Cancer Research - dont make me laugh

[Emily Cartwright]

SpankyMonkey wrote:

> i dont think those mortality rates you listed are directly
> associated with cancer research charities and that was my
> point. i bet if you looked up any disease on the internet youd
> find the same improvement in mortality rates. but hundreds of
> billions of pounds a year goes to cancer from charities. so
> where does it all go? if anything youd expect the mortality
> rate to be about 75% at least of people with lung cancer, bowel
> cancer, throat cancer.
>
> all charities stop somewhere. none of the medical profession
> training in cancer research work for nothing. the people that
> run these charities dont work for nothing either. they are all
> on TOP incomes. cancer research has spawned an industry and
> that whole industry is dependant upon it.
>
> so why is so much money being siphoned into cancer research for
> so little result.

Actually, no. You wouldn't find that kind of improvement in mortality rates across all diseases because all diseases are different, evolve differently and crucially funding for research into their treatment is different all across the board. I'll bet you didn't know, for instance, that funding for research into breast cancer treatment is exponentially higher than funding for research into prostate cancer, or bowel cancer.

And it's not hundreds of billions. It's more like hundreds of millions, if that. That has to keep the organisations together, fund labs, materials, projects, overheads, thousands of research staff. All of these things come together to produce incremental improvements to cancer treatments. Because that's the way that medicide works. Bit by bit. Not from nothing at all to a miracle cure in under six months.

Exactly what were you expecting to see, by the way? An anti-cancer pill, readily available in little blister packs on shelves in your local Boots? Do you have ANY idea how much money and time it takes to develop treatments for something as complex and multifaceted as cancer?

No, you don't, clearly.

FYI, the reason why the people who are high up in these charities make so much money is because they are some of the top people in their fields, from the research staff through to the senior management. If they weren't paid so well, they wouldn't work there. If they didn't work there, the charity would fail. It's really not that hard to grasp once you put a LITTLE BIT of thought into it. They HAVE to run it like a business, otherwise they don't make any money. It would be lovely if all of them agreed to work full-time for a tiny salary and no perks, but the reality is that that's just not a workable business model.

[diplodocus]

cheers, that's very similar what I posted before, but with a bit more passion, I was wary before of giving it full on what I thought , cos I felt I'd get grief for playing up to being on chemo etc , fuck it.
fuck it, i'm still alive, here and talking bollocks, research works

[strictlybroadband]

diplodocus wrote:

> cheers, that's very similar what I posted before, but with a
> bit more passion, I was wary before of giving it full on what I
> thought

I think I was a bit full-on too, and I've upset poor old Spanky. Ah well - maybe he'll check some facts before the next rant.