Tell the board of Susan G. Komen: Don't throw Planned Parenthood under the bus!

[OakLeaf]

Why it isn't enough (and why she wasn't ousted) http://motherjones.com/politics/2012...ned-parenthood

[Melalvai]

Why it isn't enough (and why she wasn't ousted) http://motherjones.com/politics/2012...ned-parenthood

That article also explains where the 24% came from. While Komen may be able to honestly claim that 80% goes to programming, critics point out that only 24% goes to research, and only 15% to breast cancer PREVENTION. This holds true with my experience, but not just for Komen, other agencies as well. My Komen postdoctoral fellowship focused on treating hot flashes in breast cancer survivors (who can't take estrogen, the usual treatment for hot flashes). I was unable to get funded a breast cancer prevention project, from any foundation. (AICR is big on prevention, and NIH...well, let's not talk about NIH. I would probably have eventually gotten it funded if I'd had enough time to keep resubmitting.)

I don't have a problem with agencies like Komen spending money on programming that isn't research. Livestrong had some controversy lately because they specifically don't fund research, and haven't funded it for several years. There is a legitimate need for other programs, like getting help for people who have cancer now. Sort of like a higher impact public health effort would involve plumbing and clean water, not breast cancer surgeons.

I won't be volunteering to serve on a Komen study section, anyway.

[Artista]

There is a legitimate need for other programs, like getting help for people who have cancer now.

I don't believe for a minute that their motivation to help current cancer patients is for the "greater good". Cancer diagnosis and treatment is a huge profit center for pharmaceutical companies and diagnostic equipment companies. Many of those companies are primary contributors to non-profit cancer organizations while the contributions are often shielded from public view by running the contributions through other, benevolent-sounding, front organizations.

If Susan G. Komen and other, huge, "anti-cancer non-profits" were to actually contribute to total cancer prevention, they would put themselves and many of their contributors out of business. Funding diagnostics and current cancer care, rather than funding research into preventing cancer, is all about not biting the hands that feed these non-profits.

Robyn O'Brien wrote an interesting book titled "The Unhealthy Truth". The book is primarily about the corruption of our food supply for profit but she also delves into the unscrupulous connections between for-profit organizations and non-profits and how for-profit contributions influence the primary objectives and public messages of non-profit organizations. The book was a big eye-opener for me about the hidden motives behind many of these non-profit organizations.

[Pax]

Why it isn't enough (and why she wasn't ousted) http://motherjones.com/politics/2012...ned-parenthood

Excellent article, thank you for that.

[Susan Otcenas]

Ladies,

Related to this topic.... I need some feedback from all of you here: http://forums.teamestrogen.com/showthread.php?t=46526 I value your opinions very much!

Susan

[OakLeaf]

One last thing and then I'll shut up about it ... but this all strikes very close to me too, and for more reasons than I'm willing to go into after the reaction I got here a couple of years back. http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/2012/02/08/komen/

[salsabike]

Oak, that is just an excellent write-up. Thank you.

[Selkie]

Thanks for sharing the link, Oak.