Helping women with chronic illnesses
ChronicHealing.com

REALLY?!? Is THIS Truly Your Idea Of Meaningful Endometriosis Research?

For anyone who isn’t familiar with the “REALLY?!?” skits on Saturday Night Live, I’m including a video clip with an example of one here. When I became aware yesterday of a newly published endometriosis study, these type of skits just popped into my head.



For me, sometimes humor is the single best antidote when something really gets under my skin. So, I guess it’s not too surprising that an SNL skit ran through my head while I was reading about the recently published endometriosis study I mentioned earlier. One of the first things I did I after I saw something about the study was email my friend Endochick.

It is a common occurrence for me to run endometriosis-related items by her when I find them upsetting. I find it helpful to see if she shares my perspective when such situations arise. The study came to my attention because I received a Google alert email notification for it. (She and I are each signed up for Google alerts for articles that mention the word “endometriosis”. Subscribing to these alerts is a means of staying in the loop on endometriosis news). In any event, she had seen the recently published endometriosis study before I emailed her. When I shared my “REALLY?!?” reaction to it, she had a very similar reaction.


At this point, I suppose it’s about time for me to share some information about the endometriosis study I found so objectionable (not to mention objectifying!) The study is called (and I swear to you all that I am not making this title up!): Attractiveness of women with rectovaginal endometriosis: a case-control study. That’s right. The word “attractiveness” is literally in the name of the endometriosis study. (Feel free to pause at this juncture to marvel, let your jaw drop, or swear). The preceding link will only get you to the abstract for the study. (Those wishing to read the entire study are required pay $31.50 to access it).

Needless to say, there is absolutely no way I was going to pay $31.50 to read the full article when it was very evident from the title alone that it would really make me angry! If money were no object, I’d still have no desire to financially support such “research” by paying to access the article. As anyone who knows me can probably guess, I still wanted to get my hands on the full study. The title and a peek at the abstract were not enough. I wanted to see the entire article before writing about it here. Reading online summaries of it just isn’t the same as reading the source article. Thankfully, a thoughtful friend of mine had the ability to access it. So, I was able to read the full article about the study (that was inexplicably published in Fertility and Sterility). I won’t attempt to do an in-depth analysis of the study. Instead, I will share (as briefly as possible) my perspective on the value (or complete lack thereof) of a study such as this one. Obviously, I am not able to publish the full study here for legal reasons.


Let’s just say that the full article was every bit as revolting as I had anticipated. While I was preparing to write this post, I came across the following hilarious article about the study: A study rating female attractiveness: the journal Fertility and Sterility publishes misogyny. Let me clarify why it was funny to me. In part, it made me laugh out loud because one of the great many things I ranted about in my email to Endochick was that I found this study to be misogynistic. So, when I happened upon Dr. Jen Gunter’s characterization of the endometriosis study, I found her words humorous and validating as well.

Here are just a few of the things that ran through my mind when I learned of this study regarding the attractiveness of endometriosis patients. Why not study prevention of endometriosis? Why not find the cause(s) of it? Why not study how to improve the treatment options for the millions of women and girls living with endometriosis? Why not study improving fertility in those endometriosis patients struggling with infertility? Heck, why not (gasp) study to find a cure for endometriosis?

To wrap things up here, I’m going to respond to this study (Attractiveness of women with rectovaginal endometriosis: a case-control study) — “REALLY?!?”-style. The study article was 7 pages long. I’ll try to make this as painless as possible.


It’s “REALLY?!?” time…


(1) The doctors who conducted the research for the aforementioned study looked at what age the study participants first had sexual intercourse. (Having read it in context, I can tell you that this was part of their “attractiveness of endometriosis patients” theorizing).

REALLY?!? — Sigh. You think that studying when women first had sexual intercourse is a meaningful use of your time – when you claim to be studying endometriosis? I think not. Please see the paragraph I posted earlier for some ideas of better uses for your endometriosis research time.

(2) The title of the study is: “Attractiveness of women with rectovaginal endometriosis: a case-control study”.

REALLY?!?That is your study’s article title? Wow, you’re not even trying to disguise the fact that the main focus of your “research” was to have yourselves (a handful of doctors) literally “rate” women’s “attractiveness” on a graded scale?! I have a question for you. Have you ever watched that movie about the allegedly shady origins of Facebook? You know… The one where people were rating students on campus based on their physical appearance using the software that was allegedly some sort of prototype for what we now know as Facebook? That’s what this rating of women’s appearance reminds me of. You’re doctors. Don’t you have medical training that equips you to conduct meaningful studies using scientific methods? Have you no shame?

(3) From the study (in the conclusion section): “Women with rectovaginal endometriosis were judged to be more attractive than those in the two control groups. Moreover, they had a leaner silhouette, larger breasts, and an earlier coitarche”.

REALLY?!? — After all of the time and effort you put into this endometriosis research study, this conclusion (and it is word for word from the study, people) is the best that you can produce? The fruits of all your labors on this study are summarized in the two sentences above? REALLY?!? This truly was the focus of your “endometriosis research” study? Nothing about prevention of endometriosis, improving treatment options for patients, finding clues that could lead to a cure for endometriosis? Just a focus on where the endometrial implants were located in the women judged to be “more attractive”, who had larger breasts, who had a leaner silhouette, and when the women from each of the groups first had sexual intercourse?



While I can’t post the entire study, I can post some quotes from it. So here are a few. Brace yourselves. Bear in mind that these are direct quotes from the endometriosis study published in Fertility and Sterility. I include them here because I think they provide some extra insight beyond my “ranting” into the ridiculousness of the use of time and energy by these researchers (for those who haven’t read the full study):

Some endometriosis study quotes that boggle my mind:

“However, in order to limit potential unintentional seductive behaviors that might have swayed the raters’ judgment, information on the specific hypothesis of different degrees of attractiveness in the three study groups was not given in advance of the physical evaluation”.

“This finding could be explained by higher attractiveness and, hence, higher male sexual demand, even in the adolescent phase”.

“As an example, a higher breast-to-underbreast ratio (large breasts) might have been more attractive to male than female raters”.

Endometriosis researchers/doctors can do better than this. They must. Endometriosis research that improves quality of life for patients while searching doggedly for clues as to cause(s) of endometriosis and while diligently searching for a cure absolutely must take precedence over research that instead focuses on the physical appearance and sex lives of patients!! Seriously, I don’t understand how a study like this even gets funded. Let alone published in a major medical journal. In the meantime, millions of women and girls the world over are living with this serious illness. A study such as this not only misses looking at the many crucial topics of interest to anyone serious about researching endometriosis but it takes resources away from looking at what truly needs to be studied.

I can think of many useful topics for endometriosis researchers to investigate. Studies that focus on the physical appearance of endometriosis patients do not make that list. I find it offensive that doctors at a university are conducting such research and I find it even more appalling that a medical journal such as Fertility and Sterility is giving the study legs by publishing it.

At the risk of sounding redundant, I will ask again… Why not study prevention of endometriosis? Why not find the cause(s) of it? Why not study how to improve the treatment options for the millions of women and girls living with endometriosis? Why not study improving fertility in those endometriosis patients struggling with infertility? Heck, why not (gasp) study to find a cure for endometriosis?

The women and girls living with this illness deserve better than this. An endometriosis study where doctors spend time rating physical attractiveness is not my idea of a meaningful use of time or resources. We deserve better than this.


This post was written by Jeanne at http://chronichealing.com. Copyright © Jeanne — chronichealing.com. All rights reserved.


If you’re like me, you find online shopping a helpful alternative. Thank you for supporting my blog by using my Amazon ads. I appreciate your support! ;)

New to blog commenting? Just click “comments” below post. (If you set up a Gravatar, your picture will show when you comment).

Reading: REALLY?!? Is THIS Truly Your Idea Of Meaningful Endometriosis Research?

18 comments

1 stellanorNo Gravatar { 12.01.12 at 10:40 pm }

I totally agree that the idea of anyone wasting their time doing such a study is totally bonkers, but as a recovering academic I wanted to point out a small issue:

“I’d still have no desire to financially support such ‘research’ by paying to access the article.”

The authors of the article would not see a single cent of your $31.50. When you have an article published in an academic journal you receive no monetary compensation (actually sometimes authors have to pay to have their article published). 100% of the cost of accessing the article would go to the journal in which it is published, and the journals don’t make any financial contribution to the research either. Actually, this research somehow managed to get a grant from the University of Milan School of Medicine to pay for this study.

The fact that academic publishers charge exorbitant amounts to access the research they publish and pass none of that on to the authors they’re publishing is a separate, but also bothersome, issue.

2 endochickNo Gravatar { 12.01.12 at 11:53 pm }

As you’ve so beautifully done… I’ll just sum up our conversations (per the wonder of Smartphone technology — when you must convo on-the-go!)…. REALLY?!?!?!

From the title to the methodology, I don’t understand how we are to take this study seriously? How does age of first sexual encounter have ANYTHING to do with endometriosis? And why is it just rectovaginal endometriosis? Does endometriosis discriminate now? I must not be pretty enough, Jeanne; I don’t have rectovaginal endometriosis! *please note the sarcasm*

I, too, don’t understand how this study got funding money. Precious funding could be better spent on medicinal and surgical therapies, and on eradicating the disease. Not on studies like this.

How does this help? Do they plan on rounding up all “attractive” women and inspecting their wombs? Or denying “unattractive” women potential treatment on the basis that they are unlikely to have endometriosis? Since the science of attraction is subjective — based solely on the eye of the beholder — who is the final judge?

I just don’t get how this study passed an internal review board… AND got funded! And I’ve been through both!
endochick´s last [type] ..Pain

3 JeanneNo Gravatar { 12.02.12 at 4:13 am }

Welcome stellanor!

Thank you for pointing out for people the behind-the-scenes workings of the finances in these situations. I should have worded things in such a way as to make it clearer what I meant. I realize that the $31.50 that the medical journal is charging (Fertility and Sterility, in this case) goes to the journal itself – rather than to the researchers who conducted the study. I am so appalled and disgusted that Fertility and Sterility actually published this study that I wouldn’t want to support them in any way (even if I had an endless supply of money to cover their fees). The way I look at it is that if I were to pay Fertility and Sterility to access the article, I’d essentially be rewarding them for having published it. Since I have no desire to encourage the publication of even more studies such as this, I wouldn’t want to financially reward the journal in any way.

I think that purchasing access to the Fertility and Sterility article could indirectly help the researchers. While they might not see a penny from the $31.50 fee, I’m guessing that a high demand for the F & S article could lend credibility to those who conducted the study and could indirectly support the study.

I hadn’t gotten a chance to investigate the funding of the study and didn’t know that they got a grant from the University of Milan School of Medicine to pay for this study. It boggles my mind that any university would provide any funding for a study like this.

Yes, the money that is made by charging people to access such research papers is truly a topic unto itself. I think it’s extremely unfortunate that the system works the way that it does. I understand that some sort of nominal fee per article might be necessary to cover expenses but I absolutely disagree with medical journals charging such outrageous fees per article. Having read the entire 7 page article for this study, I cannot even imagine paying $31.50 for it.

I personally believe the public should have the ability to access information without getting hit with such hefty fees per article. I understand that the journals surely enjoy the profits they make from this practice of charging an arm and a leg for each article but I don’t think it’s right.

An online friend of mine (who has a PhD, does research herself, and works at a university) once told me, many months ago, that she believes the system is rigged this way not just for the pay-per-article profits but also to intentionally keep the average person (who typically does not have access to medical journals) less informed. Essentially what she was saying is that it’s a power issue. Knowledge is power and if there are gatekeepers deciding who can/can’t access information as she described, that’s troubling to me. It may sound cynical but the way she explained it actually made sense to me.

As you said, that’s a separate issue… but I’m reminded of it every time I run across a study like this. I am fortunate enough to have friends who help me access the info through their connections. However, not everyone knows someone who can provide such access. So, it bothers me that such information isn’t freely available. Maybe I’m unrealistic to expect such open access but $31.50 for one article is beyond many people’s means.

Thank you for your feedback and I appreciate you stopping by to share your remarks!

P. S. Your “recovering academic” comment made me chuckle.

Endochick:

Oh, what would I do without an occasional call with you – to vent together about such nonsense as this study?

The fact that the study title has the word “attractiveness” in it just blows my mind. I have no idea how anyone can take it seriously. Don’t even get me started about the part of the study that focuses on when the study subjects first had sexual intercourse. As far as the focus in the study on rectovaginal endometriosis, the way I read it… they kept tying together rectovaginal endometriosis with severe endometriosis in such a way that my perception was that they were saying women who don’t have rectovaginal endometriosis automatically do not have severe endometriosis.

I’ve met plenty of women over the years who have very severe endometriosis but who don’t necessarily have any endometrial implants found/removed from the rectovaginal area. So, I don’t really understand their interchangeable use of the words “rectovaginal endometriosis” and “severe endometriosis”. Certainly a woman could have both rectovaginal endometriosis and severe endometriosis, of course. However, I don’t understand where the researchers were coming from in the aspect that one of the 3 groups of women studied do have endometriosis and are not considered to have “severe endometriosis”… because this group seems to have been automatically assumed to be in some sort of “non severe” state of endometriosis simply because they do not have rectovaginal endometriosis. There was no mention of endometriosis stages in the article. Whether a woman’s endometriosis was deemed “severe” or not seemed to hinge solely on whether she had rectovaginal lesions. I didn’t understand this at all.

As noted in the blog comment by stellanor, funding in the form of grant money was provided by the University of Milan School of Medicine. Obviously there are many ways such funding could have been put to better use for endometriosis research.

In my opinion, this study doesn’t help. In fact, it hurts. Already I have seen articles online that were triggered by this study and the wordings in the articles (and in the comments people have posted to those articles) are just pitiful. Not only did the study focus on physical appearance (eeew!), but in doing so they have made a mockery of endometriosis research for some people. It is upsetting.

In reading the full article, it’s not that they intend to round women up and dole out treatment based on appearance exactly. Their claim is to be trying to investigate phenotypes. The thing is that a study like this can affect women’s access to proper healthcare and treatment because Fertility and Sterility is a major journal that lots of doctors read. So, if even a small percentage of the doctors who read the study buy into any of it, those doctors who do so will be ones patients might be wise to avoid (in my opinion). The “grading” of appearance was done by a handful of doctors acting as judges. It’s sickening if you ask me.

I don’t get how it passed an IRB either. Why anyone would fund it is beyond me. I know you have knowledge about how these things work (from endometriosis research you’ve done in the past). It amazes me that Fertility and Sterility published this study. It disturbs me that a major journal such as that would publish it. It makes me concerned about not just this study but others too. In other words, if this got funded and published… what other wasteful studies will be published in a journal that I had previously thought was reputable? It’s troubling.

~~~

Jeanne

4 DianeNo Gravatar { 12.02.12 at 11:39 pm }

Jeanne, it’s truly disgusting for sure. And I can authoritatively confirm (as a university professor) that sooooo much research gets published that really isn’t worth 2 cents, let alone the $31.50 they want the general public to pay for it! The research that you’ve discussed in your post goes a step further: it’s not only useless (compared to what they *could* be doing to help us endometriosis patients), it’s also insulting to us.

hmm… “recovering academic” isn’t a bad title…

5 AnnieNo Gravatar { 12.03.12 at 2:37 am }

I found this link where the doctors are trying to defend the study:

Attractiveness of women with endometriosis

Nice try, guys but I still don’t see ANY value in this “research”. They note that “with regard to body size and figure, other researchers have detected an inverse relationship between body mass index and severity of the disease in general”. But perhaps thin women aren’t more likely to have severe disease. Rather, women with severe disease may be more likely to become thin. When I am having a lot of pain, I tend to lose interest in food so the worse I feel the thinner I get. Perhaps if the doctors could get funding to do some REAL research as Jeanne suggests, a more effective treatment (or cure!) could be found. This might lead to me eating more, gaining some weight, and becoming less attractive, but that is a chance I am willing to take!
Annie´s last [type] ..The End

6 JeanneNo Gravatar { 12.06.12 at 1:56 am }

Diane:

The study mentioned in this post is, in my opinion, not just useless and insulting… but potentially harmful and counterproductive.

(1) When resources are allocated for studies like this, it potentially takes away from meaningful study.

(2) This study has already triggered some sensationalistic headlines (and articles) that do far more harm than good. (Despite the many millions of women and girls living with endometriosis, there are still incredible numbers of people who’ve never heard of the word “endometriosis”. Having read the comments posted online to several of the articles that were triggered by this study, it is apparent that there are a fair number of people who’d never even heard of endometriosis before that are now posting insulting comments mocking the illness, trivializing its impact on patients, and generally making fun of endometriosis – seemingly thanks to these insensitive commenters having encountered articles about this study.

As dismayed as I am that this useless study was published and as insulting as I find it, I am even more troubled by the fact that publication of this study has laid the foundation that has led to some insensitive individuals – who are very clearly ignorant about endometriosis – to mock the illness rather than attempt to understand that a useless endometriosis study does not in any way signify that the illness itself is something to be taken lightly).

It’s unfortunate all around. I thought you’d like her “recovering academic” phrase.

Annie:

Great find on that link! I have to wonder just how much flak these researchers must be getting if they took the time to write up that defense of their work! Seriously, I really wonder how many people they’ve been hearing from about it. That was really something.

Like you, I don’t see any value in this “research”. As you pointed out, there could be other explanations for the relationship between BMI and severity of the disease. Some endometriosis patients experience vomiting as a symptom, for example. When I was a teenager, I vomited with periods as a regular matter of course. Back then, I was thin as a rail and I ate more than anyone I knew. I’m not saying the vomiting was the only reason for my being so thin then. (I think some of it was just the way my metabolism was working at that point). What I’m saying is that I agree with you that there can be many reasons for lower BMI in endometriosis patients.

Of course, these are just recollections of my own situation and that could mean absolutely nothing in the big picture. After all, there are many factors that affect a person’s weight. I’ve heard of suggestions over the years about lower BMI in endometriosis patients (than in women who do not have endo) and for all I know there is something worth investigating there… but not like this!

The methods employed in this study were just beyond the pale. For example, the “graded attractiveness scale” part alone just absolutely killed me. Measuring BMI for endo patients and drawing conclusions about it is one thing. Rating “attractiveness” is another. (Please don’t even get me started about the researchers asking the women in the study about their sexual histories and then trying to tie the answers for that back to perceived “attractiveness”).

Scientists properly qualified to study phenotype issues working at finding some sort of way to assess physical characteristics and any connections to health issues is one thing. OB/GYN doctors judging who is “attractive” (or less so) is a totally different matter!

If phenotype research is being conducted, I really don’t think OB/GYNs are the proper individuals to assess “attractiveness”. I’m not a scientist and don’t pretend to know what goes into setting up scientific research studies. It just seems to me to be common sense, though, not to have OB/GYNs in charge of rating “attractiveness”. I’m sorry but, to me, the study methods sound more like the workings of a dating service than of a legitimate research study on endometriosis.

The remarks made in that link you posted (where they were defending the study) did nothing whatsoever to reassure me that this study has any useful benefit to the endometriosis community. Rather, it sounds to me like they have received blow-back about their study and decided to post that “clarification”.

They stated:

“We would like to clarify the aims – and significance – of our recently published study on the “attractiveness of women with endometriosis”.

I’m sorry… but their piece doesn’t clarify anything for me. (Not that I can think of anything they could really say that would make me feel good about their “study”).

Thank you again for sharing the link you found. It really is interesting (perhaps even amusing?) that they took the time to post that statement. It really makes me wonder what sort of outcry there has been about that “study”. I wonder if they got flak from not just patients but from doctors and scientists who objected to their study methods? It wouldn’t surprise me.

~~~

Jeanne

7 Holly Gleason-Wise (@PeppermintDream)No Gravatar { 12.24.12 at 1:26 pm }

This absolutely beyond my comprehension. I wish every male on earth experienced stage 4 endometriosis for 24 hours in their lifetime. I think we’d have some “research” and then some.

8 JeanneNo Gravatar { 12.24.12 at 8:57 pm }

Welcome Holly!

Yes, it’s beyond my comprehension too. Actually, the reason I got the idea to respond to this “research” with a “REALLY?!?”-style post was that I needed to try to tap into sense of humor… to avoid getting really angry. Sometimes humor helps in the face of such utter nonsense.

Jeanne

9 Jannie FunsterNo Gravatar { 12.28.12 at 8:26 pm }

Jeanne, if I hadn’t read this here — you a blogger I know and trust for info, I’d say the whole study was some kind of mean joke.

Unreal. Yes, my jaw is dropped here.

Endometriosis patients DO deserve better than this, so much better I almost can’t believe I have to write this.

Thanks for posting this!

xoxo
Jannie Funster´s last [type] ..Merry Christmas, Y’all!!!

10 JeanneNo Gravatar { 01.05.13 at 3:55 am }

Jannie:

Yes, it really is hard to believe this “study” is real. I agree it seems more like a joke than actual research that was published in a well-known medical journal. It’s very unfortunate.

I miss being online as much as I used to be because I miss people like you!

xoxoxo

Jeanne

11 HeatherNo Gravatar { 01.22.13 at 5:49 pm }

Hi,

I have a quick question about your blog, do you think you could e-mail me?

Heather

12 JeanneNo Gravatar { 01.22.13 at 6:16 pm }

Welcome Heather!

I sent you an email.

Jeanne

13 Holly Gleason-Wise (@PeppermintDream)No Gravatar { 01.25.13 at 6:35 am }

Hi Jeanne. I hope you’re well. I’m having a hysterectomy, salpingo-oophorectomy, lysis of adhesions, etc. on Monday morning for my Stage IV endo. I’m an emotional wreck and in severe pain–had to stop ________ for 10 days prior to surgery so it’ll work better post-op and also had my last _____ on Sunday evening. I’d been on 800 mg of ibuprofen every 8h, so after about three days of not taking it, I started waking up (after my “naps” as I never really sleep more than a few hours at a time) in horrible pain–my teeth even hurt! I had severe whiplash in 2002 from an auto accident, and my neck and shoulders are even hurting again. I’m taking Vicodin right now, along with some ________ for cramping, but it’s a far cry from ________!
Thank God I’ve finally found an excellent doctor; have been to six or seven OB/GYNs in the last four years and began seeing my current doctor in October. I have a 17-yr-old daughter who is in the process of choosing a four-year college, which she’ll begin in the fall, and she’ll be making her second college tour a week from Saturday. I’m so depressed that I can’t participate. She’s the only child I’ll ever have, and I’m very, very thankful to have her, but it’s really painful to not be able to do things with her, especially since it’s been this way for so many years. She’s the child of my ex-husband, and I’m sad that I can’t give a child to my husband and love of my life. He’s supportive but he’s also depressed at how long I’ve been in such bad shape physically. I’m so happy for your blog and to be able to share this with you and others who understand my situation. Thank you for all you do! It’s very much appreciated. I see that you’re on Facebook, so I’ll get in touch with you on there too! Much love.

[Editor's Note: I have omitted the names of the prescription drugs Holly referenced above. I try - for a variety of reasons - to avoid printing specific drug names on my blog].

14 JeanneNo Gravatar { 01.28.13 at 12:58 am }

Holly:

Best of luck with the surgery tomorrow. I’m sorry you are in such pain and that you are unable to attend the college tour. It’s always so difficult to miss out on activities because illness/pain prevents it! I know it can be hard to look at it this way but many people have found that being a parent who lives with chronic illness/pain can often result in the child (or children) of that person being more empathetic and compassionate than they might be otherwise. Living with someone who is seriously ill can have a way of doing that. I know this may be small consolation – but it helps some chronically ill parents to look at it from that perspective. There’s no doubt that it’s challenging for spouses too. Hopefully your husband has someone to support him when things get overwhelming. Sometimes spouses of patients can benefit from networking with others like them. Certainly it’s hard for loved ones to watch those who are ill and in pain. Thank you for your kind words. I hope that you get some symptom relief from the surgery! Good luck!

Jeanne

15 elfNo Gravatar { 02.02.13 at 1:08 am }

The authors are also getting a second publication from this disgraceful study (#14 in the reference list):

Buggio L, Vercellini P, Somigliana E, Vigano P, Frattaruolo MP, Fedele L. ‘‘You are so beautiful’’: Behind women’s attractiveness toward the biology of reproduction: a narrative review. Gynecol Endocrinol 2012. In press, DOI:10.3109/09513590.2012.662545.

My advice? Write to the journal. Write to the university that funded it. Write to the ethics committee that approved it (not that I can find any reference to it in the paper).

16 JeanneNo Gravatar { 02.04.13 at 5:45 am }

Welcome elf!

I looked for the second publication you mentioned and found this abstract:

“You are so beautiful”*: behind women’s attractiveness towards the biology of reproduction: a narrative review.

Part of me wants to get my hands on the rest of it (however much it may upset me) and part of me is disgusted enough by the abstract alone not to want to see it.

I find the “research” they are doing to be degrading to women and spectacularly offensive.

You are absolutely right that writing in is most likely the best route to take. I have been online very little for awhile now because I’ve been very sick and very busy. I would love to summon the energy to write in to them. Thank you for making me aware of the second publication! If you write in to them, please drop another comment here because I would be interested to know if you do so… and what response they give you, if any.

You are onto something, though, about writing in to them about this ridiculous “research”.

I hope you’ll keep in touch. Thanks again for the information!

Jeanne

17 Endometriosis Patients Deserve Better — ChronicHealing.com { 02.12.13 at 2:19 pm }

[...] by the fine folks who brought the world the article that I referenced in my last post. (See this post about a “study” on endometriosis that many people found objectionable). Anyhow, the following “study” effectively rubs salt in patients’ wounds. The [...]

18 JeanneNo Gravatar { 02.12.13 at 7:32 pm }

elf:

Today I wrote a follow-up to this post. (See the new post here: Endometriosis Patients Deserve Better). If you have any addresses that would enable people to write to the journals and/or the university, could you please post them here? Unfortunately, I have been unable to be online much recently due to illness and time constraints. I did put the links for both of my posts on Facebook – in the hope that my Facebook friends (a great many of whom have endometriosis) will consider writing in about these “studies”.

Thank you again for bringing the second study to my attention. To me, it is truly offensive.

Jeanne

Leave a Comment

CommentLuv badge