<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Menopause and the Media: Same Study, Different Story</title>
	<atom:link href="http://womensvoicesforchange.org/menopause-and-the-media-same-study-different-story.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://womensvoicesforchange.org/menopause-and-the-media-same-study-different-story.htm</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 23:40:09 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Carolyn Hahn</title>
		<link>http://womensvoicesforchange.org/menopause-and-the-media-same-study-different-story.htm/comment-page-1#comment-3014</link>
		<dc:creator>Carolyn Hahn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 07:09:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://womensvoicesforchange.org/menopause-and-the-media-same-study-different-story.htm#comment-3014</guid>
		<description>They weren&#039;t safe, now they are, sort of, but only for a short time and better if you skip them altogether? This is making my head spin. Tangential funny: I was in New Mexico last week, where my aunt and uncle have just moved to the Jemez mountains and where my uncle seems to have resurrected from the Albuquerque house my grandmother&#039;s circa 1930 obstetrics &amp; gyno textbook (she was a nurse  -- hated it, my uncle said -- wanted to be a lawyer, but I don&#039;t think women circa 1927 did that much with no money).
Anyway, in the textbook -- which I read cuz it was, you know, the middle of nowhere -- it mentions that a few &quot;hysterical&quot; (sic) women had a harder time with menopause. But that&#039;s practically what at least one of those articles said, that when it came down to it, dressing in layers, fans, and cool drinks worked as well as anything else and were safer than any meds. So maybe not much has changed since 1930 except they left out the word &quot;hysterical&quot;?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They weren&#8217;t safe, now they are, sort of, but only for a short time and better if you skip them altogether? This is making my head spin. Tangential funny: I was in New Mexico last week, where my aunt and uncle have just moved to the Jemez mountains and where my uncle seems to have resurrected from the Albuquerque house my grandmother&#8217;s circa 1930 obstetrics &#038; gyno textbook (she was a nurse  &#8212; hated it, my uncle said &#8212; wanted to be a lawyer, but I don&#8217;t think women circa 1927 did that much with no money).<br />
Anyway, in the textbook &#8212; which I read cuz it was, you know, the middle of nowhere &#8212; it mentions that a few &#8220;hysterical&#8221; (sic) women had a harder time with menopause. But that&#8217;s practically what at least one of those articles said, that when it came down to it, dressing in layers, fans, and cool drinks worked as well as anything else and were safer than any meds. So maybe not much has changed since 1930 except they left out the word &#8220;hysterical&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faith Childs</title>
		<link>http://womensvoicesforchange.org/menopause-and-the-media-same-study-different-story.htm/comment-page-1#comment-3015</link>
		<dc:creator>Faith Childs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 02:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://womensvoicesforchange.org/menopause-and-the-media-same-study-different-story.htm#comment-3015</guid>
		<description>The evaluation of the different spin on the data presented by the JAMA findings regarding menopause--with the Wall Street Journal emphasizing one position on hormone therapy and the New York Times another-- is quite confusing.  As I read the story when it was first reported, I wondered whether the two news sources had considered the same data.
This was not the first time that there had been differing reports on the same research findings.
The difference in emphasis between the two news sources  underscores the need for clear, reliable, accurate analysis and information on menopause.
Kudos to Dr. Pat for providing that clarity about this study.  Where women&#039;s health is concerned, informed consumers of health care information should look to this space for more straight talk.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The evaluation of the different spin on the data presented by the JAMA findings regarding menopause&#8211;with the Wall Street Journal emphasizing one position on hormone therapy and the New York Times another&#8211; is quite confusing.  As I read the story when it was first reported, I wondered whether the two news sources had considered the same data.<br />
This was not the first time that there had been differing reports on the same research findings.<br />
The difference in emphasis between the two news sources  underscores the need for clear, reliable, accurate analysis and information on menopause.<br />
Kudos to Dr. Pat for providing that clarity about this study.  Where women&#8217;s health is concerned, informed consumers of health care information should look to this space for more straight talk.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
