scigirl

Heh, I know exactly the feeling - just defended my thesis a couple months ago (in immunology). What are you studying?

scigirl

P.S. Sorry if I was a bit antagonistic to your post - I'm going to med school and your criticism of all mainstream doctors as anti-women just struck a nerve for some reason.

Hey, you will be happy to know that in many medical schools, the average ratio of female to male is either 1, or higher than one. So I have high hopes that dedicated women (and men) are going to change the wrongs in medicine (while keeping all the good parts of modern medicine around - which IMHO are plenty!!)

buddhagrrl

Yes, but atherosclerosis is not something that is inherently part of a human's biology, like menstruation. It's apples and oranges.

Mad Kally

I thought we were comparing PMS and atherosclerosis?

buddhagrrl

I'm actually studying contemporary women's writing, particularly as it applies to marriage, motherhood, and sex. Which means that I'm doing a lot of background research in sociological and anthropological texts.

No worries. I actually zoomed right past it before making my last round of comments. I see what you're saying, and I apologize if anyone thought I was generalizing. However, I never said that "all mainstream doctors are anti-women." My actual comments were: "I'm loathe to trust what mainstream doctors suggest to treat ailments usually cooked up to sell some type of drug or another."

And I was thinking of JoAnne Manson, an Md/PhD from Harvard Medical School who testified in front of the FDA, saying that it should approve fenfluramine because it would aid in the fight against obesity, ostensibly saving lives. That drug was eventually pulled from the market because it was found to cause heart valve damage. The New York Times later reported that Manson was a paid consultant to the company that made Redux, an obesity drug whose active ingredient was fenfluramine.

I'm also thinking of Serafem, the PMDD-drug that has the same active ingredients as Prozac (fluoxetine hydrochloride).

It is my perception that certain members of the medical industry are in cahoots with the diet industry, etc., to prey upon women's fears and insecurities.

And I'm not alone, haven't been for a long time:

"I think it is in the increased attention paid to women, and especially in their new function as lucrative patients, that we find explanation for much of the ill-health among women, freshly discovered today." -- Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi (1895), quoted in Ehrenrich and English, p. 115 (emphasis mine)

And it's really no secret that there is a problem with <a href="http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/reporter/may99/race.htm" target="_blank">race and gender bias in medicine</a>.

That's not to say that I mistrust all doctors (but I do see female doctors exclusively, my own personal gender bias in medicine). And it's good to hear that

I look forward to seeing the good work that your generation of doctors will produce.

Cheers~
bg

Mad Kally

So because of some quack doctors and some mistakes all mainstream medical science is suspect? Especially men? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Arrowman

scigirl: Sellout! Traitor! Splitter!

Arrowman

buddhagrl: As others have said - not to labour the point or be antagonistic; just to pursue the topic....

- "syndrome" is not a synonym for "malady".

- What's wrong with describing PMS as an "abnormality"? (and by implication, something which your average woman, not to mention their partner would rather they did not experience?) It is "abnormal" unless you wish to claim that it (PMS-related mood swings etc) is the way one behaves all the time, ie "normally". "Abnormal" may be wrongly used in a negative or pejorative sense some of the time, but that doesn't change its literal meaning.

Now, certainly the history of society and therefore the history of medicine has had a patriarchal flavour to it, and in some cases this has done no favours to women. And some "invalid" things have been done in medicine as a result. But that doesn't mean that some things aren't still valid - for example:
1. PMS happens.
2. It happens in some women more than others.
3. Different women have different capacities for "coping".
4. When the "severity" line on the graph crosses the "coping" line, the woman may wish to seek medical assistance.
5. Fortunately, medical assistance is available and the "right" assistance can be found by a combination of knowledgeable and sensitive doctor, and knowledgeable and self-assured patient.

Your stereotypical patriarchal male doctor may on occasion overly encourage drug treatment and/or treat PMS as more of a "curse" than it really is, but that doesn't change the basic validity of the above.

Just like the current overenthusiastic prescription of drugs like Ritalin for normal, active children doesn't change the fact that some children (and their parents) legitimately need help.

Dr Rick

Mad Kally

Rick,
Tee hee

Kally

seebs

One of my friends basically had her life wrecked by incompetent doctors; they kept saying "oh, yeah, cramps are normal" for years and years, then realized that they needed to do an emergency hysterectomy, because she'd actually been complaining of something *WAY* worse than ordinary cramps, and they'd been blowing it off.

She was griping about the "lack of concern" for women's issues, originally, but I managed to fast-talk her into believing that, in fact, endometriosis is rare enough that, in the grand scheme of things, there are probably much more important avenues of medical research, and if she really wants to complain about something getting disproportionate coverage, she should look at the $many-many spent every year on trying to reduce the number of masectomies required to halt the spread of breast cancer.

I mean, I like boobs as much as the next guy, but there's a point at which people might do well to focus the research a bit more on things that will kill you, and a bit less on keeping everyone's boobies intact.

(FWIW, yes, I have a relative who's had breast cancer, and she went for the masectomy, because, well, *DUH*, better survival rate.)