Apparently my Pink Ribbon Rants are not working....

If KFC can do it, why not a cigarette company?

Back in October of 2008 I posted my first Pink Ribbon Rant.  I was so upset that in July 2009 I posted another one.  Then when Pepsi came out with its 'Refresh' campaign and my beloved Ellen DeGeneres let Brooke Shields come on and promote it, I had to post again.

Apparently the marketing folks at KFC were not listening.

I see all the controversy (not to mention money...) being raised by KFC's Bucket for the Cure campaign and wonder: is it because people are getting fed up with inappropriate products bearing the pink ribbon or did KFC just go a little too far?  Either way I should be stunned that someone, anyone, thought this would be a good idea.  But I'm not surprised at all.  I guess KFC figures that if products that contain parabens which doctors know for sure show up in breast cancer tumors can bear a pink ribbon then why shouldn't a product that contains only saturated fats, MSG, astronomical levels of sodium, and preservatives?  I think that the American public (and by public I really mean WOMAN) has proven that she'll support just about any product in pink.  I mean after all the money goes to research for the cure, right?  And it's way more important that we find a cure than actually prevent the disease in the first place, right?  Right????

I said it 2 years ago and I'm saying it now: the Pink Ribbon campaign is the biggest fraud perpetrated upon women since those Virginia Slims cigarette ads that featured women, each more gorgeous and glamorous than the last, telling us "You've come a long way, baby!" 

The ad is in pink...why is that?

So I ask this: why not Virginia Slims with a pink ribbon?  I mean smoking may increase your risk of breast cancer but for the most part it is associated with lung cancer, not breast cancer, so why not?  I mean they are already dressing the model and printing the ad in pink and if you think that's a coincidence, think again my friends, think again.  I think it's because many women will not really look for the Pink Ribbon, they'll simply buy the product because it looks like it might have a pink ribbon.  And if that isn't effective sheep herding marketing, then I don't know what is.

Take a long look at the image below.  Sure, it's a joke...but then isn't what KFC is doing a joke too?

Smoking isn't worse for you than KFC, just quicker

Pepsi Refresh? Shame on you!

You may remember my Pink Ribbon Rant where I expressed my frustration with products that contain carcinogens on the inside yet bear a pink ribbon on the outside packaging.  Pepsi's new Refresh campaign is inspiring the same frustration.  At its core, Pepsi's idea to give money to support ideas that will "Refresh" the planet, ideas such as recycling T-shirts into reusable bags, sending Girl Scout cookies to overseas troops, improving living conditions for children living in poverty -- are all good ideas.  I don't have any problem with the ideas put forth to fulfill the campaign. 

My problem is with the campaign.

Pepsi, how dare you spend money on this campaign while saving money by using inferior, unhealthy,and carcinogenic sweeteners such as high fructose corn syrup as the main ingredient in your product?  You want to Refresh the Planet?  Start with your own product.  You want to make a sweetened cola?  Fantastic, make it with organic cane sugar.  Bottle it in recyclable glass bottles, not cans made with aluminum that 1. leach toxic aluminum into our soil when they are not recycled, and 2.  are made from bauxite which is not mined responsibly and is devastating lives in India and the rainforests in Brazil.

How does contributing to obesity, heavy metal poisoning, and environmental destruction Refresh our world?  But the slogan is catchy, it gets celebrities behind it, people feel good buying Pepsi and sales go up.  So it's all good, right?

No.  Pepsi, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Shouldn't we "Race To Prevent?"

The SPAM filter in my email is working overtime: must be getting close to registration time for the Race for the Cure, Light the Night, MS Walk-A-Thon, etc., etc.

I have done them all. I believed in them. Walking, wearing the T-shirt, organizing the Brownie troops to get out and support the event I felt virtuous, I really did. What changed?

I know what changed: I began to notice that everyone was focusing on a cure, new drug therapies, new surgical techniques, and improved hospital stays. Why were we accepting that you had to get the disease at all? Why is it okay to go through the pain and terror of the diagnosis as long as there is reasonable hope the "cure" will work? I can define prevention with no problem, but how is "cure" being defined? Is radical, invasive surgery a "cure"? Is taking toxic medications that cause your hair to fall out and your stomach to heave a "cure"? I know, I know, it's my Pink Ribbon Rant all over again.

I am stepping up onto my soap box now, so hold on to your hats:

I have been there. I have been told "you have a tumor. It appears inoperable. The MRI dye is lighting up showing what could be cancer but we won't know for sure until we run more tests. This is very serious." I know the sheer terror that accompanies the diagnosis. I know the agony of gauging how soon the tumor will kill you versus how dangerous the surgical procedure. I can attest firsthand to the misery of lying in an intensive care unit while mysterious and scary-sounding drugs are fed intraveneously into your body. The fear of post-surgical infection, fever, or swelling. I had to sign a paper that said that I understood that the surgery I was about to have carried a high risk of stroke, coma, or death, and that I still gave the hospital permission to proceed. I have kissed my only child goodnight knowing that it may be the last time I ever see her, yet not knowing any other option. I have climbed up onto an operating table while a team of nurses prepared the bone saw and head clamp that would be needed to access my brain. I have been there and I wouldn't wish those experiences on anyone else -- ever. Yet many would clap me on the back and say "Yes, but you're cured!" Aside from the $28,000 my insurance company paid for the surgery, what was the cost?

So now I find myself angry. I am angry that hundreds of thousands of dollars are raised by extremely hard-working, well-meaning, altruistic people so that a cure may be found for xxxx (insert your disease of choice here) while companies who know better put forth no money for prevention. I am angry that companies can sponsor various walk-a-thons and fundraisers while knowingly putting carcinogens in their products. I am angry that our society does not force these companies to help us keep our bodies and planet healthy. I am angry that pesticides, food additives and preservatives, air pollutants, insecticides, and dangerous drugs are accepted as part of life in the United States yet billions of dollars is spent trying to "cure" the diseases these things cause.

I cannot be complacent. It is not okay for only the rich to have access to organic foods, clothing, and bedding. It is not okay for our food to be irradiated so that later our tumors can be radiated. It is not okay for our children to be given mercury in their vaccines and filled in their teeth. It is not okay for our foods to be laden with antibiotics and hormones while our children suffer from antibiotic-resistant strep, our boys are sterile, and our girls menstruate at age 7.

Do not fool yourselves folks, you are involved in a race: as long as the assumption is that we must be reactive and not proactive we are all racing toward one disease or another. Am I being gloomy? A doom-sayer? Melodramatic? I probably am. I am passionate about this subject and passion usually invites hyperbole.

Then again, I'm the one who saw the bone saw...

My Pink Ribbon Rant

October is breast cancer awareness month. Hordes of women will walk or run for Susan G. Komen. Millions of dollars will be spent on products bearing a pink ribbon. A climate of hope will be cultivated as money is raised to fight breast cancer. Or will it...?

In my opinion, breast cancer research is the biggest fraud perpetrated on the American woman in this century.

Putting a little pink ribbon on a product is a bit marketing genius. Someone figured out that women will buy, buy, buy...thinking they are doing something good for breast cancer research. I am not here to dispute how the funds are used. I have no idea if the money goes to breast cancer research or not, it really makes no difference to me because all of the energies are being spent on curing, not preventing. Some of the very products that bear the pink ribbon are carcinogenic. This has to stop. The very products that can lead to breast cancer are being consumed by women who buy them to help fight breast cancer. Anyone else think this is crazy???

Most of the "pink ribbon" clothing being sold is not made of organic cotton. Some of it is even dry clean only. Dry cleaners use formaldehyde to clean the clothes. Formaldehyde is a carcinogen. Another chemical, perchloroethylene, or PERC, is used by three out of four dry cleaners nationwide (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/23/earlyshow/contributors/tracysmith/main2507444.shtml) PERC is stated by the EPA to be a possible to probable cause of cancer. Cotton growers use numerous pesticides to ensure the viability of the cotton crop. Pesticides are carcinogens. In fact five of the top nine pesticides used on cotton in the U.S. (cyanide, dicofol, naled, propargite, and trifluralin) are KNOWN cancer-causing chemicals. All nine are classified by the U.S. EPA as Category I and II— the most dangerous chemicals. (http://www.ecochoices.com/1/cotton_statistics.html)

Cosmetic companies have long been guilty of hidden carcinogens in their products. Many foundations and pressed powders contain aluminum and talc (which contains an ingredient similar to asbestos and is linked to ovarian cancer), numerous dyes and preservatives that all end up in your bloodstream, via the skin, are present as well. Chemicals such as diaminoanisole and FD&C Red 33 are found in hair dyes, and scientists have directly classified both of these as carcinogens. This evidence is also supported by separate studies that link hair dyes to such rare cancers as: non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's disease and multiple myeloma. Another study claims that at least 20% of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma found in women is caused by use of hair dyes. Chemicals found in hair sprays, lipsticks, and perfumes are all linked to cancer. (For a complete listing, click on http://www.breastcancerfund.org/site/pp.asp?c=kwKXLdPaE&b=3005277).

Parabens and aluminum-based products (both compounds that are found in antiperspirants) raise estrogen levels. Elevated estrogen levels may lead to breast cancer. (http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/AP-Deo)

And the worst part is that these companies know all this information. Sure, the can play dumb like the tobacco companies "oh, does smoking cause lung cancer? We didn't know..." but women are gambling their health, not to mention their money, on these products. The FDA does not regulate hair sprays, perfumes, cosmetics, shampoos, conditioners, or hair dyes. These products do not have to undergo any rigorous testing or comply to any safety standards. Basically, anything can be in your body lotion that you are rubbing into your largest organ, your skin, and sending right into your bloodstream. Why do you think nicotine and birth control patches are so effective?

And how about the food? When I walked into the grocery store and saw a huge display of M&Ms bearing the pink ribbon packaging, I was furious. Ignoring the fact that obesity puts a woman at a much higher risk for breast cancer (http://www.webmd.com/breast-cancer/news/20061127/breast-cancer-risk-age-and-obesity), what about the ingredients in the M&Ms themselves? M&Ms are high in sugar. Sugar feeds cancer. (http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/nutrition/sugar.htm), (http://www.healingcancernaturally.com/sugar-and-cancer.html) M&Ms also contain artificial colors, are high in fat, and have little to no nutritional value. (http://caloriecount.about.com/calories-mm-mars-candies-mms-plain-i19141).

Yet these candies bear a pink ribbon. Even if 100% of the sales were given to breast cancer research, shouldn't these products have some responsibility for not promoting cancer?

Right now companies are content with being reactive, providing most of their support to research cures, not support for prevention. While this is beneficial to the pharmaceutical companies that sell these treatments and cures, this is not beneficial to humankind. This is not an approach that we can support. We must demand that companies remove the carcinogens from their products. We must demand that companies support products that are cancer preventatives. Why isn't there a pink ribbon on broccoli or other cruciferous vegetables that are so good for our bodies? Where's the pink ribbon on apples? How about a pink ribbon advertising for walking and bike trails?

A diagnosis of cancer is terrifying. Let's envision and support a world where that diagnosis is never made instead of putting all our energies into trying to cure a disease.