The book covers a variety of information, starting on how to find out about breast cancer through different steps and techniques (mainly through scientific methods), options for treatment and post cancer treatments, important questions you will need to ask to doctors, and ending with referral resources and definitions of terms.

Kushner’s reading is so useful and supportive in a way that it provides great deal of information about breast cancer itself. It makes the reader possible to test oneself at the moment without any doctor’s appointment or other difficult steps; it gives simple directions to test the signs of abnormalities by oneself (ex. Observe the color, texture, shape of the breast skin, nipple discharge, or feel it for unusual lumps).

However, I think it is not necessary to categorize people into different groups based on their age, gender, backgrounds (ethnicity), or body measurements. Kushner distinguishes age group of 21~39 from over 40, and puts an emphasis on age group over 40 to be more vulnerable to breast cancer. She provides different examinations or screening (and ‘when’ to get the exams done), which further indicates greater seriousness on older age group.

Similarly, she also stresses that there’s a significant connection between diet and breast cancer. She gives an example of Japanese women who normally eat seafood rather than fatty foods, and argues that they tend to have lower risk of getting breast cancer than U.S women who eat higher fat calories. Although many studies prove on a probable connection between cancer and obesity, I think this is highly misleading when Kushner chooses a specific ethnic group to be at a higher risk of being victimized in breast cancer. Some of the readers may feel relieved just because they are vegetarian or are lower than normal weight.

People normally do not pay careful attention diseases or illnesses when it is not their case. We show sympathy for the victims, but we believe that ‘we’ will never be ‘victimized’. As people read Kushner’s book, they think optimistically, believing that all the symptoms provided are not relevant to them at all. In that sense, I think it is unnecessary to put emphasis on a particular group more than the other, as such information may even trigger future victims to be ignorant about their own illness.

Rose Kushner can be seen as one of America’s most prominent breast cancer activist. She had made great contributions through helping women to win the right to make treatment decisions, and also stressed the importance of good science. Due to such advocacy, Kushner can be regarded as a consumer advocate as feminist critic. Together with Susan G. Komen Foundation’s support, new interventions such as new medication systems were allowed. Despite their successful achievements, they have been highly criticized due to their strong focus on science and medicine to detect new cases of cancer, while giving insufficient attention to what sort of environmental factors are the causes. Some critics even concluded that corporations like Komen are becoming an industry in a manner of a ‘capitalist marketplace ‘. However, in my perspective, I think that this act of ‘commercialization’ (through pink ribbons or teddy bears) enables the public to at least become aware of such diseases and to associate themselves with the events. Without them, I don’t think the breast cancer organizations or the feminist activism would have been possible to reach up to this point.

After visiting another website on breast cancer organization, the Breast Cancer Action, I felt that they are reaching the issue of breast cancer in a more individual-centered way. While the ‘culture of action’ Komen insists that it is necessary to get annual mammograms, BCAction tries to help through a patient-centered perspective, on whether the patient should or should not get the mammogram. I believe BCAction is being more careful with the use of medical systems, which may seem cautious and preventing of any further diseases or illness. However, I was surprised to know that they are criticizing the corporates and corporate sponsors that benefit financially from increased promoting and screening for breast cancer (as they even call the type of Komen’s fundraising activity as ‘pink-washing’). I believe that corporates would have not become successful if there were no cause-related marketing. Despite the fact that companies build their reputation of a brand and increase profit, each dollar contributed to the system was possible because of the promotions. People are now socially active in donating money to those charities, and no matter where the money was actually used, what is significant is the public’s recognition of it.

When you are ill, you must be cautious of what you do next. From the reading “How Many Die from Medical Mistakes in U.S. Hospitals?”, Marshall reveals his research on estimated number of medical mistakes in major hospitals. One of the things you will take as a step to follow when you are ill may be to ‘take medicine’. However, the article tells us that medical error may cause more serious symptoms and even to death. As Foucault emphasized that “Knowledge is a form of power”, an individual should be able to understand knowledge about the body and how medical discourse is constructed through social causation and social construction. What makes you think you are ill anyways? When would be the perfect time for you to believe that you are ‘healthy’? I can still argue that I’m very healthy when I’m a smoker and also suffer from anemia, as long as I can maintain my daily routine and communicate with other people. How do you think? Do you think you are healthy? If your answer to this is yes, can you come up with any theoretical approaches that may back up your belief? As noted in the lecture, Australian Aboriginal-background people define health as “not merely being physical well-being but also refer it to the social, emotional, spiritual and cultural well-being of the whole community,” illness and health issues are pretty much social products, revealed in different ways and forms according to the individual.

When  I am ill I believe more in diet than in drugs. I often get very dizzy and even suffer from anemia, but I always refuse to take any medical drugs. I try to focus more on changing my diet and food plans as “I” believe what I eat is the major factor that determines my health. After reading the lectures and readings provided, I have realized that people often link ‘illness’ mostly with physical illness, and yes, that’s what came into my brain at first when I saw the phrase about illness. As Michel Foucault’s theory on medicine describes its form as a ‘bio power’ rather than merely a healing treatment, it is certainly true that we should be more careful when adopting a term and to be able to relate them in other ways. According to Peter Conrad and Kristin K. Barker in “The Social Construction of Illness: Key Insights and Policy Implications”, some illnesses are implanted with cultural status, and are socially constructed dependent on ‘us’, on ‘how’ we understand and accept them. Illness can be physical, emotional, social and more, but the key point is that we must find our way out to truly comprehend that it is in the realm of social construction. It was so interesting to find out that illness can be highly perspectival; one may believe ‘cold’ to be illness while the other does not. In the end, a single word or a concept can be regarded distinctively based on individual’s cultural experiences.