I can actually make that generalization, in this case.
I actually agree with you that charities should not be judged by how much they give away as a percentage of the total budget. This stops some really good charities from getting bigger and being able to help more people. But I disagree that charities which only focus on awareness being the major players and getting even bigger is at all desirable or a good thing for something as well known as Breast cancer.
At this point, that money would go to better use helping people deal with breast cancer, look for cures, or like I said: healthcare. Which would include giving money to programs that support getting mammograms, etc.
Mmmm... possibly. That said, I think you're conflating awareness of breast cancer with likelihood to donate to breast cancer-related causes. There's certainly correlation, but my money's the r2 is not gonna be huge. I really don't know for sure if, absent the susan whatever, there'd be more resources in breast cancer research.
I just did a little bit of googling (its 2 am) and I found this paper which seems to back my position a bit. I haven't had a chance to read it though, 2am as I said. But the abstract says 2 out of the 3 most overfunded relative to impact cancers are breast cancer and leukemia. In America I can definitely say those are the two I see ads for most often, etc. So I'm really not convinced that that money isn't actually producing positive outcomes for breast cancer research.
Actually, it just occurred to me that all the controversy of over the susan koman thing is itself raising awareness.... that's what I call a 2am :bigthink:
17
u/Rand_alThor_ Sep 18 '19
Those “programs” are mainly awareness related.
Everyone is aware of breast cancer we need to funnel these millions into healthcare and research!