Climate Denial Crock of the Week: Ocean levels

May 10, 2009

Blue Ollie carried a YouTube video that got me to look at Peter Sinclair’s marvelous series of amateur videos, “Climate Denial Crock of the Week.” Sinclair posts under the handle GreenMan at YouTube.

Here’s the Climate Denial Crock of the Week video on ocean levels, and the denial that they are rising — in line with my post a few hours ago about peoples in the South Pacific and in Alaska losing their homes to climate change:

Pat Frank’s work keeps reminding us that, in science, it’s often difficult to establish a clear, indisputable proximate cause.  Something is going on in Newtok, Alaska, and in the Carteret Islands, Papua New Guinea.  Those things should not be ignored, and cannot be ignored safely for long.

(Teachers:  Note most of these videos are around 5 minutes in length — more than suitable for classroom use, perhaps even as a bell ringer.  Notice also that, if you don’t know how to make these videos, as I don’t, you’re behind the curve.)


Afarensis back in the old digs

May 10, 2009

Afarensis left the Seed stable. Here’s the new (old) site.

Afarensis skull - symbol of Afarensis  blog

Afarensis skull - symbol of Afarensis blog

Some story there, maybe some drama, maybe not much.  Still worth reading.


What if we changed the climate and no one paid attention?

May 10, 2009

Rush Limbaugh, Pete DuPont, Michael Savage, the Discovery Institute and other great exponents of reality denial (generally, but not always, without drugs) will continue to rail at James Hansen’s science chops, but the universe goes on in the Real World™Global warming, climate change, takes a severe toll on inhabitants of this planet.

It’s a tribute to the propaganda value of Anthony Watts that this milestone earned so little note:  Residents of Carteret Island, Papua New Guinea, began their move to higher ground last week. The rising ocean is reclaiming their land; seasonal high tides make agriculture impossible.

Who noticed?

You can read about the refugees in The Solomon Times.  You can read about it in the Papua New Guinea Post -Courier. You can’t read it about it much of anywhere else.  The revolution is not televised, it’s not even in print.

Meanwhile, in Alaska, without serious action by the world to enact some sort of program out of the Kyoto meetings to combat climate change by nations united, indigenous peoples are meeting to figure out what they can do without government help.  The place of their meeting carries a message:

The summit is taking place about 500 miles from the Alaskan village of Newtok, where intensifying river flow and melting permafrost are forcing 320 residents to resettle on a higher site some 9 miles away in a new consequence of climate change, known as climigration.

Newtok is the first official Arctic casualty of climate change. A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers study indicates 26 other Alaskan villages are in immediate danger, with an additional 60 considered under threat in the next decade, Cochran said.

Here’s how the warming denialists’ diary entries should run:

“Climate change chased the Carteret Islanders out of their homes, but I wasn’t concerned because I am not a Carteret Islander, and probably couldn’t find the place on a map.”

Further reading:

http://alphainventions.com/rss


Armed Forces Day 2009 – May 16; fly your flag

May 9, 2009

Armed Forces Day 2009 poster; click on image to download a high-def copy

Armed Forces Day 2009 poster; click on image to download a high-quality copy

Armed Forces Day is one of the score of dates for which federal law suggests we fly our flagsArmed Forces Day is the third Saturday in May, every year.

Got events scheduled near your home?  Tell us about them in comments, please.


Lusitania – sunk 94 years ago today

May 7, 2009

We’re talking about the sinking of the Lusitania, and the role that incident played in getting the U.S. into World War I.

Coincidence:  Look at the date today.

Enlistment poster, after the sinking of the Lusitania

Enlistment poster, after the sinking of the Lusitania

94 years ago today.  U-20 sank the Lusitania, champion of the Cunard Line, on May 7, 1915.

World War I appears to have been a heyday for propaganda posters.  Google up “Lusitania +poster” and you can find a wealth of recruiting posters and just plain propaganda posters.  If only we had the time, there are a couple of lesson plans waiting in that search.

Note:  Details on the poster: Artist, Fred Spear, 1915; “Enlist,” published by Sackett & Wilhelms Corp.

Other resources:

  • All Lusitania, all the time:  Lusitania blog

  • True, but did Einstein say it?

    May 6, 2009

    Poster by Ricardo Levins Morales. Updated March 2015 - click image to purchase a copy of the poster from Mr. Morales.

    Poster by Ricardo Levins Morales. Updated March 2015 – click image to purchase a copy of the poster from Mr. Morales.

    Nice poster, great thought — you can’t measure everything about a student with a test, nor with a battery of tests.  Texas testing in core areas finished up last week, Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate testing runs this week.

    Not everything that can be counted, counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
    – Albert Einstein

    I especially thought of this quote one day last week while reading the questions to a kid with Downs syndrome who, as best I could measure from just watching reactions working problems, has a great flair for mathematics, and again when I discovered a geographic genius in the special education group.  (My classes say universally the tests were easy — and for some reason I find that terrifying.)

    Did Einstein say it? I found the poster at Learning is More Than a Score; it can be purchased from the Northland Poster Collective.  Neither suggests where we might verify that Albert actually said it, though Bob Murphy at More Than a Score said he understands it may have been on the wall in Einstein’s office.  The artist is Ricardo Levins Morales (see more at Ricardo Levins Morales Galleries).

    Readers, can you help?  Did Einstein say that?  When and where?

    Update March 2015:  Quote Investigator urges that we attribute the quote to William Bruce Cameron, in a 1963 book.


    Crazies drop into the Bathtub, but not like this

    May 5, 2009

    Seriously.  Ed Brayton gets some serious crazy folk.  I won’t mention their names, but even GB and NS aren’t quite that crazy.  I hope.

    Obama as a Marxist Muslim?  Wow.


    Cinco de Mayo explained

    May 5, 2009

    You thought Cinco de Mayo was Independence Day for Mexico?

    No, it’s not.

    History.com has a nice explanation, with a nice little video.

    Perhaps the U.S. should celebrate the day, too, at least in those states who were not in the old Confederacy.  On May 5, 1862, Mexicans under the command of 33 year old Commander General Ignacio Zaragoza Seguín stopped the quick advance of superior French forces trying to invade Mexico to take it over, at the Battle of Puebla.  While France did eventually defeat Mexican forces (after getting 30,000 men in reinforcements), the spirit of May 5 inspired Mexicans to continue to fight for freedom.  And ultimately, Mexican forces overpowered and captured the French forces and Emperor Maximilian, who was executed.

    Thus ended a great hope for the Confederacy, that French-supported Mexican Army would lend aid to the Confederates in their struggle to secede from the Union.

    It is one of the great what-ifs of history:  What if France had kept Mexico, and what if French-led Mexican forces backed up the Confederate Army?

    One thing is rather sure:  Had that happened, and had the Confederacy been successful, we wouldn’t be celbrating Cinco de Mayo in Texas today.

    Also in Texas, on May 5, 2009, AP Spanish tests.  Good luck, kids!

    Battle of Puebla, Wikimedia (artist?)

    Battle of Puebla, Wikimedia (artist?)

    Mexican Independence Day is September 16.


    Alma conference on DDT and human health calls for DDT phase out (Pine River statement)

    May 5, 2009

    Wheels of science grind carefully, accurately, and consequently, slowly.

    The report from last year’s Alma College conference on DDT and human health has been published in .pdf form at Environmental Health Perspectives:  “The Pine River Statement:  Human Health Consequences of DDT Use.”

    Carefully?  Check out the pages of references to contemporary studies of human health effects.  Each one of the studies cited is denied by the more wild advocates of DDT use, and each of those studies refutes major parts of the case against DDT restrictions.

    Warning sign near the old Velsicol plant where DDT was produced, on the Pine River, Michigan. The 1972 ban on DDT use in the U.S. was prompted by damage to wildlife and domestic animals; a 2009 conference noted that human health effects of DDT are also still of great concern, and perhaps cause alone for continuing the ban on DDT.
    Warning sign near the old Velsicol plant where DDT was produced, on the Pine River, Michigan. The 1972 ban on DDT use in the U.S. was prompted by damage to wildlife and domestic animals; a 2009 conference noted that human health effects of DDT are also still of great concern, and perhaps cause alone for continuing the ban on DDT.

    Warning sign near the old Velsicol plant where DDT was produced, on the Pine River, Michigan. The 1972 ban on DDT use in the U.S. was prompted by damage to wildlife and domestic animals; a 2009 conference noted that human health effects of DDT are also still of great concern, and perhaps cause alone for continuing the ban on DDT.

    Accurately?  Notice how the conference marks those areas where we do not have good research, such as in the long-term health effects to people who live in the houses that are sprayed with DDT for indoor residual spraying (IRS).  While the conference report cites studies showing elevated DDT levels in the milk of women who live in those homes, they draw no unwarranted conclusions.  Alas, that leaves the field free for Paul Driessen to rush in and claim there are no ill effects — but read the paper for yourself, and you’ll see that’s far from what the research shows.  The paper exposes Steven Milloy’s claims to be almost pure, unadulterated junk science.

    Slowly?  Well, it’s been more than a year.

    The paper makes one powerful statement that is only implicit:  The claims that DDT is safe, and that use of the stuff should be increased, are wildly inflated.

    The paper’s abstract:

    Objectives: Dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane (DDT) was used worldwide until the 1970s, when concerns about its toxic effects, its environmental persistence, and its concentration in the food supply led to usage restrictions and prohibitions. In 2001, more than 100 countries signed the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), committing to eliminate the use of 12 POPs of greatest concern. DDT use was however allowed for disease vector control. In 2006, the World Health Organization and the U.S. Agency for International Development endorsed indoor DDT spraying to control malaria. To better inform current policy, we reviewed epidemiologic studies published in the last five years which investigated the human health consequences of DDT and/or DDE exposure.

    Data Sources and Extraction: We conducted a PubMed search in October 2008 and retrieved 494 studies.

    Data Synthesis: Use restrictions have been successful in lowering human exposure to DDT, however, blood concentration of DDT and DDE are high in countries where DDT is currently being used or was more recently restricted. The recent literature shows a growing body of evidence that exposure to DDT and its breakdown product DDE may be associated with adverse health outcomes such as breast cancer, diabetes, decreased semen quality, spontaneous abortion, and impaired neurodevelopment in children.

    Conclusions: Although we provide evidence to suggest that DDT and DDE may pose a risk to human health, we also highlight the lack of knowledge about human exposure and health effects in communities where DDT is currently being sprayed for malaria control. We recommend research to address this gap and to develop safe and effective alternatives to DDT.

    Rachel Carson was right.

    Tell other people about this conference report.  This is real science, and it deserves to be spread far and wide.

    Tip of the old scrub brush to Ed Lorenz at Alma College, both for providing the news, and for his work to organize the original conference.

    Other information:


    Swine flu shuts down prisons: Let the prisoners out?

    May 3, 2009

    This headline from the Sacramento Bee sure caught my eye:

    Swine flu case shuts down visits at all 33 state prisons

    Of course, I read it too fast, and skipped over the word “visits.”  I had to click on the story to see whether they were going to tell the prisoners to stay at home for a week, like the Fort Worth, Texas, school district did.   I suppose, after a fashion, that was exactly the message.

    At the Officer of the Receiver for California Prison Health Care Services, spokesman Luis Patino said Sunday that an inmate in Centinela State Prison in Imperial County was diagnosed as probable for the H1N1 virus, or swine flu.

    “The inmate and his cellmate have been isolated, Patino said. “They remain at the prison.”

    Whew!

    Ticket sales for movies are way up in those areas where the schools are shut down — good news for the opening weekend of X-Men Origins:  Wolverine.

    Maybe we’d be better off if the kids remained in school, as well as keeping the convicts in the prisons.

    Is the panic over swine flu too much? If we go back to the week ending March 21, 2009, we find that there were already more than 22,000 cases of influenza in the U.S., with 35 pediatric deaths.  Has the swine flu added to either the rates of infection or the rates of death?  If the dramatic steps, the event cancellations and school closings, are appropriate for the swine flu, shouldn’t they have been appropriate for the other flu viruses, too?

    Do we really need to close schools?  What do you think — tell us in comments.

    See the CDC’s report on swine flu at their site:    H1N1 (Swine Flu)

    Other resources:


    Evolution theory driven by anti-racism

    May 3, 2009

    Here’s a book that most creationists hope you never read and which strikes terror in the hearts of Discovery Institute fellows: Darwin’s Sacred Cause: How a Hatred of Slavery Shaped Darwin’s Views on Human Evolution.

    Cover of Desmond and Moores 2009 book, iDarwins Sacred Cause/i

    Cover of Desmond and Moore's 2009 book, Darwin's Sacred Cause

    It’s another grand book on Darwin from the team of Adrian Desmond and James Moore, based on their deep diving into the archives of writings from and about Darwin in his own time.  Their earlier book, Darwin, is a bit of a modern classic in biography, and a must-read for anyone seriously studying Darwin and evolution.

    This book promises to eviscerate a favorite chunk of calumny claimed by creationists, that Darwin’s theory is flawed because Darwin himself was a racist.  Scientists painstakingly note that the racist views of a scientist don’t affect the theory (think of William Shockley and the transistor), but creationists still use the false claim as fodder for sermon’s and internet rants.  Or, in the case of the Discovery Institute, the false claims is used as a justification to appoint a fellow in the propaganda department, Richard Weikart.

    Desmond and Moore confront the claims head on, it appears.  How will creationists change their story to accommodate these facts?  Or, will creationists resort to denial?

    One theme that may be supported in the book is the realization that pursuit of a noble cause frequenly ennobles those who pursue it.  Certainly it is easy to make a case that Darwin’s hatred of slavery and advocacy for its abolition colored his views of what he saw, though perhaps not so much as what he saw colored his views of slavery and abolition.  Desmond and Moore have a chapter that discusses Charles Lyell’s trips to America, and Lyell’s different views on slavery having traveled the American south.  Lyell did not travel as an abolitionist, and his views suffer as a result.  Lyell was a product of his times in the portrait Desmond and Moore paint.  Darwin demonstrated the power of science, and the power of personal use of science, in using the facts to overcome racism; Darwin used his experience and study to rise above the times.  That may be the difference between the men, why we celebrate Darwin today, and remember Lyell as a good scientist, but usually a footnote to Darwin.

    Resources:


    Applying evolution theory to defeat malaria

    May 3, 2009

    If the theory works, why not use it, eh?

    One of the most serious problems with the use of DDT is that it tends to drive insects to evolve defenses to pesticides very quickly.  Almost every mosquito on Earth today has alleles that allow it to digest DDT, rather than be poisoned by it.  These alleles arose shortly after DDT was put into use against mosquitoes, and by the mid-1960s had made fruitless the malaria eradication campaign worked by the World Health Organization.

    Evolution can be used to the benefit of humans and the eradication of malaria, too.

    Voice of America (remember that agency?) tells the story of Andrew Read, a researcher at Penn State University, who realized that the deadliest mosquitoes are old ones — malaria has to survive for about two weeks in the mosquito in its life cycle in order to be infectious to humans.  If the mosquito dies before that time, the malaria can’t be transmitted.

    Read’s proposal?  He has a fungus that takes a couple of weeks to work, but which kills the mosquito once it gets going.

    In other words, Read doesn’t worry about getting all the mosquitoes.  His method, if it works, will kill only the mosquitoes most likely to carry malaria.

    Plus, since most of the breeding cycle of these mosquitoes will be completed, it won’t drive the mosquitoes to evolve around the problem.

    “The good thing about just killing the old ones is that most mosquiotoes will have done most of their reproduction before you kill them, and that means the susceptible mosquitoes will indeed continue to breed, so you still have susceptible mosquitoes, and your insecticides then just work against the old guys, removing them, and they are the dangerous ones. So under those circumstances, you don’t get the evolution of insecticide-resistant mosquitoes.”

    He and his colleagues have been testing a kind of fungus that makes mosquitoes sick over the course of several weeks. And it eventually kills the oldest and most infectious mosquitoes.

    “The name of the game is not mosquito control. It’s actually malaria control,” Read explains. “So if you just remove the old ones, you still have lots of young, non-dangerous mosquitoes around, but you have controlled malaria.”

    Read says this fungus is about 98 to 99 percent effective at killing old mosquitoes in the lab. Now he says he needs to test this fungal insecticide in villages areas where malaria is prevalent, to see whether fewer people get the disease, even if they’re still getting bitten by mosquitoes.

    Read and his team propose a new concept of mosquito control, based on what we know about the life cycles of mosquitoes and how they evolve, rather than just looking for one more “new” pesticide to which the insects will soon become resistant.  Read’s article appears in the open-access Public Library of Science (PLoS), published April 7, 2009:  “How to Make Evolution-Proof Mosquitoes for Malaria Control.” His coauthors are Penelope A. Lynch and Matthew B. Thomas.

    Summary

    Insecticides are one of the cheapest, most effective, and best proven methods of controlling malaria, but mosquitoes can rapidly evolve resistance. Such evolution, first seen in the 1950s in areas of widespread DDT use, is a major challenge because attempts to comprehensively control and even eliminate malaria rely heavily on indoor house spraying and insecticide-treated bed nets. Current strategies for dealing with resistance evolution are expensive and open ended, and their sustainability has yet to be demonstrated. Here we show that if insecticides targeted old mosquitoes, and ideally old malaria-infected mosquitoes, they could provide effective malaria control while only weakly selecting for resistance. This alone would greatly enhance the useful life span of an insecticide. However, such weak selection for resistance can easily be overwhelmed if resistance is associated with fitness costs. In that case, late-life–acting insecticides would never be undermined by mosquito evolution. We discuss a number of practical ways to achieve this, including different use of existing chemical insecticides, biopesticides, and novel chemistry. Done right, a one-off investment in a single insecticide would solve the problem of mosquito resistance forever.

    Among reasons you may want to bookmark that publication:  In the opening paragraphs the authors discuss how Indoor Residual Spraying drives mosquito resistance to pesticides, with citations to the most recent and most powerful studies.  This is the case against bringing back DDT in a big way.


    California federal judge throws pie in face of the First Amendment

    May 2, 2009

    I’ve gotta think about this case some more, but it’s not a good decision.

    1. From my view as an Advanced Placement teacher, and as a teacher of history, the judge is contradicting Settle v. Dickson in saying, essentially, the student may claim religious exemption to get out of doing the hard work of thinking.
    2. The judge’s ruling might fairly be said to call into question the entire issue of giving harder-studying high school kids college-level classes, if the serious issues in those classes may not be discussed.
    3. Claiming that creationism is the root of Christianity is rather dictating Christian beliefs to Christians, and in this case, offensive and incorrect beliefs (most Christian sects do not favor creationism, and only a minority of Christians hold such views, generally contrary to their sect’s theology).  Can judges order people to believe something?  Can a judge dictate to the many sects of Christianity one false and crazy thing they all must include in their creeds?

    The case is C.F. vs. Capistrano United School District et. al. [Dr. James C. Corbett]. The Orange County Register has a story and links to the case decision, with the headline “High School Teacher found guilty of insulting Christians.”

    The headline is troubling because it was a civil suit — no “guilty” verdict could be rendered under the law.  But with a wacky decision like this, the reporter and copy desk must have been quite discombobulated, enough to let such a bizarre headline sneak by.

    Will students flock to our AP classes now, hoping to be able to get out of the work by saying history offends their religion?  Ooooh, we could hope!

    It’s a very, very strange decision, insulting to scholars, academicians, historians and Christians.  Go read it — what do you think?

    Other resources:


    Equations, tattooed into our lives

    May 2, 2009

    Tattoo of Alison, a high-school physics teacher - from Carl Zimmers Collection, at the Loom

    Tattoo of Alison, a high-school physics teacher - from Carl Zimmer's Collection, at the Loom

    Can’t tell which equation is the Mandelbrot Set, which the hydrostatic equation, which the description of entropy?  Can’t figure out why the delta, and otherwise confused?  Alison explains it all, at Carl Zimmer’s blog, The Loom.

    It’s relatively clear that she didn’t get the tats to use them to cheat on any exams.


    Making a false case against Gardasil

    May 2, 2009

    Especially after working for so many years alongside the big drug companies working health legislation in the Senate, and after later policy work for private companies that made the point again that Big Pharma doesn’t always act scrupulously (remember Oraflex?), I’m no particular fan of the big companies.

    But I am a big fan of getting the facts before making claims against them.  I also stand in awe of the accomplishments of medicine, including Big Pharma, in so many areas.  My oldest brother had polio as a kid, and it haunted him to his death.  Polio vaccine was a great advance.  I survived a bout of scarlet fever as an infant, but as a result I am particularly vulnerable to certain infections now; I stand in awe of a $10 prescription that literally saves my life.

    Get the facts.  We’re talking saving lives here — be sure you’re accurate.

    There is a nasty campaign against modern medicine claiming that vaccines and other injectable preventives do not work, or do much greater harm than is revealed.

    One victim of this unholy smear campaign is the Merck Drug company, and its anti-cancer vaccine Gardasil.  This vaccine has been the topic of much controversy here in Texas.  I’ve written about it before.

    So I was shocked once again browsing Neil Simpson’s blog (looking for a post that disappeared, it now seems), to discover this statement of concern from Mr. Simpson:

    Gardasil Moms: If one of those 32 dead girls or women was your daughter. . . – I wouldn’t rush out and get the vaccine for your girls just yet.

    32 dead girls from the vaccine?  Mr. Simpson fails to tell the whole story.  Here’s what CDC actually said:

    As of December 31, 2008, there have been 32 U.S. reports of death among females who have received the vaccine. There was no common pattern to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine. [emphasis added]

    This isn’t the first time opponents of Gardasil have failed to report accurately the deaths accounted for in the trials and use of the drug.  In previous outings, critics of the drug have done such bizarre things as counting deaths of people who never took the drug, as deaths perhaps caused by the drug.

    For example, from the numbers available when I wrote about this in May 2007:

    • Of the 17 deaths reported in the clinical trials,  7 of them came from the placebo group.  That’s right:  Only 59% of the reported deaths were in the group that got Gardasil.  41% of the reported deaths came from people who had received no Gardasil vaccine.
    • 7 of the deaths were from auto accidents, 4 in the Gardasil group, 3 in the placebo group.
    • Most of the deaths were from causes generally thought to be unrelated to to Gardasil, including suicide and cancer.

    Don’t you think that, in blaming deaths on a dosage of a vaccine, one should not count deaths to people who did not get the vaccine? So, can we trust numbers from a slander campaign that keeps repeating falsehoods for two years, though the data are freely available?

    If you check the Gardasil site now, you’ll find more deaths have been added.  Merck follows up reports of problems, and they update the information when they can, as required by law.

    There are now 24 deaths reported in Merck’s literature, 16 in the Gardasil group, and 9 in the control group; the Gardasil deaths have risen to 64% of total deaths; some new causes are added in.  But there is no glaring indictment of Gardasil, and it still seems to me to be rather unethical to claim, as Simpson’s source does, that deaths by auto accident can be attributable to Gardasil, especially when an almost equal number of auto accident deaths occurred in the control group.

    Here is what the CDC says, unedited:

    Reports to VAERS Following HPV Vaccination

    As of December 31, 2008, more than 23 million doses of Gardasil were distributed in the United States.

    As of December 31, 2008, there were 11,916 VAERS reports of adverse events following Gardasil vaccination in the United States. Of these reports, 94% were reports of events considered to be non-serious, and 6% were reports of events considered to be serious.

    Based on all of the information we have today, CDC continues to recommend Gardasil vaccination for the prevention of 4 types of HPV. As with all approved vaccines, CDC and FDA will continue to closely monitor the safety of Gardasil.  Any problems detected with this vaccine will be reported to health officials, healthcare providers, and the public, and needed action will be taken to ensure the public’s health and safety.

    23 million doses of the vaccine, high efficacy in preventing cancer and genital warts, only 6% serious events reported, no deaths that doctors can connect to the vaccine.

    In the time Simpson writes about, several thousand women died of cervical cancer; he’s posing 32 deaths unrelated to the vaccine and saying it’s dangerous, when the facts show exactly the opposite.  Is that ethical?

    It’s creationism syndrome:  Religionists decide on their conclusions, sometimes supported by scripture, but sometimes also supported by misreadings of scripture; then they set off in search of evidence to support their pre-conceived conclusion, and they step over real data and alter evidence to make sure their pre-conceived conclusions get the support.

    In other words, they use doctored data.  Neil Simpson’s sources are using doctored data again.  Shame on them.  I’m sure he’ll correct it in his blog.

    ______________

    Update, May 3: Simpson has not corrected his blog yet.  As an indicator of the issues at stake, you may want to look at CDC figures on cervical cancers, many of which are prevented completely by Gardasil.  Actually trends on the disease are encouraging:

    Cervical cancer used to be the leading cause of cancer death for women in the United States. However, in the past 40 years, the number of cases of cervical cancer and the number of deaths from cervical cancer have decreased significantly. This decline largely is the result of many women getting regular Pap tests, which can find cervical precancer before it turns into cancer.1

    According to the U.S. Cancer Statistics: 2005 Incidence and Mortality Web site, 11,999 women in the U.S. were told that they had cervical cancer in 2005,* and 3,924 women died from the disease.2 It is estimated that more than $2 billion is spent on the treatment of cervical cancer per year in the U.S.3

    Cervical cancer strikes disproportionately at minority women:

    Even though these trends suggest that cervical cancer incidence and mortality continue to decrease significantly overall, and for women in some racial and ethnic populations, the rates are considerably higher among Hispanic and African-American women. Find more information about cervical cancer rates by race and ethnicity.

    More information: