Prostate carcinoma tends to affect men in an older age group compared to breast carcinoma (though prostate CA certainly occurs in younger males), who can survive for an extended time with it and often die of something else (my father, for example). It’s generally highly treatable, at least early in its course, through hormonal manipulation.
Colon carcinoma is getting increasing publicity (partly because it’s got such a good screening tool (i.e. colonoscopy) and is avoidable for many.
I’d like to see a lot more money going into research on pancreatic cancer, because while it’s not all that common, it’s so hard to treat (currently, by the time the diagnosis is made the disease has generally spread and metastasized, the only surgical option is one which few survive for very long and there’s no good chemo available).
I sometimes get a little :rolleyes: with the publicity bandwagon for breast cancer, but if that saves some lives it’s hard to argue it’s not worthwhile. We just need to be aware that research funding for other cancers (and diseases) deserves support too.
Or how about skin cancer? That one seems ripe for an awareness campaign, considering how many people intentionally increase their chances of developing it solely because of the ridiculous social stigma attached to pale skin. I feel like today, that kind of awareness campaign would reap more benefits than the breast cancer awareness campaign, which is laudable but oversaturated at this point.
There are “colors” formost malignancies. (In fact, many colors can stand for several diseases or other causes; that’s the simplest list I could find.)
Anybody out there know how to Google? In about 5 minutes, you can learn about any malignancy, connect with local support groups, volunteer or contribute money. Hey, here’s an international list of cancer charities.
If you choose to remain ignorant & passive, don’t blame the ladies in the pink t-shirts.
Nah, I’m blaming the groups who haven’t figured out how to cash in on that same kind of publicity. Well, not entirely; the point about making it a feminist/pro-woman/“do it for your sister/mom/grandma/friend” cause is pertinent too.
Actually, AIDS research/awareness kicked breast cancer awareness’ ass in terms of making the disease more of a mainstream discussion topic. Unfortunately a lot of people think we basically “cured” AIDS now (well, that you “just” take a pill or two and you’re fine, which is way simplified), at least in Western-type countries, so I think they could stand some more work on their efforts.
Some womens sports teams have worn pink jerseys for a game. Even some pro mens teams have used pink equipment during a game or warm ups and then auction it off for charity.
I agree. Unfortunately, because it is so quickly and almost-universally lethal, there are very few “pancreatic cancer survivors” who can go around speaking up about being personally touched by the disease to try to incite more people to care.
I also think that ovarian cancer suffers the same sort of problem - unfortunately, because it is very hard to catch it early and most people who have ovarian cancer die within a few years of diagnosis, there is not the same community of survivors speaking up about it.
The wiki article on the pink ribbon phenomenon includes some leads for some groups who are critical of the way that industries seem to have used breast cancer to try to look like they care about something while not actually doing much of anything.
(Personally, my mother died of ovarian cancer, so naturally I strongly wish that there had been the sort of funding for research for ovarian cancer that breast cancer gets).
With “research”, people may envision male geeky scientists in white coats doing mysterious (and maybe dangerous) stuff. It’s unpopular because science is unpopular. Research is tangible.
“Awareness”, on the other hand, is a vague, abstract concept that does not refer to specific, hard things ; it’s rather feminine, in the way that women are (on average) more attracted to the psycho-social side of things. Therefore this word is doubleplus compliant with the ideology of these current times.
I really think this is key - not only are a lot of people pushing for greater breast cancer awareness, but the group is very vocal and impressively well-organized. If you see someone wearing a pink ribbon, you think “breast cancer awareness” right away. If you saw me wearing a lavender ribbon, how many would know I was promoting epilepsy awareness? (Which is why I don’t wear one, frankly. Nobody recognizes it and my son would just like to get on with being a teenager without his mother calling attention to one small aspect of himself thank you very much.)
I also don’t think it hurts that the news media love running breast cancer stories, as it gives them an excuse to show boobies :rolleyes:
And there are a lot of breast cancer awareness efforts that have nothing to do with research. Getting women to do breast self exams. Funding mammograms for women without insurance. The current one is letting women know how to lower their risk factors - alcohol, weight, lack of exercise - all of these can be controlled to lower a woman (or man’s) risk (although as someone who has a cousin who is a fitness instructor - thin, doesn’t drink - who had a mastectomy, it isn’t all risk factors). Also, post diagnosis support is huge in the breast cancer community. The Komen Foundation funds all of that as well as research.
Prostate cancer hits about 192,280 people a year. Breast cancer hits 192,370 women and another 1910 men.
Breast cancer also has a higher mortality rate. 40,170 women and 440 men compared to 27,360 for prostate cancer.
(Lung cancer is the tough one, hits 219,440 people a year and kills 159,390 of them. But the big battle with lung cancer is prevention, and it has that PR problem of affecting smokers)
So, that’s essentially the same incidence rate, and a difference of 6% in mortality rates. That hardly justifies the fact that there is about twice the federal funding for breast cancer, and something like 7 times as many medications used to treat breast cancer. The stats you gave simply validate the frustration a lot of people feel when they see pink everywhere they turn come fall.
I guess it’s safe to assume many commenters here won’t be indulging in a big ol’ pinkwashed bucket of KFC chicken, then?
So ridiculous.
I don’t mind all the attention it gets – I can’t imagine debating the merits of awareness or funding with the dozen-or-so survivors (or relatives of non-survivors). But I get a little nauseous over some of the commercial tie-ins, especially when it comes to selling products (cosmetics, food) that could very well contribute to cancer.
I didn’t say it was or wasn’t. I simply corrected the numbers.
I’ve never lobbied my congressman for increased funding for breast cancer - or any kind of cancer research. But perhaps people interested in increased funding for prostate cancer or colon/bowel cancer or whatever should do just that. As well as start walks, get corporate donors, and “raise awareness.”
You don’t think they do? Pink sneakers and cancer walks have very little to do with why the National Cancer Institute doles out twice as much money to breast cancer research than it does for prostate cancer. Of course, that’s better than 3 or 4 times as much, which was the case in the mid-90s. Back then, the death statistics were virtually identical.
“Awareness” also has nothing to do with why the FDA has rejected what many believe will be a breakthrough prostate cancer medication, while approving 7 times as many drugs used to treat breast cancer.
I think breast cancer has hogged enough of the cancer dollars. I walked for breast cancer a few years ago on behalf of a friend, but I’m over it. Any effort or money I put forward for cancer research in the future will be for cancer generally, or for some form of cancer that is underfunded, which breast cancer absolutely is not (compared to others - everything’s underfunded so long as cures aren’t found)
Then lobby your congressman. If you think your issues are not seeing enough tax funding, the person to gripe to is not the internet, its your congressman.
And awareness has a lot to do with how much funding gets allocated out and how much pressure gets applied to the FDA. Its politics.
Well, glad we solved that. I’ll go ahead and let the folks who run this board know that they can go ahead and shut the site down. We’re all in the wrong place.
Stupid comment aside, it would be best not to act like you have any idea what I do with my spare time.
