Featured Sponsor
| Store | Link | Sample Product |
|---|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
 |
http://www.ted.com Surprising, but true: More women now die of heart disease than men, yet cardiovascular research has long …
source
We’re happy to share our sponsored content because that’s how we monetize our site!
| Article | Link |
|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
| Sponsored Content | View |
| ASUS Vivobook Review | View |
| Ted Lasso’s MacBook Guide | View |
| Alpilean Energy Boost | View |
| Japanese Weight Loss | View |
| MacBook Air i3 vs i5 | View |
| Liberty Shield | View |
Oh fuss… You douchebags. Just listen and accept it. You don't know better.
I disagree with getting government to sponsor research. Why is ted talk so political just tell people the facts and let them decide.
I guess this is the intersection of feminism and ….. cardiology?!?
that's because this talk wasn't about that.
ok well what does the heading read then?
The healthcare system and supporting charities are more concerned with women's health than men's health. Just look at the dichotomy between the support and resources available to women for breast cancer and men with prostate cancer. The spending both public and private far out weighs the resources pumped into prostate cancer research and treatment. Ask yourself if you've ever been told by to do regular self examinations or whens the last time you went on a walk for prostate cancer.
I think some people are just upset at the clear lack of resources being pumped into men's health issues and treatments.
Why is this video so underrated?
wow.. just read few comments and I have to say, guys you grossed me out. Grow up and improve your comprehending skills!
"an atrocious diet" is the cause of most cardiac arrests in MEN AND WOMEN, but WOMEN are more likely to be missed by the diagnosis because for years the diagnosis was tailored for men. I don't think watched the video in full.
Yeah I get that, she was talking about how the fat deposits form differently on the arteries for women.
But that still doesn't address that these fat deposits and diet aren't natural. They are self inflicted.
It's like saying more drunk women get hit by trains than drunk men. You can explain the reason behind this e.g. brainchemistry alterations… but still does nothing for prevention of risks.
What she said is right but dampens the arguement not addressing a key aspect of the topic.
Read EATING OURSELVES CRAZY to arm yourself against obesity and obesity-related illnesses. Dieting only promotes intense cravings and bingeing. Find it on Amazon.com
We both suffer from it
She seems to misunderstand how to read a simple graph at 01:40
she says "2, 3, 4 times more women dieing of heart disease than men"…according to the graph she is showing (at 01:40) in 1997 (the biggest gap) there were around 500 000 deaths in women and 450 000 in men so the gap is by no means as big as she suggests.
yeah, i had a heart attack when i was 13. and i gotta say, it sucked.
I don't understand the negativity directed at this video.
@VoiceOfAleppo, you misinterpreted what she said. The graph showed that the treatments developed for men lead to a 10% drop in cases of the disease, while not making a difference for women. The problem is that for a long time, the practice was to only study the effects of treatments on men and assume it would work the same on women, ignoring the possibility that women's bodies may behave physiologically different. This was a case of a sexist practice that led to treatments not being as effe
The part you mentioned was not read from the graph. She was relaying a report that stated that women who have a heart attack are 2-4 times mor likely to die from it. This is a different measurement from a different source.
the point is that most PHDs in medicine r still men, most researchers r still men. you perspective is there, it has built the system. Don't worry there is lots of researchers invested in male issues. that's why there r these women centric talks, for the first time in history we have enough women PHDs to shift the perspective a bit. Either way like the stem cell example, both sides ALWAYs profit. either you get a health benefit, or your wife, daughter, sister is around to love you longer.
pointing out a flaw in the system doesn't make you sexist, or feminist (though I'm sure she is a feminist). it just shows that something isn't working for part of your population-so if you love ur nanna/sis/wife/daughter u might want to consider supporting research that targets their needs. Why r guys flippin out cuz of that? You're stereotyped as being the logical rational sex.only a few of you on here are upholding that though. Calm down it's not about who wears the pants it's about <3disease
whether they are self inflicted or not- skinny pple have heart attacks 2.as a society we have 2 face a HUGE population coming up 4 retirement. we need to be able to effectively treat these people bc they will be old, but still have the potential for 2 more decades of life. btw, as 4 ur example is kinda faulty. i think the point is that there is something in place to keep the drunk men off the tracks, so we should now have something there 4 the women too. self inflicted or not it's only fair.
But the important thing to notice here is that she is talking specifically about the formation of fat in the heart and how it affects men and women differently. What we need to understand is that these deposits can only come from an artificial diet.
Before the 1950's, heart attacks were rare due to reasonably healthy diets.
The solution is simple. People have to eat healthily, and the fat deposits will not be a factor in heart attacks. Prevent the causes, not encourage them, is key.
But I'll agree investment should be equal among genders. What I'm doubting is the sensibility of the treatment. Why spend money developing ways of treating drunk people that walk on to train tracks when the issue is the alcohol in the first place? 🙂
I do not disagree, but I also do not feel that you should approach the issue by ignoring the other side. I would have no problem with seeing a TedXWomen talk on here, if there was also a TedXMen. I completely agree that women have been over looked for years, but you don't change that by ignoring men and just focusing on women, you change it by making it how it should be.
where? I see none in the Ted list. Name them and I will happily watch them. I see a lot of male speakers, yes, but none with a male centric talk.
What is "yenti" syndrone folks?
They should eat less ice-cream.
Men aren't egoists, hence what you want is impossible 🙂
There you have it. You statement respresents the actual problem. Yet it does not define the problem.
I have watched most of the Ted talks in the past 3 yrs on the Ted channel, and have scrolled trough most of them. I do not see a single talk that is men centric. I am not talking about the sex of the speaker, but the sex of the talk. I see a TedxWomen, but no TedxMen. Oddly enough I am fine with that, as long as you stick these gender specific talks to the appropriate TedxForum.
That all being said, I have no control over Ted, so I really am only bitching here…
saying you'd like to see a "man" centric talk is like saying you'd like to see a "white" centric talk. up until now most of the talks have been about men. the reason the talks are about women is because, in case you werent listening, the medicine and the education are geared toward men. designed for men. work better on men.
Some small minded men just hate any scientific attention/research focused/ directed at women…
And it is mainly women that are campaigning and donating their hard earned cash. Not sure why men cannot do the same for prostate cancer awareness. The cures are there, and funding is well focused on it, it's just that men find it hard talking about their private parts. Of course it would be even harder if the majority of doctors were women…
I understand and sympathise that there are many areas in this world where women are oppressed and there are fewer opportunities open to them professionally but the last time I checked they are still outliving men
I don't understand why this video has so many dislikes…
Realized a pattern: TED talks geared toward women's issues and initiatives get a lot of dislikes (e.g. women entrepreneurship one)
Dislike bar and comments tell me that there's a lot of misogynists in here, shame.
My mom passed away due to heart complications. She was very healthy and took great care of herself. She passed away last year, and I am only 15. My grandmother (other side of the family) passed away from cardiovascular disease, too. If you disliked this video, shame on you.
Welcome to (insert pretty much any popular web forum here.)
Youtube just needs to be the villain in the next "Män som hatar kvinnor" movie.
Hey don't forget to dislike this too. Other reasons women outlive men; Men commit homicide more than women, a lot more and when they do they kill other men far more than they kill women. In Russia women outlive men by many more years than women outlive men in UK or USA, this is due to the unhealthy risk taking lifestyle of men. I could probably write a list but basically, If it's not due to biological reasons then it is simply your own fault. Thumbs down.
This is very informative. Thanks!
I don't get why so much hate is happening on this video. Would you respect her better if she was a man talking about this? Is it the stem cell part, about how women have better stem cells? I don't think this is about trying to be better than men, it makes logical sense that our stems cells work better because we are born made to create and raise children, so we need to heal ourselves better because more is on the line. She even said it has been shown with animals as well.
In any case, all the points she has talked about is important, we really need to learn to detect and treat women's heart disease. Sometimes we have to face the facts that we are very different in some area's, and the medical part of the world needs to look more into this for every type of illness, to benefit men and women.
I watched this all the way through, expecting it to include specific information on how women can self-check for heart problems – in the same way we all self-check for cancer and symptoms of other diseases. Nothing. Extremely disappointed!
The data she is referencing does show that in 2013 around 0.4 percent more women died from CVD than men, however the prevalence was higher for men by about 2.2 percent (this is because women, outnumber men in general but especially in 64+ age groups) so much like every country in the world, men are still more likely to die from CVD than women are.There are 6 million more women than men in the U.S.A.
Heart disease and stroke statistics–2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association.(page 288-289)
The CDC also puts total deaths of men higher for 2013 than women so there is conflicting data.See here at page 55
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf
Tis wack
I recently had the opportunity to hear Dr. Noel Bairey Merz speak to our school. It is disappointing to see how relevant this video is to women’s healthcare today. One part of her presentation that stood out to me was a similar chart illustrating more women being affected by heart diseases than men (and how their trending down). Although she gave this Ted talk 10 years ago, we are better at diagnosing women with heart disease especially female patients with heart attacks and getting them life-saving treatment. However, signs associated with male patient heart attacks are still being taught as the norm, while signs associated with female heart attacks are taught as abnormal presentation. After listening to her Ted Talk, I wanted to discuss the ethics principle of beneficence and its relation women’s health today. Beneficence is the obligation of the physician to act in the benefit of the patient. For decades, women have been receiving subpar care for heart diseases because presentation differs from men and the diagnostic tests were all developed with men in mind. Even when Dr. Healy, first female head of the NIH wanted to invest in researching cardiovascular disease presentation in women, many advised her that it was an expensive undertaking, which is not a good reason to not do something. In taking that leap, despite being strongly advised not to do so, Dr. Healy demonstrated beneficence. To this day, women’s health continues to evolve based on the research projects she initiated decades ago. My point is that physicians today need to continue practicing this principle by advocating for their patients or encouraging patients to advocate for themselves. This begins with normalizing how we teach female presenting signs for heart attacks. We should not have to wait for the next wave of active women’s health awareness before improving how medicine is practiced.
This is amazing to see the power of campaigns of awareness for medical issues. When men historically had a higher risk of heart disease research targeted that to the point where women now have a higher risk of heart disease. When a campaign targeted women’s risk of breast cancer, researchers targeted it to the point where women are able to be very effectively treated for a lot of types of breast cancers. The fact that women are now more likely to die from heart disease than men highlights the ethical principle of Justice, famously a part of the Hippocratic oath. The principle of justice emphasizes the equality of access to healthcare and the quality of the healthcare received. Dr. Merz’ idea to begin a campaign to raise awareness of women’s risk of heart disease is an amazing way to approach this disparity. Dr. Merz also talked about the difference in the pathologic course of atherosclerotic buildup in the coronary arteries of men vs women and how both of these require different approaches to screening and testing. I can’t blame the medical field for their bias towards looking at heart disease through the lens of how it affects males as that is where most of the research the past 100 years had been focused. That said, it doesn’t change the fact that women will suffer the consequences if they have the non-male typical presentation of heart disease. This related to another ethical principle called non-maleficence. Non-maleficence is another term for “do no harm,” which again, is part of the Hippocratic oath medical professionals take when they enter the field. In relation to the women’s heart disease, if a lot of women are presenting with a non-male typical type of heart disease, then it will be to their detriment to approach the screening as one would for a man. This could leave women without receiving treatment when they really need it and increase their chances of a fatal incident. Thankfully there are women advocates out there like Dr. Merz who are paving the way for improved women healthcare.
Comments are closed.