Granted, it’s only the fashion and style section of the New York Times, but somebody from the health-medicine-science team at the Times has to give their colleagues a little in-house training on disease-mongering.
For the second time this week – the other being its “Never Too Old for Plastic Surgery” piece, the Times breaks new ground on the medicalization of aging.
“Fighting Cleavage Wrinkles” ??????
The story leads with a woman’s sad saga:
“Soon after she got breast implants in 1999, augmenting her measurements to a 36C (up from a 34B), she started waking up with thick lines on her chest where one breast had fallen against the other as she slept on her side.”
That’s how it began.
Here’s how it ends:
“Anti-aging advances being what they are, she and other women may not have to (wear camisoles under their V-necks to hide these wrinkles).
…
But how big a problem cleavage wrinkles are might also come down to perspective. As one flat-chested woman put it: “Some people would be so happy to have cleavage that they would never think to complain about the wrinkles that accompanied them.”
Too little too late for this story, wrapping up a bad week for stories about women and aging in America.
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
Puleeeeease... this 'game changer' weight loss drug causes more nausea and vomiting than a placebo. Some game, some change. My friend Gary would spank you for using the eighth word medical reporters should never, ever use. @garyschwitzer @thackerpd
https://www.healthnewsreview.org/toolkit/just-journalists-writing-tips-case-studies/7-words-and-more-you-shouldnt-use-in-medical-news/ https://twitter.com/OttawaCitizen/status/1361426796126830597
A scary @statnews Op-Ed warns that govt attempts to rein in Pharma may cut off access to "life-changing" drugs.
It takes @garyschwitzer to let us know: the author spent 10 years as Pfizer's public-policy chief. https://twitter.com/garyschwitzer/status/1360325022578053123
.@TranspariMED criticizes STAT op-ed for not disclosing pharma funding of author’s institute - similar to criticism we’ve made of STAT op-eds in the past. @transparify @ThinkTankWatch @icer_review https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2021/02/transparency-watchdog-criticizes-stats-non-disclosure-on-pro-pharma-op-ed/
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Barbara Duck
August 12, 2011 at 4:53 pmHey I posted a story just about as strange, you can buy a breast pillow that is preventive to avoid this:) Steroid marketing is everywhere today and I take this with a grain of salt and posted it as I do all kinds of other strange healthcare news. The pillow was invented by an RN and said it was the answer to sleeping on your side to avoid wrinkles so we come back to prevention again..well sort of…enjoy:)
http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2010/06/intimia-breast-and-chest-pillow.html
Liz Scherer
August 12, 2011 at 6:48 pmI guess what bothers me most about these stories is the endless emphasis on improving one’s appearance. Whether it’s cleavage wrinkles or saggy breasts and eyes, our society refuses to acknowledge the beauty that aging females bring to the table. Rather we are encouraged to ‘youthify’ our appearances in order to remain relevant and avoid invisibility. Until that acceptance comes, I suspect that we are forever inclined towards improvement.
Exercice Abdo
August 15, 2011 at 12:34 amWhen you think about it, it is really tough to be a woman these days. It starts by “you gotta look like Mrs Hilton” which means stop eating and now ends by “your boobs gotta look like Mrs Anderson even if you are 50+”. It’s sad to see “serious” newspapers collaborate to such non sense propaganda. No wonder they disappear one after one.
Pierre
bev M.D.
August 15, 2011 at 12:27 pmAhh, I am a 34B and sleep so peacefully…..
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like