Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Family Fortunes Fundraiser
-
13-05-2013 11:43am#1Hi all. I'm trying to think of a different fundraising idea to raise funds for the Irish Cancer Society. Just wondering has anyone ever been involved in a Family Fortunes style fundraiser or any advice as to how I could go about organising it? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
0
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
The Barefoot Pizza Thief wrote: »People have been raising money for cancer research and the like for 50 years or more and it doesn't seem to have made feck all of a difference but make people richer. If they were looking in the right areas or spending the money on prevention rather than trying to find a patentable cure, then I would be the first to put my hand in my pocket, what with having lost family of my own, otherwise though, not a chance (might make an exception for a hospice and the like however). Oh and nail varnish is carcinogenic and so you might actually save more lives by become and ex-junkie of it.
Who ate your biscuit?
Cancer research has allowed massive improvements in prognosis and treatments over the past few decades. Massive.
Breast cancer is no longer the immediate death sentence it used to be, and patients of all sorts of cancers have a much better quality of life during treatment with less severe drugs having as good as/better results.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Nail Varnish Junkie wrote: »I didn't ask for your opinion on my chosen charity so quite frankly, your post is unwarranted.
No offense meant but I am just sick of seeing people raising money for cancer when they have no real interest in how that money is spent. I'd admire their (and your) good intention but just feel that they tend to view raising money for cancer charities through rose coloured glasses. Used to be like that myself. Not saying you are like that, but the nail varnish monkier struck me as kinda ironic given the subject."Doesn't seem" is hardly a statistic to base your ignorance on.
It's not ignorance, my opinion is based on experience of having a family member die from the disease and many friends also. There are exceptions, but by and large, the billions that have been raised each year, for over fifty years, has been grossly misspent. Certain researchers have made some remarkable findings, but yet their research has either got largely ignored, mainly as what they had found was never going to lead to anything patentable (ie, most research regarding prevention).
Go into any supermarket and you can buy a million and one carcinogenic substances for example, that shouldn't be and even the recent research regarding how cooking food at high temperatures creates carcinogenic substances, is largely being ignored:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/cooked-meats
Some words I would wholly endorse from the book, World Without Cancer:What happened to ending cancer?
When it comes to treating cancer, we seem to be in a holding pattern. We are still relying on surgery, chemotherapy and other anticancer drugs, and radiation, just as we did 40 years ago. “We are stuck in a paradigm of treatment,” says Ronald Herberman, MD, the former director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. And our treatments are not working.
With the “war on cancer,” we may have created a framework that allows us to declare a stalemate, with no expectation of ultimate victory. We may have put generals in charge who think we should start talking about living with cancer as the “new normal.” At least that is what the director of the National Cancer Institute seems to be suggesting when he talks about “making cancer a disease you can live with and go to work with.” Harold Varmus, MD, who has also served as president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, one of the world’s great cancer hospitals, goes on to say, “We have many, many patients with lethal cancers who are actually feeling pretty good and are working full time and enjoying their families. As long as their symptoms can be kept under control by radiotherapy and drugs that control symptoms and other modalities, we’re doing right by our patients.”
Simply put, we have not adequately channeled our scientific know-how, funding, and energy into a full exploration of the one path certain to save lives: prevention. That it should become the ultimate goal of cancer research has been recognized since the war on cancer began. When I look at NCI’s budget request for fiscal year 2012, I’m deeply disappointed, though past experience tells me I shouldn’t be surprised. It is business as usual at the nation’s foremost cancer research establishment. More than $2 billion is requested for basic research into the mechanism and causes of cancer. Another $1.3 billion is requested for treatment. And cancer prevention and control? It gets $232 million altogether. (Remarkably, in the very same budget report, the NCI states, “Much of the progress against cancer in recent decades has stemmed from successes in the areas of prevention and control.”)
The failure to give prevention its due has been a longstanding complaint. Political tensions arose in the 1960s and 1970s between those who wanted more attention placed on preventing cancer by addressing occupational and environmental factors and those who wanted the locus of responsibility to fall more on individual behavior choices. Scholars at UCLA complained in The Journal of the American Medical Association in 1988 that biomedical research, with its clinical and laboratory emphasis, dominated the allocation of federal resources, at the expense of preventive medicine. They called prevention “the most neglected element” of the NCI’s efforts to date.
Decade after decade, similar complaints have been made, and decade after decade, little changes.
It’s true that even with a new commitment in funding and expertise, the prevention of cancer will be a formidable goal. But there are many promising avenues to pursue. It is time to commit our resources to more aggressively studying the ways in which diet, exercise, supplements, environmental exposure, and other factors can influence the development of cancer. It is time to look more diligently for vaccines and prophylactic therapies, and to do a better job distributing the ones we already have.
We also must get the word out about the prevention strategies we know are effective. As recently as March 2012, public health experts told us that we could prevent more than half the cancers that occur in the United States today if we applied the knowledge we already have. Imagine the transformation that could take place if we showed more respect for the powerful and often-subtle strategies of public health—the ones that help people change their behavior, improve access to health care, and regulate environmental and occupational hazards.
We should not “slouch toward a malignant end” and accept cancer as “an inevitability,” as one bestselling history of cancer suggests we do, but instead we need to recognize that the more than $90 billion spent in pursuit of a cure has not achieved the most effective “cure” of all—preventing the disease to begin with.
SourceWho ate your biscuit?
Les Dennis.In addition to providing funding for research, the Cancer Society offers practical assistance to people with cancer. They make a huge difference.
Just sick of all seeing all this research going nowhere and thousands using it as either a well paid career or a social scene. The vast majority of these people on fun runs and the like still spray Mr Sheen all over their household furniture, and I bet and serve up a plateful of nitrates and heterocyclic amines for breakfast each morning but hey, we'll have some newfangled drugs soon, so why worry.
People need to start realising that we will never win the "war" on cancer by waiting for big pharma to create a magic pill. What we need to do is create a world that doesn't need that magic pill.
I'll leave you to you your thread, excuse the intrusion.0 -
Nail Varnish Junkie wrote: »Hi all. I'm trying to think of a different fundraising idea to raise funds for the Irish Cancer Society. Just wondering has anyone ever been involved in a Family Fortunes style fundraiser or any advice as to how I could go about organising it? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Family fortunes is really hard to run, the concept wouldnt work, especially if you are trying to attract a fund raising audience !
Sometimes the simpliest idea's work, coffee morning, table quiz, bag collecting.
All of us resonate with the Irish Cancer Society in some way shape or form and any fund raising activity for them is in my eyes well worth supporting:):) 0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
There is some truth in what you say, the expectation that by throwing lots of money at it that a magic bullet will be created to cure cancer is an unrealistic one. Research and cancer don't work that way.The Barefoot Pizza Thief wrote: »Just sick of all seeing all this research going nowhere and thousands using it as either a well paid career or a social scene. The vast majority of these people on fun runs and the like still spray Mr Sheen all over their household furniture, and I bet and serve up a plateful of nitrates and heterocyclic amines for breakfast each morning but hey, we'll have some newfangled drugs soon, so why worry.
People need to start realising that we will never win the "war" on cancer by waiting for big pharma to create a magic pill. What we need to do is create a world that doesn't need that magic pill.
I'll leave you to you your thread, excuse the intrusion.
However I take issue with the claim that thousands use it as a well-paid career and social scene. I'm in postgraduate studies in the area and can assure you it is anything but well-paid and as for social scene - I wish
. The money raised through charity is tightly regulated and has for the most part been well-spent and has massively furthered our knowledge, particularly in molecular biology, even if that work doesn't always translate directly into treatments.
I do agree that more funding should be directed towards reducing environmental and lifestyle related risk factors. However as we live longer something will eventually get us in the end, so expect cases of heart disease, strokes, etc to rise with a corresponding fall in cancer cases.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Thanks for all the advice, Family Fortunes might just be a better game to be enjoyed at home with a small group of friends. A pub quiz with a twist on all the rounds is a great idea plus its tried & tested! Next time I'll be sure not to mention my chosen charity 0
-
Advertisement