly not sexism. But, the total disregard for women's health research has been largely based on sexism.





As mentioned above, a greater awareness is generating related to enormous differences between males and females in such areas as nutritional requirements and health consequences. In order to begin to more accurately comprehend ANY cancer, gender-based research is imperitive. For example, women who consume soy products prior to adolescence have significantly reduced risk of breast cancer throughout their lives. But, soy product consumption for boys prior to adolescence does not reduce their risk for prostate cancer. But, as you know, reducing red meat consumption does reduce the risk of prostate cancer.
Reply:It's a fault in a fashion. Cancer is a serious stuff, and every form of cancer deserved to have funds, and education about prevention. But maybe prostate cancer is still something who requires regular checkups. Usually, when you find there's something really wrong with your prostate and your testes, is too late. The only prevention avaiable is a regular check-up in adult age.


Breast cancer has the "advantage" of leaving marks than a trained woman can feel on herself just showering and touching her breast searching for lumps and stuff. If she's told how and when.
Reply:Because





1. Researchers used to ignore breast cancer because it has to do with... breasts. And breasts are 'dirty', and only for sex. You didn't used to be able to read about breasts, nevermind breast cancer. Breasts are naughty, dirty, and shouldn't be discussed in polite company (or in public). It used to be unacceptable to use the word 'pregnant' in the mass media - it was strictly censored and replaced by the more 'socially acceptable' word 'expecting'. Also, you didn't used to be able to show a pregnant woman on television. Check out "I Love Lucy" footage when Lucille Ball was pregnant with "Little Ricky" - you will see the pregnant Lucille Ball was exclusively photographed from the WAIST UP. You never see her pregnant belly - EVER; such dirty images would never have made it past the censors.





Pregnancy = dirty


Anything to do with breasts = dirty





2. Breast cancer is the #1 killer of women in America





Researchers are trying to MAKE UP FOR LOST TIME from when the only illnesses worth studying were those males suffered from - and then the information extrapolated onto female populations.





HUGE PROBLEM: the findings from work done on male populations often didn't - and doesn't - apply to females.





Back to the drawing board.





edit:


Maybe some of you will remember an episode of "All In The Family" where Gloria, pregnant and as big as a house, is barking right in Archie's face "pregnantpregnantpregnantpregnant..." and Archie is so offended by the word he is seen wildly flailing his arms in the air, trying desperately to get away from Gloria and the offensive word! I don't think that even "All In the Family" would have gotten past the censors with the word "breast" - and boy, did they ever push the envelope!
Reply:First of all, the men who are directly affected by this have only recently been men from the "Boomer" generation and later. Men of previous generations tended to "suffer in silence" and be neither politically active about such things nor comfortable even discussing them.





Second, following that last point, the whole issue of even the examinations involved in identifying prostate problems make it a subject about which many men are squeamish. Most men definitely are not going to be comfortable even thinking about the issue.
Reply:I believe that it is because women are more likely to talk openly about something private that affects them. Men with cancer or any other problem are not likely to talk about it publicly. Men want to keep it to themselves.
Reply:men get prostate cancer in their 70s (age does affect spending), they tend to die WITH it - not OF it, it tends to be easily treatable (hormone therapy).





women tend to get breast cancer in their 60s, it is not easily treatable unless found very early, chemo is often used. it has also killed women in their 30s and 40s.





you cannot simply handpick 2 cancers and say why is funding for a woman's cancer (men get breast cancer too - but in small rates) than the man's cancer. this is just ridiculous.





women were just used as reseach subjects in the 60s. this did a huge disservice to us. women and men may experience diseases differently (heart disease is a good example). we still lag behind. so do minorities.





you want to talk about health disparities? talk about how poor people or minorities often are diagnosed with cancer at later stages and have higher death rates.
Reply:Is is "visibility"? Breasts are visible, functional, and have a more widespread interest in them while the prostate is hidden away. There are no testicular cancer, pancreatic cancer or liver cancer soup cans,either.


I do not mean to give a frivolous answer, I feel that all cancers are equally important and more should be done to create awareness and education as to cause and cure.
Reply:That is a real double standard because prostate cancer is just as brutal as breast cancer.


Children`s medical conditions are much more important than adult's medical conditions.
Reply:It doesn't matter what kind of caner.Cancer is a killer. All types!!!


More studies should be done on Melanoma cancer. There is no cure.Being told one has melanoma is the same as being given a death sentence.