Things have blown up this week for Susan G. Komen For the Cure (TM)! Some explosions, implosions and a lot of light shed on the complex, ongoing politics of disease-centered corporate charity campaigns.
The debacle over Komen’s de-funding–and re-funding–of Planned Parenthood, as a site for breast cancer screening, brought about a stir among people who had not previously asked critical questions about where their funding dollars were going, when purchasing “pink” products or going on “For the Cure” (TM) walks and runs for the foundation.
But are advocates focusing on fighting one “status quo” while overlooking another?
One question to think about: should this much priority funding be put on mammograms alone? What about focusing on correlative causes of breast cancer, prevention and a comprehensive approach to treatment?
Here is one interesting opinion, from the Dr. Susan Love Breast Cancer Research Foundation, which puts emphasis on research for prevention of cancers–noting, with its army of women campaign, the need for more focus on prevention of breast cancer, rather than only detection and cure of a disease whose prevalence is increasingly accepted as commonplace.
From Breast Cancer Action, here’s one watchdog opinion. What’s yours?
I tend to support anyone who talks about chronic disease prevention because its just NOT DONE. While Susan G. Komen really stepped in it this last week, the group would go a long way to redeeming itself, in my opinion, if they became a mouthpiece for disease prevention — preventing breast cancer is in large part the same set of behaviors that we recommend for preventing heart disease, obesity, stroke, diabetes, and all the other killers. Eat more fruits and veggies, less processed food, more whole grains, better protein sources, fewer animal products, and stay active. The nutrition world has not done a good job communicating these 'simple' prevention strategies.
Perhaps a giant organization like Komen will do better.