Partisan Politics Not Part of Women’s Health? MY ASS. A View From “Land of The Forgotten.”

February 6, 2012 by in accountability, Awareness, Early detection, Komen, Lung Cancer Alliance, Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act, National Spotlight, Stigma

 

While we’re on this little subject of women’s health and access to health care and cancer screenings, I have a little something to say about this: “Senators to Komen: Women’s Health Before Partisan Politics?”

Biggest line of BULLSHIT. Ever.

Mom with Hope & NED

As a lung cancer advocate,  it’s been interesting to watch the Komen fiasco play out on a variety of levels: (Big PS…ANYONE can get lung cancer. No smoking required.)

- Everyone’s intense focus on the critical issue of women’s access to healthcare and the importance of breast cancer screenings (Good thing).

- Politicians saying that politics has no place in healthcare (True, but complete oxymoron).

- Huge political & survivor/advocate pressure on Komen to cave…and it did (we think).

Yeah, twenty-six U.S. Senators issued a letter to Komen saying,  “It would be tragic if any woman — let alone thousands of women — lost access to these potentially lifesaving screenings because of politically motivated attacks.” Absolutely. Amen. Clap. Clap. Clap.

Wait, what? For real? Yes, we all heard/read correctly. And, what they said makes total sense, right? Indeed it does.

OK, well then Senators (see the list here) …while these words are still fresh in everyone’s minds, surely you feel the same about THE largest health care barrier for women with the #1 cancer killer, right? Funny, I haven’t heard your public outrage. Haven’t seen a letter of concern. No one has for more than 40 years.

See my Mom here? Yeah, she has Stage IV lung cancer. Nope, she’s never smoked a day in her life.  Doesn’t matter.  ANYONE can get this horrendous disease. It’s equal opp these days, yet it remains the LEAST funded cancer by a looooooong shot.

Let me repeat that plea to Komen: “It would be tragic if any woman — let alone thousands of women — lost access to these potentially lifesaving screenings because of politically motivated attacks.” Hypocrisy on too many levels to count. 

“Land of the Forgotten”

Last time I checked, my Mom is a woman. She is a woman with terminal cancer…but she doesn’t have access to standard lung cancer screenings because, guess what? – THERE AREN’T ANY. For God’s sake, if ONLY the lung cancer community had a screening issue to fight about.  Is this really OK with you? Talk about tragic. Talk about politics.

Maybe this will help get your attention – 80% of people diagnosed with lung cancer are people who have never smoked or former smokers who quit decades ago. 80%! This is insane, people!!!  Even more insane – the survival rate. It’s virtually remained unchanged for 40 years at just 15%.

Again, these “some people” are you, me, my Mom and more than 220,000 who will be diagnosed with lung cancer this year. It makes absolutely no sense. It boggles my mind beyond comprehension. It defies logic on so many levels.

Just for perspective, more women die of lung cancer than the top three cancers combined – (breast, colon, prostate). When compared to breast cancer, lung cancer research funding is barely an inkling of a blip.

Courtesy Lung Cancer Alliance

Why everyone needs to care. I will break this down into the simplest language possible:

Some people who smoke get lung cancer.

Some people who smoke don’t get lung cancer.

Some people who have smoked get lung cancer.

Some people who have smoked don’t get lung cancer.

Some people who have never smoked get lung cancer.

Why no outrage? Simple. It’s called POLITICS. No, let me rephrase, it’s not just politics. It’s politics, big business and that old stigma crutch. It’s so much easier to hold onto that outdated smoking stigma and continue pointing to it as the only culprit, even though clearly, it’s not.

What Say You Now?

On a positive note, a big “thank you.” Twelve of the 26 senators (bottom of post in bold) who sent that letter to Komen have pledged their support of the Lung Cancer Mortality Reducti0n Act - the first comprehensive research plan addressing all aspects of lung cancer prevention, early detection and treatment.

Passage of this Act would be HUGE for the lung cancer world and cancer in general. Heck, lung cancer patients just might be able to move from the kiddy table and even use real silverware. Maybe. Still a long way to go.

For the 14 other senators who claim to be so concerned about “Lost access to these potentially lifesaving screenings because of politically motivated attacks,” what say you now?

If you truly believe politics doesn’t (or shouldn’t) play a role in women’s health care issues such as breast cancer, then you’ve ditched the stigma crutch, you’re fired up and ready to do something about lung cancer, right? Perfect. I can’t wait to update this blog post with your responses.

From a much broader perspective, I leave you with this: How can we possibly think we are, or can, conquer the war on cancer by continuing to ignore the type of cancer that kills the most?  Lung cancer accounts for 30% of all cancer deaths. Chew on that for a second – 30% of ALL cancer deaths.

I repeat, partisan politics not a part of women’s health care? My ASS.

—

What YOU can do - See your senator on this list? Where do your congressional representatives stand on the Lung Cancer Mortality Reduction Act?  Find out. Send an email to Congress through Lung Cancer Alliance Advocacy Action or call your Congressional offices through LCA Advocacy Hotline: 877-727-5068.

(The letter sent to the Komen foundation  is signed by the following: Sens. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., Patty Murray, D-Was., Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Ron Wyden, D-Ore., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., Mark Begich, D-Alaska, Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., Jon Tester, D-Mont., Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., Max Baucus, D-Mont., Ben Cardin, D-Md., Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., Al Franken, D-Minn, John Kerry, D-Mass., Claire McCaskill,D-MO., Debbie Stabenow, D-MI., Chris Coons, D-DE., and Jeff Bingaman D-NM)

 

12 Comments - Leave a comment!
  • http://dannybrown.me Danny Brown

    The “politics is not part of healthcare” line is a wonderful thought. But, unfortunately, not usually a realistic one. If it was, we wouldn’t see it being used as a battle weapon in party discussions…

    • http://www.wtflungcancer.com/ Jennifer Windrum

      Absolutely Danny. Completely unrealistic, which I why I HATE when politicians use it. Rhetoric continues. Thanks for chiming in. 

  • http://twitter.com/bobledrew Bob LeDrew

    You know how some jerkwads will tell (it’s almost always women) someone “you’re cute when you’re angry”? Well you’re eloquent when you get angry. Impressive. 

    • http://www.wtflungcancer.com/ Jennifer Windrum

      Ha. Ha. Well, I wasn’t even at full “angry” capacity here, so just imagine how much more “eloquent” I can be. But, my guess is – when I reach full-on ANGER – it won’t be eloquent or impressive. Probably in ALL CAPS and more “ass” comments that will take away from the message. But, boy does it feel good to pound on this keyboard. I kind of feel sorry for it. Thanks Pepe!!!

  • http://dailyplateofcrazy.com/ Big Little Wolf

    Until we live in a country that cares about its people, and the logic that without a HEALTHY citizenry you don’t have a healthy COUNTRY, this is exactly what we will continue to find. Until we live in a country in which loss of job no longer means loss of health care, in which maintaining health care coverage of any sort beyond a certain age is no longer prohibitively expensive, in which pharma rules the roost and bureaucrats hold sway over whether or not people live or die, this is exactly what we will continue to find.

    Until we live in a country that does not delude itself that holes in the fabric make the strength of the fabric dangerous for all, that we ARE our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers (which is in our own best interest as well), that people don’t “deserve” to be sick or somehow “do or don’t do” something to bring misfortune on themselves, we will continue to find these outrageous (and irrational) misconceptions about health care, not to mention the role that government (at any level) should play in it.

    Thank you for speaking out on this issue, and so eloquently. 

    • http://www.wtflungcancer.com/ Jennifer Windrum

      Wow, talk about eloquent – you nailed it!  I really wish we could see a light at the end of this insane tunnel, but not holding my breath for that to happen any time soon. Until then, the public needs to be informed and/or reminded the extent that politics and egos control our own fate…and come together to find solutions to crack this beast. Thanks so much for your feedback. 

  • Anonymous

    Thank you for bringing attention to the ever important subject of the lack of funding for lung cancer.  As a lung cancer advocate, I find the statistics about lung cancer being the leading cause of cancer deaths to be about as staggering as the hypocrisy of funding.  

    I want to share that I find it offensive when people need to emphasize that their loved one didn’t smoke, and yet has lung cancer.  My father did smoke- and he has lung cancer.  Does that mean that he has deserved the last two years of incredible suffering and struggle? Just about every time- I mean, literally, almost every time- I tell someone he has lung cancer, the first question they asked is: did he smoke.  Why is that even a question?  When I hear that someone died of a heart attack, I don’t immediately ask if they were obese or ate unhealthily or didn’t exercise.  That would be offensive. Not to mention unfair.

    As you say, there is clearly a stigma around lung cancer, as related to smoking.  And that is clearly contributing to the lack of funding. In my opinion, emphasizing that anyone can get lung cancer seems to be catering to that stigma, rather than obliterating it.  

    It’s as if to say- “Hey, don’t ignore lung cancer just because smokers get it; innocent people get it, too!”  Very offensive.  All cancer victims are innocent… And if you try to open pandora’s box on that one and make claims about who deserves it and who doesn’t, well that is a very slippery slope. 

    Bad enough that my father can barely walk, breathe, or participate in life anywhere close to the way he once did.  He also has to feel shame around his smoking?

    Sorry, but I think your article caters to the stigma, rather than helps free us of it.  I understand that emphasizing that anyone can get lung cancer- smoker or not- may be a means to get more funding for research. But sadly, it’s not a means to moving past the stigma.  

    I know you and I are on the same side here as far as funding goes.  And although I despise cigarette smoke, I don’t believe people who get lung cancer who didn’t smoke should be favored over people who did.  What if, rather than emphasizing that anyone can get lung cancer- we communicated that most smokers who have lung cancer today are of a generation when it was totally acceptable to smoke- socially, medically, and politically.  My parents’ doctors both smoked right in their offices.  Ever see the show, “Mad Men?”  It was everywhere.  And it’s more addictive than heroine.  Not everyone has access to support to quit.  Not everyone can quit.  And our government has chosen to keep tobacco legal.  As long as our government has kept it legal, it is their responsibility to clean it up.  The stigma should be on them.

    • http://www.wtflungcancer.com/ Jennifer Windrum

      Hi Kristen. Thanks for your message. I DO always say, “No, my Mom never smoked” and I think it is crucially important. Many people do NOT know this. Many people think it is still all caused by smoking. If I can help educate even ONE person when I say (No, she never smoked) in parentheses, like I usually do, or have that person go “huh,” then I have done my job. We will never get beyond people asking that question until they realize it is not the only cause. It is certainly not to pit smokers versus non smokers. I always say NO ONE deserves it and I firmly believe that. But, from a PR perspective, we will not be able to penetrate through that stigma without a “new” angle and one that others can relate to. In most people’s minds – they DO think that smokers deserve it, unfortunately. We are working to change this by saying that ANYONE can get this disease and NO ONE deserves it…and then some.  We don’t have public sentiment on our side. As a former reporter, getting back to the “new” angle (of never smokers getting it and/or people who quit decades ago) we a story to tell…and one the media are finally picking up on. I have seen a tremendous change since I started this campaign in people becoming more educated and SHARING lung cancer stories, especially in the social media sphere. We will get nowhere if wait for people to be “fair” and our government to be held accountable.  Just my 2 cents. :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kathryn-McKeracher-Sinclair/1273536656 Kathryn McKeracher Sinclair

    I empathize with Kristen’s feelings.  My
    brother smoked and was diagnosed with lung cancer at age 58. He quit
    upon diagnosis.  I did not smoke and was diagnosed at age 41.  I have
    another brother who has not been diagnosed with lung cancer, but suffers
    greatly from COPD and he cannot quit – he was able to stop drinking 15
    years ago, but tobacco with it’s addictive additives is too powerful for
    him.  My father smoked for 35 years until he had a massive coronary at
    age 55.  He went on to live for many years, was diagnosed with bladder
    cancer and then alzheimer’s, but never lung cancer.  None of us deserve
    lung cancer.  Nor do any of the other imperfect human beings who smoke,
    eat too much, or don’t get enough exercise deserve to be diagnosed with
    heart disease, diabetes and many forms of cancer.

    Personally, I think the stigma arose from the many years of anti-smoking
    campaigns/cessation programs that did not spell out how harmful tobacco
    is on more than just your lungs. I believe the tobacco companies are
    evil.   

    As scientists are learning, lung cancer is not just one disease and it
    does not have just one cause.  I guess, unlike Aids which carried a
    tremendous stigma, we in the lung cancer community are challenged
    because we arrived at the disease for different reasons. That won’t
    change, but we can be united in our efforts to fight for the increased
    federal funding that this disease warrants and deserves. 
     

    • http://www.wtflungcancer.com/ Jennifer Windrum

      Unity is critical, Kathryn. Agree with you completely. Yes, stigma started years ago, so obviously takes a long time to “undo” the damage.  How are you doing? Are you undergoing treatment currently? Thanks for your message. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Nadia-Persaud/100003593021841 Nadia Persaud

    This is an amazing and powerful article! Unbelievable that this is even an issue of politics. 

    • http://www.wtflungcancer.com/ Jennifer Windrum

      Thank you Nadia. Yes, it is a shame just how much politics plays in our healthcare in general…and so much more. Have a great day.