trapper501 said:
I doubt such a report will be available yet, we shall have to await a study some time in the future.
And you'll be waiting a long time because nobody is doing such a study.
And even if someone decided that they wanted to start a study tomorrow, they wouldn't be taken seriously. You don't start your research when you already know the answer you are looking for. It doesn't work like that.
The best you can hope for is someone to invent a time machine specifically for the purpose of going back and asking all the women that had a smear test why they visited between the dates we're interested in.
Because they sure as hell weren't asked about Jade Goody when they did.
trapper501 said:
However this from Cancer Research backs up the numerous newspaper reports regarding the increase in enquiries regarding testing.
No it doesn't. It's pure speculation, just like the newspaper reports.
Firstly, none of the statistics on that page are backed up with any meaningful evidence. We're told that page views have jumped from 2-3,000 up to 32,000 but there's no information about where those views have come from, how long they stayed on the pages, etc. We don't even know if the figures are real as we're not shown the raw data for ourselves. It's simply cherry-picking figures to fit around a newsworthy story.
And as for backing up the 'numerous newspaper reports' if you take the time to read the stories and the quotes, you'll see there is no meaningful evidence to support those claims. You could quite easily attribute the increase in screenings and enquiries to any eventuality that you care to mention, especially when nobody has been testing or monitoring for that particular attribute.
All the clinics that were interviewed for these 'percentage rise stories' were in the midst of a concerted effort to increase the number of women attending screenings via various methods that weren't even mentioned in the articles. Not to mention the fact that one of the clinics involved had recently expanded its testing facility which accounted for a large percentage of the increase in tests being processed as they had increased the amount of tests they
could process.
You can't prove that Jade Goody
wasn't responsible for this supposed '20%' increase, but seeing as nobody was testing for that variable you can't say she was either. What you
can say is that the figures reported were part of a gradual increase year-on-year and possibly, although not conclusively, due to a campaign targeting young women run in conjunction with GPs, specialist clinics, gynaecologists and via various media sources included direct mail campaigns and targeted marketing.
trapper501 said:
you seem more than a little agitated about the whole thing.
I get agitated when people quote meaningless statistics and press articles, not about some 'celebrity' who is about to die.