babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » Gender Bias - Multiple Sclerosis

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Gender Bias - Multiple Sclerosis
Sans Tache
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13117

posted 31 October 2006 01:33 PM      Profile for Sans Tache        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Puzzled Canadian researchers find women more at risk

I know a few women that were diagnosed with MS. I didn't know it affected men and women this disproportionately. This is very strange.

quote:
It has long been thought that multiple sclerosis isn't an equal-opportunity disease when it comes to afflicting women and men.

In recent decades, far more women have been getting the ailment, with most experts believing that multiple sclerosis in Canada afflicts about twice as many females as males.

But a team of researchers combing over Canadian data on those with multiple sclerosis has made a startling discovery: Women with the disease have inexplicably started to outnumber men by a ratio of more than 3 to 1.



From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 31 October 2006 02:22 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That's amazing. People should read the linked story.

If it's environmental, I wonder why the environmental factor doesn't also affect men?


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alberta Guy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13419

posted 31 October 2006 03:24 PM      Profile for Alberta Guy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Epidemiology is always a puzzle. This one is further complicated by the long timeline.

Where do you start? Here are just a few thoughts even off the top of my head

- Increase in herbal medications/vitamin supplements, maybe there are a few unhealthy ones out there. Male to female usage rates?

- Chemical exposure in the workplace? Women are increasing as a percentage of the workforce and are on industrial plants in increasing numbers.

- Is it in equel numbers everywhere? Is there an environmental or emmissions componant?

I just attended a short seminar on Forensic Occupational Hygiene and Toxicology. It was facinating stuff really.

I don't envy the researchers this task, it's gonna be a bearcat!


From: Fort McMurray | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
morningstar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12378

posted 31 October 2006 05:34 PM      Profile for morningstar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Women are far more vulnerable to all autoimmune diseases. Female hormones and pregnancy have long been known to affect immune function.

Scientific testing of virtually all chemicals is conducted with the biological profile of healthy young men in mind.

When I first began researching the effects of pesticides on humans, the only research that had been done was with healthy 25yr old [on average], males! I was utterly horrified because I knew that women, children and the aged have much different metabolisms--not to mention body mass, organ function, immune response etc.

Research with consideration to female vulnerabilities is not a priority, in my opinion.
We still don't have safe foolproof birth control and look at the huge fuss that had to be made to force more research for a breast cancer epidemic.

I believe that this is just one other area of our society, where viewing everything through a male lens blinds us to the real needs of over half of the population.


From: stratford, on | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Alberta Guy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13419

posted 31 October 2006 06:07 PM      Profile for Alberta Guy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Chemical Threshold Limit Values/Occupational Exposure Limits were designed with data from male test subjects to be sure. They values are set based on the effect the chemical would have on a health worker. This does not mean the values are safe for everyone, there are illness, infirmaties, sensitivities and individual genetics that come into play.

Most of these limits were put together decades ago when women were pretty much non present in the workforce. I don't think women were excluded do to any overt policy of gender exclusion, it was just the reality of the workforce at the time. When setting exposures for new substances or updating old OEL's, women will definately have to be kept in mind.

There is some progress, we do have MSDS data on Terrogenic/Mutogenic effects of chemicals, which is definately a womens issue. I did work one plant where there was chemical that affected male reproduction as well, which is a rarity.


From: Fort McMurray | Registered: Oct 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sans Tache
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13117

posted 31 October 2006 07:54 PM      Profile for Sans Tache        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I subscribe to this theory; virus and bacteria cause much more chronic disease that we know. These clever little devils, whose only ambition is to multiply and survive. Virus don't even do a great job at procreating, thus the reason some become so deadly. There seems to be a little bit about MS and research studies that seem to have found what cause it but the mainstream medical community is not responsive to the data.

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS - Dr. Gabe Mirkin

quote:
Several researchers have presented evidence that chlamydia pneumoniae may be the cause (1,2). It has been detected in the cerebrospinal fluid of multiple sclerosis patients, but not in that of patients with other neurological diseases. There is also a report of a patient with spinal chlamydia infection and rapidly progressive multiple sclerosis that was cured by minocycline, a very safe antibiotic. Because nerve damage caused by multiple sclerosis can be permanent and minocycline is so safe, doctors should offer this treatment to multiple sclerosis patients, provided that they tell them that this treatment must be considered experimental, because chlamydia has not been proved to cause multiple sclerosis and minocycline has not been tested to see if it can cure that disease.
Researchers at the National Institute of Health reported that multiple sclerosis may be caused by human herpes simplex virus six, and researchers at the University of Wisconsin and Rockefeller University in New York reported the same results. However, no studies have been done to treat multiple sclerosis with drugs that kill human herpes virus-6, Gancyclovir or fornascat, probably because many researchers are afraid of its toxic side effects.
1) Presence of Chlamydia pneumoniae DNA in the cerebral spinal fluid is a common phenomenon in a variety of neurological diseases and not restricted to multiple sclerosis. Annals of Neurology, 2001, Vol 49, Iss 5, pp 585-589. J Gieffers, D Pohl, J Treib, R Dittmann, C Stephan, K Klotz, F Hanefeld, W Solbach, A Haass, M Maass. Address: Gieffers J, Med Univ Lubeck, Inst Med Microbiol & Hyg, Ratzeburger Allee 160, D-23538 Lubeck, GERMANY.
2) An infectious basis for multiple sclerosis - Perspectives on the role of Chlamydia pneumoniae and other agents. H Moses, S Sriram. Biodrugs, 2001, Vol 15, Iss 3, pp 199-206.Address: Sriram S, Vanderbilt Stallworth Rehabil Hosp, Multiple Sclerosis Res Lab & Clin, 2201 Capers Ave, Room 1222, Nashville,TN 37212 USA

Dr. Gabe Mirkin is a little controversial but he did bring North America and Western Europe the simple cure for most stomach ulcers.

[ 31 October 2006: Message edited by: Sans Tache ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076

posted 31 October 2006 11:45 PM      Profile for Steppenwolf Allende     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
According to the piece I saw on CTV National the other night, MS was once considered to strike men and women in relatively equal numbers. Researchers quoted said that began to change, for some reason, about 60 years ago, as diagnosis in women began to rise compared to that in men.

It's been rising ever since to the point where now three women are diagnosed with MS compared to every man diagnosed.

No one is sure why, but there is a suspicion that it has to do with a deficiency of Vitamin D in women.

Of course, that still doesn't explain how that deficiency take place or why it's only mattered in the past 60 years.


From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
morningstar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12378

posted 01 November 2006 06:59 AM      Profile for morningstar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
the neglect of the research community to consider women in 'human' studies is a typical example of society viewed through a male lens, as if men actually represent all of humanity.
It hasn't helped that, until very recently, most researchers, research funders, academic bodies, govt, etc were totally run by men[with the occasional honourary maleworld-oriented woman thrown in for good measure to add indignity to injustice.]

Male malice? probably not---there didn't need to be malice---women and their children simply didn't come up on the radar!

The testing of chemicals in the environment [example; pesticides] had little to do with only workplace safety---they were looking at public exposure,----- except that the only public that was deemed important enough to worry about was the male public.

It's no bloody wonder that as far as all autoimmune environmental illness goes, women are the bulk of victims of male corporatist thinking.

I've been there, it's outrageous that it still continues to happen.Even medical attitudes and treatment is lax because it is mostly women affected.


From: stratford, on | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sans Tache
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13117

posted 01 November 2006 07:17 AM      Profile for Sans Tache        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I ran across this website last night and thought I would post it as well.

Welcome to the DIRECT-MS Website

This website is a great jump-site as it contains a lot of information. There is a lot of concentration on vitamin D.

Morningstar, do you have any information regarding pharmaceutical testing demographics? I often hear radio advertisements asking for (guinea pig) volunteers. What percentages of the volunteers are male vs. female? I have heard that many treatments for many conditions and illnesses do not work effectively or as effectively on women as they do on men and some can be downright toxic.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
morningstar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12378

posted 02 November 2006 07:54 PM      Profile for morningstar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm sorry that I can't hook you up w recent research as I'm no longer doing this work. Fed epidemiologists are usually quite forthcoming with this type of info. My main source quit in disgust a few years back.
An amazing amount of research, at a glance, still often makes no mention of women specifically in the human studies.

I also still see chemical companies referring back to old studies that I know damn well never even thought about women.


From: stratford, on | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sineed
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11260

posted 03 November 2006 03:18 AM      Profile for Sineed     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
the neglect of the research community to consider women in 'human' studies is a typical example of society viewed through a male lens, as if men actually represent all of humanity.

Actually, it's fear of liability.
Women were traditionally excluded from pharmaceutical studies because of the potential for ruinous lawsuits should an experimental drug be inadvertently given to pregnant study subjects. Fortunately, things are changing because everybody's now realizing that you can't just extrapolate studies done on adult men to women and children.

From: # 668 - neighbour of the beast | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
morningstar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12378

posted 03 November 2006 09:51 AM      Profile for morningstar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This may have been true for some pharmacological studies, but in pesticide studies , women just never came up on the radar.
From: stratford, on | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
bigcitygal
Volunteer Moderator
Babbler # 8938

posted 03 November 2006 10:08 AM      Profile for bigcitygal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Alberta Guy posted: decades ago when women were pretty much non present in the workforce.

This is completely untrue, and to not contribute to thread drift, how about we take this to the feminist forum?


From: It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent - Q | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca