Obama's First 100 Days: A Women's Health Perspective

President Obama ran a presidential campaign that was unlike any other seen in history. He entered the race as an underdog for his own party’s nomination yet easily emerged victorious over his Republican adversary just over a year later. What made Obama unique was the true integrity of his character. Perhaps being so young compared to fellow politicians meant that Obama hadn’t (yet) been so sucked into political games as to lose sight of the passion for change that brings one into the playing field in the first place. During his campaign, he carried himself with poise and charisma that others could only dream of in politicians, and yet was awfully humble throughout.

As any politician would in his position, Obama made a lot of promises. His biggest asset was the foundation of his promises- change. Coming from 8 years of a President who made less than popular choices, Americans were very ready to forget the past and fix the present- and Obama knew this sentiment well.

Well the election was long awaited and now over in an instant. Obama has taken on the task of getting our country back on the right track at a time when everything that could go wrong seems to be doing just that. So what now? Now it is our job as American citizens to treat this idealized presidential candidate as we would treat any other elected official in a high office- we must hold him to come through on all that he promised. It has now been 100 days of his administration, and though it is still extremely early to evaluate the integrity and effects of his a , we can better judge his character in a post-election atmosphere where straying from his campaign promises wouldn’t be surprising. Below, I have attached comments to two blog posts that comment on Barack Obama's record. The first appears in the blog Our Bodies Our Blog, and the second in the Reproductive Health Realithy Check Blog. It’s time to take a look at Obama’s actions so far as they affect women and women’s health.

And On Day 101 … A Look Back at Obama’s First 100 Days in Office

Comment

I like how you brought together different perspectives on different issues affecting women. For the most part, what I gather from the comments from different experts in their respective fields is that Obama hasn’t really pulled through as we had hoped. Perhaps this is an unfair judgment. When has any politician been able to produce real change in a matter of months, especially with a financial debacle as dire as the current one? All the people quoted in your post overall conclude that besides the positions in his cabinet that are being filled by women, they are not satisfied with what Obama has accomplished so far.

I believe the idea of even judging Obama’s 100 days is a tacky move by the media. We are the ones who elected this guy on the basis of his eloquent words and inspiring visions for our country. Why aren’t we giving him just a short period of time to gather himself before judging his every move? Maybe we just got too used to scrutinizing the man in the Oval Office for 8 years, and rightly so. But if we’re expecting Obama to pull off miracles in all aspects of our country that seem to be failing, we must also allot him some time to do so. Yes, we have a right to expect Obama to follow through on his promises of change, and we should believe that after a long period of poor choices, someone in charge finally has their head in the right place. This should be more than enough just in itself to keep us satisfied. By watching him so closely for these 100 days, we have reassured ourselves that he is not the kind of man to turn on his words or change his character once he achieved his goal of reaching the office. But as we scrutinize his policies of this 100 days, we should have no problem being lenient enough and comfortable enough to have faith in the person we put there. Such is the strength of a democracy. It’s about time we restore our faith in it.

The Prevention President: A Report Card

Comment

First of all, I appreciate your easy-to-follow breakdown of the most important women’s health issues. Grading is always easier when you know where to look for what.

As you so clearly point out, in lifting the Global Gag Rule, Obama has made a statement not towards the issue of abortion, but instead towards the respect he has for global policies and recognizing the effect the US has on international issues.

In what you call the first lover’s quarrel, it is indeed important that Obama kept his cool in the face of real opposition. He chose not to pick a fight, so to speak, and yet managed not to displease anyone too much. Ah, there’s that composure we have grown so fond of.

You also point out that two positions with the power to carry women’s health issues far have both been filled by women- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Health & Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. And in reopening the review of the Plan B contraceptive, Obama has shown wisdom in at least acknowledging the spike in abortion and teen pregnancy that you mention has been the case since the Bush administration.

I like that contraception takes a string and ties all the issues you mentioned together. This is obviously a main goal when it comes to health issues, and goes beyond just the hot button issue of abortion. The availability of and policies surrounding contraception plays just as big a role as abortion, and yet it provides a middle ground for opposing beliefs.

In all these situations, it becomes clear that in his first 100 days, Obama has pretty much played it as safe as possible. He clearly understands the volatility of the many realms of policy in question right now, and he knows how keenly the public is watching. He will not succumb to pressure, and he will not be an instant crowd pleaser. Obama will continue his next 100 days, and the 100 after that too probably, with the same poise and humility we saw in the campaign he ran. He will acknowledge the opposition that has temporarily given him a vote of confidence, and he will hold on to the support of the Americans that have pinned all their hopes and dreams on his magical powers. Here’s to watching the next 100 days, and hoping the pressure doesn’t push Obama to some sort of edge- he is after all ‘just human.’

Botox: Toxin or Aesthetic Serum?

A New York Times article reports that last week, the FDA has issued “a so-called black-box warning” be added to the label of Botox and similar drugs. Contrary to what you may think, it is not to warn people that a toxin is being injected into their body. (Come on, that’s just common knowledge!) The warning is to warn patients that “the material has the potential to spread from the injection site to distant parts of the body” potentially causing serious complications. So who knew things injected into our body could travel? Some IV drug user broke the code of honor by revealing this secret to the rest of the world!

The FDA is proud to call the black-box warning its strongest safety actions, and the articles compares this warning on Botox to a similar warning on antidepressants. How is there even a comparison? There certainly is a difference between affecting brain chemistry with the risk of suicidal thoughts, and the possibility of a paralyzing toxin we voluntarily inject, traveling through our body.

The article also states that “the F.D.A. said it would also require makers of injectable toxins to send doctors letters warning of their risks and to produce a medication guide to be given to patients at the time of injection.” So what was done before? Were patients ever really fully informed of what was being put in their body?

When Botox first came out, it spread like wildfire. The idea that there was an immediate remedy to look younger for a period of time was something no woman with money could ever pass up. As the article states, botox contains “injectable botulinum toxins [that] are purified forms of the bacterial poison botulism, a paralyzing disease that can be fatal.” Does the idea of paralyzing ourselves on purpose not alarm the patients who show interest in this drug and even get it injected on a regular basis? There was a time when medicine was about treating diseases, not only to save lives but also improve the quality of life for patients. The fact that we use the same diseases we once struggled to cure to now benefit our cosmetic effects shows how much focus has shifted to pure physicality in our society.

What is it about our society that convinces women that agelessness is beautiful? It should be enough that medicine has give us the opportunity to live a lot longer than our predecessors. Who do women really fool by getting rid of frown lines and wrinkles? It could be that media tells us that young women can get away with a lot more than older women. Movies such as Miss Congeniality show that good looks can be used as means to an end, and women who look ‘sexy’ can be just as, if not more, accomplished and successful. It could also be that all society portrays old people as senile with impaired judgment and poor motor and driving skills. But what we seem to have forgotten is that aging is a natural process. We are actually lucky enough to have life expectancies that allow us to even worry about grey hair and wrinkles. As for the behavior of old people, it is indeed just that. No specific age or number of wrinkles can control the way someone acts. For all its worth someone can be senile and drive slow at any age.

So what is the infatuation that enabled Botox to earn about $1.3 billion just last year alone? As the article states, up until very recently, Botox had no actual competitor, at least in this country. Since its introduction, Botox prices have continued to rise annually due to this reason.

The only products that can try to compete with Botox-like drugs are cosmetics and creams that say they offer the same ageless effects without ‘harmful’ injections. Just seeing a magazine or television ad for some of these products can help us begin to understand just how this facet of the industry works.

One such company, Nivea, claims that it’s age defying moisturizer can mean “the difference between high collars and plunging necklines” and has a slogan that dares women to “touch and be touched.” Sexuality sells in our society, above any other advertising mechanism. The thought of a woman being untouchable if she doesn’t look young enough sends a very mixed message to young women. On one hand, romance is exemplified, and many girls believe in fairytale, happy-ending love. Yet, our media tells young women that lust overpowers love, and does so in the long-term as well.

The stress on young women to stay ‘young and beautiful’ doesn’t just end with cosmetics and anti-aging drugs like Botox. In a society where obesity is a growing epidemic, especially among the young, there is a lot of pressure on girls to maintain a likeable, ‘sexy’ physique, as I discussed in a previous entry. From Disney movies to magazines like Playboy, the female body is worshipped, idealized, and even romanticized. From their childhood, girls are told they are unique like princesses, and they are taught that the world will treat them as such. But no princess or Playboy playmate has wrinkles, no matter what age they are. Women are constantly expected to live up to an unrealistic standard of looks and to maintain that for a large portion, if not all, of their lives.

Only by changing our emphasis on lust and sexuality will we be able to teach the upcoming generations of women that beauty truly does lie within the very wrinkle lines that make them who they are. The generations before us understood this- it’s not like older women weren’t loved or touched because there was no such thing as Botox in the 60’s. We can blame the media for their unhealthy portrayals of everything from love to lust, from a woman’s body to a man’s pursuit of it. It is important, however, to realize that the media only glorifies beliefs that society at large accepts as part of its norms. If we start believing in ageless beauty once again, we would realize the ramifications of paying thousands of dollars to get paralyzing disease injected into our bodies voluntarily.

Birth Control: Gone too far?

The New York Times published an article that discussed the most recent advances in birth control. With so many pills, rings, skin patches, etc. available, we should be seeing a trend in higher usage of birth control. In fact, the article states that the higher number of birth control options actually hasn’t made much of a difference yet.

Instead, the article leads to a very interesting question: has the idea of contraception gone too far? The article discusses Plan B, a pill that can “prevent conception if taken within three days of unprotected intercourse.” Even though it has no other medical benefits, Plan B is widely popular. This shows that people are getting more ways to hit the ‘undo’ button in real life. What does this say about how our society has evolved? Sex used to be a beautiful event, meant to bring two people closer than anything or anyone else, and create a brand new life out of that intimacy. Sex has not only become the butt of a world of jokes and romantic drama in movies and television, it is now just one more thing in our lives that can happen as a ‘mistake’ on a whim of a bad night- something we want to erase, like a hangover that reminds us of our loss of control the previous night.

Media such as movies, music, and television have become much more explicit, with language and behavior that is more tolerant and lenient towards sex. It has actually portrayed two main ways of looking at sex. Movies such as the 40-year-old Virgin glorify it, setting sex as the ultimate goal, and then idealizing the person who ‘completes the task’ to be much cooler than they had previously been. Other movies such as Knocked Up, show that it is okay to have one night stands, and romanticize the story thereafter. In both portrayals, the media is showing young people that sex makes them mature, has no repercussions or strings attached, and may even play into their fantasy of a fairytale love story.

For women, the danger of the media is far more severe. When it comes to birth control, the initial goal was an increase in planned pregnancies. The article states that “almost half the pregnancies in this country are unintended, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” So we know the initial goal may not be fully accomplished. What is happening then? It seems that women are having a tough time using birth control consistently and correctly.

To solve this problem, the media is encouraging all women (including those who may not even need birth control in the first place) to take it anyways. As the article states, “ads for pills like Yaz cite beautiful skin and relief from premenstrual bloating and mood swings.” Who wouldn’t want to get rid of all the ups and downs of premenstrual energy, even if they may not be sexually active?

The most dangerous in fact are birth control pills in which the woman only menstruates three or four times a year, or not even at all. Does this become another thing to just undo? No woman would choose to menstruate if given that choice, with no side effects. The article states that out of the 28 day pack, 7 are placebo, to allow for menstruation. However, “many women have been controlling their periods for years by skipping the placebos in their packs and taking the real pills continuously.” Not only is there inherent risk of breakthrough bleeding (I thought the whole point of a cycle was to know when to expect it) and the need to take pregnancy tests as a ritual because skipping a period is now not an anomaly. What’s more astounding is that the long term effects of these phenomena are unknown, and the immediate risks such as STDs do not go away. So how is it that society has completely romanticized the idea of birth control for us?

Beyond birth control, the role of medicine in childbearing is astonishing. Fertility treatments were first created with the hope of helping women who were ready to have children, but whose bodies had in some way ‘malfunctioned’. And it still does this today, giving hope and opportunity to those who are ready for and understand the blessing of having a child. Yet it has now become a common thing to hear a woman have a number of children at once, from triplets to septuplets.

As if this was not enough, our technologies continued to develop, soon allowing fertility treatments not only orally but in vitro as well. Hello, Octo-mom. The fact that one woman could have eight babies at once unnaturally says something about how far the idea of controlling childbearing has gone. It was quite common to hear of adoption in this county being a slow process, and even the most qualified parents having to wait years to be approved and be able to provide a child with a safe home. So how is it that people like Nadya Suleman could bypass a system that was so strict about the parents being stable and ready for a child and have multiple children unnaturally, not only once but twice, without a stable income or spouse to share it with?

All in all society tells us that casual sex is okay, that we can’t conceive by accident, but if we do, a pill can take care of that within three days, or we can just conceive artificially women shouldn’t menstruate every month. These messages for young people growing up fundamentally change how our society comes together and reproduces.

Advances in technology have given us the power to make choices that have always been strictly biological phenomena. Are we playing with fire by controlling our bodies in ways they weren’t meant to be controlled? It seems the once sci-fi like discussions of parents being able to choose the physical traits, like eye and hair color, of their children is really not that farfetched any more. The field of medicine thrives in its efforts to save lives, and change them for the better when certain situations arise. But is it correct for medicine to step into fixing things that aren’t broken? Where is the line drawn?