Cancer makes far more interesting reporting than the slow boring drone of diabetes.
When I pick up the news paper I'm often reminded of the power the media hold in influencing public reaction.
Specifically, it wasn't long ago that the local news paper was reporting about potentially cancer causing chemicals in some children's soaps and shampoos. It wasn't just one article, but a series of reports, claiming that these chemical laden products posed a significant health hazard.
No doubt this may have caused recalls and products to be removed from store shelves. It's been over 2 weeks now, and there's been no further mention of the sinister products that threaten our children's lives.
When I pick up the news paper I'm often reminded of the power the media hold in influencing public reaction.
Specifically, it wasn't long ago that the local news paper was reporting about potentially cancer causing chemicals in some children's soaps and shampoos. It wasn't just one article, but a series of reports, claiming that these chemical laden products posed a significant health hazard.
No doubt this may have caused recalls and products to be removed from store shelves. It's been over 2 weeks now, and there's been no further mention of the sinister products that threaten our children's lives.
While I don't disregard the importance of reporting the potentially dangerous chemicals present in products, I can't help but feel that that there is a discrepancy in what is reported, what isn't, and the style of reporting. It seems to be a bit of the flavour of the week mentality, where they create a public reaction by bombarding us frequently with a report, and once the story has done it's time, they move on to the next. The cancer causing shampoo is just one example, but I wonder why the same aggressive style of reporting, isn't used to really educate the public.
Interestingly when there are irrefutable studies that show poor nutrition mainly caused by over consumption of sugar - being one of the primary causes of diabetes, and some forms of cancer- there doesn't seem to be the same response in the reporting by the media, or public reaction. People don't stop consuming sugar and demand it be taken off the store shelves.
It's a good bet your chances are significantly higher for acquiring diabetes or cancer from your food choices than it would be from shampoo. So why do we see such a discrepancy in the responses. Why is it that with products, we see recalls and hysteria; while in the nutritional side-that is clearly a real and present problem- do so many people not only ignore the seriousness, but in many times; refute the data.
I think it's because it's a simple feedback loop that's easy to trigger a public response to something so frightening as cancer. It provokes strong negative images in the minds of so many. It creates good reader adhesion, and sells well. On the side of the public, it's relatively easy to get upset and change shampoos. If I hear a story that warns me of harmful chemicals in a product, there're plenty of others to choose from. It's no great sacrifice to switch my Pert plus for Alberto! The media get off the hook with a story that sells and creates reactions, and the public can feel like they're taking a stance on their health in a way that really requires no great sacrifice. And the beat goes on.
Contrary to what many people believe, many forms of cancer are not invaders that prey on us with no provocation. You are actually more in control than you think, in avoiding this condition. The American cancer society, in cancer facts and figures of 2006, stated that deaths from cancers have been decreasing since 1991, and less than 4% of cancer deaths are caused by exposure to environmental pollutants (shampoo and other chemicals). The greatest risk factor for developing cancer is lifestyle. It's smoking, diet, obesity, lack of physical activity, and drinking; that are the causes for about 65% of cancers! Interestingly, many of these factors provoke the onset of diabetes as well.
Interestingly when there are irrefutable studies that show poor nutrition mainly caused by over consumption of sugar - being one of the primary causes of diabetes, and some forms of cancer- there doesn't seem to be the same response in the reporting by the media, or public reaction. People don't stop consuming sugar and demand it be taken off the store shelves.
It's a good bet your chances are significantly higher for acquiring diabetes or cancer from your food choices than it would be from shampoo. So why do we see such a discrepancy in the responses. Why is it that with products, we see recalls and hysteria; while in the nutritional side-that is clearly a real and present problem- do so many people not only ignore the seriousness, but in many times; refute the data.
I think it's because it's a simple feedback loop that's easy to trigger a public response to something so frightening as cancer. It provokes strong negative images in the minds of so many. It creates good reader adhesion, and sells well. On the side of the public, it's relatively easy to get upset and change shampoos. If I hear a story that warns me of harmful chemicals in a product, there're plenty of others to choose from. It's no great sacrifice to switch my Pert plus for Alberto! The media get off the hook with a story that sells and creates reactions, and the public can feel like they're taking a stance on their health in a way that really requires no great sacrifice. And the beat goes on.
Contrary to what many people believe, many forms of cancer are not invaders that prey on us with no provocation. You are actually more in control than you think, in avoiding this condition. The American cancer society, in cancer facts and figures of 2006, stated that deaths from cancers have been decreasing since 1991, and less than 4% of cancer deaths are caused by exposure to environmental pollutants (shampoo and other chemicals). The greatest risk factor for developing cancer is lifestyle. It's smoking, diet, obesity, lack of physical activity, and drinking; that are the causes for about 65% of cancers! Interestingly, many of these factors provoke the onset of diabetes as well.
