Ladies' Choice
Today, while reading my aforementioned issue of Elle Magazine, I saw this ad for Gardasil, Merck's vaccine against cervical cancer.
Turns out, I have less than two more years to receive the Gardasil vaccine-- it's officially recommended only for women and girls aged 9 to 26. Once you hit 27, it's next to impossible to get insurance to cover the three shots, which aren't cheap: Gardasil has a list price of $360, plus you have to pay the price your doctor charges for administering it. In fact, it's the most expensive vaccine ever to receive the FDA's recommendation.
Since my time is kind of starting to run out, I decided to do some homework today about cervical cancer and what Gardasil does. You guys: I was pretty surprised by what I found.
The first thing I looked for was the actual figures about cervical cancer itself. According to the most recent estimates from the National Cancer Institute, there were 11,070 women diagnosed with cervical cancer in the US in 2008, and 3,870 deaths attributed to the disease. Some perspective: 182,460 US women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2008, with 40,480 deaths. In fact, cases of cervical cancer make up just 1.5% of all cancer diagnoses in American women every year, and 0.7% of cancer diagnoses in the US overall.
I was shocked that the incidence of cervical cancer is so relatively low, especially given the number of ads for Gardasil I've seen over the past two years and the number of friends I know who have gotten the vaccine. That said, I do realize that 11,070 cases is 11,070 cases too many, especially if it can be prevented. It's still a no-brainer to take a vaccine that could completely eliminate that risk, no matter how small, right?
But then I realized that many of us already take proven precautions against cervical cancer with yearly Pap tests. And, it seems if more women did the same, that already-small 11,070 figure could drop dramatically: According to the American Cancer Society, between 60% and 80% of American women with newly diagnosed cervical cancer hadn't had a Pap test in the past 5 years-- and many of them had never had a Pap test.
In light of all this, Gardasil's adoption in its short time on the market seems almost irrational. The CDC reported in October that a whopping 25% of all teenage girls in the US have received the Gardasil vaccine. Virginia now requires by law that girls complete a three-shot vaccination against HPV before they enter the sixth grade, and nearly every other state has had similar bills under discussion since Gardasil's debut.
It seems to me that Gardasil has had a disproportionately large adoption rate for a vaccine that seems poised to benefit such a relatively small potential audience. For me, the jury is still out on whether or not I'm going to take the vaccine-- but after the research I did today I feel more confused than ever.
Seriously-- am I missing something here? What's up with Gardasil?
Turns out, I have less than two more years to receive the Gardasil vaccine-- it's officially recommended only for women and girls aged 9 to 26. Once you hit 27, it's next to impossible to get insurance to cover the three shots, which aren't cheap: Gardasil has a list price of $360, plus you have to pay the price your doctor charges for administering it. In fact, it's the most expensive vaccine ever to receive the FDA's recommendation.
Since my time is kind of starting to run out, I decided to do some homework today about cervical cancer and what Gardasil does. You guys: I was pretty surprised by what I found.
The first thing I looked for was the actual figures about cervical cancer itself. According to the most recent estimates from the National Cancer Institute, there were 11,070 women diagnosed with cervical cancer in the US in 2008, and 3,870 deaths attributed to the disease. Some perspective: 182,460 US women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2008, with 40,480 deaths. In fact, cases of cervical cancer make up just 1.5% of all cancer diagnoses in American women every year, and 0.7% of cancer diagnoses in the US overall.
I was shocked that the incidence of cervical cancer is so relatively low, especially given the number of ads for Gardasil I've seen over the past two years and the number of friends I know who have gotten the vaccine. That said, I do realize that 11,070 cases is 11,070 cases too many, especially if it can be prevented. It's still a no-brainer to take a vaccine that could completely eliminate that risk, no matter how small, right?
But then I realized that many of us already take proven precautions against cervical cancer with yearly Pap tests. And, it seems if more women did the same, that already-small 11,070 figure could drop dramatically: According to the American Cancer Society, between 60% and 80% of American women with newly diagnosed cervical cancer hadn't had a Pap test in the past 5 years-- and many of them had never had a Pap test.
In light of all this, Gardasil's adoption in its short time on the market seems almost irrational. The CDC reported in October that a whopping 25% of all teenage girls in the US have received the Gardasil vaccine. Virginia now requires by law that girls complete a three-shot vaccination against HPV before they enter the sixth grade, and nearly every other state has had similar bills under discussion since Gardasil's debut.
It seems to me that Gardasil has had a disproportionately large adoption rate for a vaccine that seems poised to benefit such a relatively small potential audience. For me, the jury is still out on whether or not I'm going to take the vaccine-- but after the research I did today I feel more confused than ever.
Seriously-- am I missing something here? What's up with Gardasil?
Kate Hudson sounds like fun
I know the whole growing-up-as-Hollywood-royalty-by-being-the-daughter-of-Goldie-Hawn-and-Kurt-Russell thing might add to her apparently awesomely blissful personality, but the latest cover story in Elle Magazine kind of made me like Kate Hudson. Which is saying a lot, because I've always just thought of her as that annoying "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days" girl.
The article's tipping point for me:
"Let me give you an idea about Kate," [Kate Hudson's lifelong friend Jen] Meyer says. "You go spend a day with her, and you'll go into her house and she will be in a bikini, having just been lying out, walking around with the most perfect body you've ever seen in your life. She'll be saying to [her son] Ryder, 'Honey, we're going to go on a bike ride in just a few minutes; Mommy's just making you a banana souffle'-- no cookbooks out-- and, at the same time, go, 'Oh my God, Jen, you have to hear this,' and she'll go over to the piano and play a perfect song she just wrote like it's nothing. You go, 'Okay, that was amazing,' and she runs right back to the kitchen, gets the banana souffle out-- it's the greatest banana souffle you've ever had-- and she throws on her helmet and gets on the bike with Ryder."
Um, Kate Hudson, can we seriously be friends?
Real talk from John McLaughlin
I have to say a highlight of my birthday was the McLaughlin Group's January 2nd episode**. Well, specifically, John McLaughlin's "macro-prediction" for the year ahead:
"2009 will be the year when it will gradually dawn on U.S. policymakers that the cause of the global economic crisis is globalism itself. The premise that, as we shifted jobs to developing countries, new jobs would develop here to replace them is false. It is not possible to shift production jobs and service jobs to low-cost countries without hollowing out the purchasing power of the middle class."
My heartbeat actually sped up as I watched him say this, because I am so excited for this kind of real talk to be getting airtime and coming from such a respected person. I hope he's right that the next 12 months will bring a sea-change in way we perceive the pros and cons of our increasingly "flat" world.
**I'm 25 now, which is safely and unabashedly grown up, so I am going to refrain from making any "Oh, ha-ha, isn't that so nerdy and boring of me" apologies/jokes. Because on the real, John McLaughlin is awesome, and is definitely on all my fantasy birthday/dinner/cocktail party guest lists.
Do it before you discard it
I love Esquire Magazine's "What I've Learned" feature.
Also, I was a total late bloomer in realizing how awesome Clint Eastwood is. I knew that he was a bit abnormally accomplished in the artistic sense as a jazz musician, actor, director, blah blah blah. But I learned in conversation only a couple of weeks ago that he has been super active in local politics for years (like, getting his hands dirty and going to meetings, not just wearing Vote or Die t-shirts) and was for a short time the mayor of Carmel, California. I mean, did you know that?
Seems to me that Clint Eastwood is just a man who has really taken life by the horns and has fully inhabited the space that he's in-- and from now on, anytime he's talking, I'm listening. Some of my favorite bits from his "What I've Learned" appearance:
"Like Sir Edmund Hillary talking about why you do anything: Because it's there. That's why you climb Everest. It's like a little moment in time, and as fast as it comes into your brain, you just throw it out and discard it. Do it before you discard it, you know?"
"The Korean War was only a few years after World War II. We all went. But you couldn't help but think, Shit. What the hell?"
"That's why I [ran for mayor]. 'Cause I thought, I don't need this. The fact that I didn't need it made me think I could do more. It's the people who need it that I'm suspect of."
