October 2, 2001

8:01 AM

Yahoo made a subtle change to its site today to raise awareness about a cancer that will be diagnosed in 192,000 women in the U.S. this year.
posted by rcade (19 comments total)

For some reason, I thought that maybe Yahoo was going to put nipples in the middle of their Os. I think this says bad things about the way I think. But the pink background is nice, too.
posted by ColdChef at 8:08 AM on October 2, 2001

On the other hand, there is some good news as well . . .

Melanoma actually kills more people annually, but apparently nobody wants to see a "blotchy skin"-style web interface.
posted by Skot at 8:22 AM on October 2, 2001

Subtle. Like a stomach pump.
Although, it IS better than just sticking a little ribbon pic somewhere obscure. I hate ribbons.
posted by Su at 8:26 AM on October 2, 2001

i think it's the first time i've seen any other dominant color on Yahoo since i first discovered it in '97. good move.
posted by arrowhead at 8:37 AM on October 2, 2001

Melanoma actually kills more people annually, but apparently nobody wants to see a "blotchy skin"-style web interface.



And the less said about the prostate and testicular cancer awareness colours, the better.
posted by holgate at 8:49 AM on October 2, 2001

I found this screenshot of Yahoo's site, circa late 1994 or early 1995.
posted by waxpancake at 9:17 AM on October 2, 2001

Skot: Melanoma actually kills more people annually.


I'm not sure where you are getting your data. For 2001, the American Cancer society predicts:

Lung: 157,400 deaths and 169,500 new cases
Digestive: 131,300 deaths and 235,700 new cases
Breast: 40,600 deaths and 193,700 new cases
Melanoma: 9,800 deaths and 56,400 new cases

More interesting data from this report:
"In the U.S., men have about a 1 in 2 lifetime risk of developing cancer, and for women the risk is about 1 in 3."

Men who smoke have a 20-fold increase in likelihood of developing lung cancer. Women who have first-degree (mother, sister, daughter) family history of breast cancer have about a 2-fold increased risk of developing it themselves.

Does anyone think that the media has covered breast cancer disproportionately compared to other cancers (digestive) with higher incidence. I guess people prefer to discuss breasts rather than stomach the truth in the digestive cancer facts. Groan...
posted by hitsman at 9:29 AM on October 2, 2001

Does anyone think that the media has covered breast cancer disproportionately compared to other cancers (digestive) with higher incidence.

I kinda think that too. In fact, I wonder sometimes why it is that I have heard women complain that "women's health care gets no attention in this country" when there's breast cancer awarness events almost every week, and when I see so many news programs with regular "Women's Health" reports.
posted by dnash at 10:11 AM on October 2, 2001

Men can also get breast cancer.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:14 AM on October 2, 2001

Yes, the media has covered breast cancer disproportionately. As a result, breast cancer research now receives more funding per patient than any other disease. Our efforts to combat the disease are admirable, but they are out of proportion with the number of people who actually get it. This results in research on other conditions, like colon cancer, being disproportionately underfunded.
posted by shinnin at 10:20 AM on October 2, 2001

I'm not sure where you are getting your data.

Directly out of my ass, obviously.

Actually, it was a dumb error on my part (as opposed to my usual "smart errors"). I was misremembering death statistics for commonality of occurence--skin cancers (though not melanomas) are the most common of all cancers, but not the biggest killers. My bad.
posted by Skot at 10:33 AM on October 2, 2001

I died laughing when, after reading Yahoo!'s main page I went into the news section where the side-bar banner proclaimed:

"Pink is not your color. Find your new job at Yahoo! Carreers."
posted by Qubit at 10:53 AM on October 2, 2001

Breast cancer gets disproportionate publicity because it is disproportionately discoverable and treatable with early discovery, and disproportionately kills minority and lower-income women because the messages about self-detection and regular screenings have yet to get through to that community. One in nine women will get it; far more will die from it than need or ought to. We can't do much to change the first half of that statement, but it's frightening to see backlash against the efforts to change the second half.
posted by Dreama at 12:10 PM on October 2, 2001

Making their site pink only raises awareness that pink is one ASS UGLY color.
posted by kingmissile at 1:34 PM on October 2, 2001

More than 1,000 women a day die from cardiovascualr disease disease which is also preventable. Unfortunately our medical system concentrates on treatment at the expense of prevention for a variety of reasons. Is there anyone still unaware of breast cancer?
posted by euphorb at 1:54 PM on October 2, 2001

euphorb -- there are plenty of women who think that they are not at risk, due to lack of information or worse, misinformation. There are horrifying numbers of women who are still not taking five minutes to perform regular self-examinations. The percentage of women over 40 who have mammograms according to the recommended protocol is absolutely abysmal, particularly, as I mentioned before, in minority and low-income populations. It isn't a matter of being aware of the existence of the disease, it is a matter of making sure that every woman is educated on what she can do to make sure that she isn't one of the 40k tragedies each year.

And skallas, when we have a blood test that can diagnose breast cancer in its earliest stages, before it is detectable through even sonography, or when the most successful method of assuring survival after prostate cancer is a maiming surgical procedure, then you can whine.
posted by Dreama at 2:49 PM on October 2, 2001

Skot: "skin cancers (though not melanomas) are the most common of all cancers, but not the biggest killers."

Not true. Skin cancers (including melanoma and all others) generate 56K new cases a year. They are not nearly as common as digestive cancers (236K new cases/yr) including colon cancer (98K new cases/yr); lung cancer (170K new cases/yr).

All this data is in the American Cancer Society's annual report.
posted by hitsman at 9:55 PM on October 2, 2001

All right, I'm not going to get boned on this twice!

Actually, hitsman, I'm right, though it's easy enough to miss. Read page 6 (.pdf page #) of your own report.

"About 1,268,000 new cancer cases are expected to be diagnosed in 2001 . . . These estimates do not include carcinoma in situ (noninvasive cancer) of any site except urinary bladder, and do not include basal and squamous cell skin cancers. More than 1 million cases of basal and squamous cell skin cancers are expected to be diagnosed this year."
posted by Skot at 8:17 AM on October 3, 2001

Skot: Actually, hitsman, I'm right...

Thanks, Skot, for diligently digging into this and pulling out the facts. The good news is that basal and squamous cell skin cancers are ~95% curable and rarely life-threatening. I've learned a good bit about cancers (other than breast) in this thread, so awareness has improved! Go MeFi and Y!
posted by hitsman at 8:51 AM on October 3, 2001