Komen (I may lose my lib card for this)

_Fenton · February 2012

Explain why money that should be going to breast cancer research should be donated to screenings in the first place.

in my mind, if you want to support research, you donate to Komen. If you want to help low-income women get health care like mammograms and paps, you donate to Planned Parenthood. If a person is donating to Komen, they don't expect that money to end up in another organization. I imagine. so what's the problem?

BobLoblaw · February 2012

_Fenton:
Explain why money that should be going to breast cancer research should be donated to screenings in the first place?
in my mind, if you want to support research, you donate to Komen. If you want to help low-income women get health care like mammograms and paps, you donate to Planned Parenthood. If a person is donating to Komen, they don't expect that money to end up in another organization. I imagine. so what's the problem?

Unless I'm mistaken, Komen's main priority is "awareness", not research. Hence the pinking of America.

_Fenton · February 2012

I thought that awareness was a secondary goal and all that pink sh!t was sold to make money which was then donated to research, drug development, and clinical trials or whatever.

I guess I should look it up.

FallinAgain · February 2012

A large part of "curing cancer" is not just research but preventative care and early screenings. Plus, Komen is mostly a funding clearinghouse, right? It's not as if Komen is a research center.

The bigger problem is that, even for people who donated to PP, the idea that an organization that promotes itself as pro-woman and pro-ending breast cancer has pulled funding for an organization that largely provides healthcare and breast cancer screening for women because they hired an anti-legal abortion, right wing VP and have bought into the right wing view that PP is primarily an abortion provider. No one buys that it is not a political decision.

wingedbride · February 2012

They funnel their funds to other agencies that support a bunch of things, including research. They have supported PP for 5 years. The issue is suddenly cutting the funding to PP right when their new Senior VP just took over who opposes PP for religious reasons.

BobLoblaw · February 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/business/in-the-breast-cancer-fight-the-pinking-of-america.html?pagewanted=all

So they still pay $67mill a year towards mammograms and other forms of screening, but not to PP anymore? It's completely political and Komen's CEO is a moron if she thinks anyone will believe otherwise.

I tried to start a FB fight about this with my favorite fundie yesterday, but she didn't bite. She was all "but PP doesn't provide mammograms! watch this incredibly biased video!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq0kBkUZbvQ&feature=player_embedded

BobLoblaw · February 2012

Yeah, Karen Handel is a nutjob.

EssBe · February 2012

They spend roughly the same amount of money on research and screening ($75M and $67 M respecitvely).

Meanwhile, they spend $141M on "awareness." I wonder if that includes the fees for their "for the cure" lawsuits.

Most of their corporate partnerships are mainly to get their name out there. For example, the ON shirts they sold recently, just 5% of sales went to SGK. That means they got 75 cents for each shirt!

boxerfan · February 2012

This is from the "About Us" section of the Susan G Komen website:

Susan G. Komen fought breast cancer with her heart, body and soul. Throughout her diagnosis, treatments, and endless days in the hospital, she spent her time thinking of ways to make life better for other women battling breast cancer instead of worrying about her own situation. That concern for others continued even as Susan neared the end of her fight. Moved by Susan?s compassion for others and committed to making a difference, Nancy G. Brinker promised her sister that she would do everything in her power to end breast cancer forever.

That promise is now Susan G. Komen for the Cure?, the global leader of the breast cancer movement, having invested more than $1.9 billion since inception in 1982. As the world?s largest grassroots network of breast cancer survivors and activists, we?re working together to save lives, empower people, ensure quality care for all and energize science to find the cures. Thanks to events like the Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure? and the Susan G. Komen 3-Day for the Cure?, and generous contributions from our partners, sponsors and fellow supporters, we have become the largest source of nonprofit funds dedicated to the fight against breast cancer in the world.

The sentence I bolded is what I see as their mission. To me, the PP donations fall squarely into that "ensure quality care for all" bit. Early detection is so important to fighting Breast Cancer, so I've always seen screening as a major part of what the Komen foundation was supposed to support. I hate that they got so caught up in the political crap, and less people will get help because of it.

_Fenton · February 2012

Thank you for proving me wrong.

I still think it's odd they put so much money toward screening, but if they're doing it at all, screwing PP over sucks. I guess to me it's like people donating after Katrina to preventing another flood and money going toward both new levees and sandbags if the levees break again. How about we dump all the money into preventing a flood, not siphoning cash off to spend on bandaids on the fallout after everything's already gone to sh!t.

wingedbride · February 2012

_Fenton:
Thank you for proving me wrong.
I still think it's odd they put so much money toward screening, but if they're doing it at all, screwing PP over sucks. I guess to me it's like people donating after Katrina to preventing another flood and money going toward both new levees and sandbags if the levees break again. How about we dump all the money into preventing a flood, not siphoning cash off to spend on bandaids on the fallout after everything's already gone to sh!t.

It's like that but a step further. It's like not donating to help anything in New Orleans ever again because it's a place full of sinning and sinning sinners who sin.

ReturnOfKuus · February 2012

EssBe:
They spend roughly the same amount of money on research and screening ($75M and $67 M respecitvely).
Meanwhile, they spend $141M on "awareness." I wonder if that includes the fees for their "for the cure" lawsuits.
Most of their corporate partnerships are mainly to get their name out there. For example, the ON shirts they sold recently, just 5% of sales went to SGK. That means they got 75 cents for each shirt!

This. Komen is a bit of a scam. I did breast cancer research for years, in a building for cancer research in a department specifically for sex-linked cancers, and not only did we never get any Komen money, I've never known or known someone who has known anyone who has ever gotten Komen money. Precious little, like 25% or so, of their proceeds actually go to research, and dishearteningly large salaries go to the top execs.

_Fenton · February 2012

OK, so if that's the case, why would anyone give money to Komen ever again? If that's where you want your money to go, give to PP directly. If I'm going to donate to anything, PP is one of my top choices. I would never give to Komen and assume some of that money gets to another specific organization.

I get that it sucks that it's because of religious reasons. But what if it was because of a personal falling out between the leaders of the two organizations? Does it matter why? It is what it is and people should adjust their charitable giving accordlingly.

ReturnOfKuus · February 2012

I don't think people who give to Komen realize how shady they are in general. Good intentions, you know, and you'd think that such a publicly visible corporation... er, I mean, charity, would be able to be trusted.

What people are the most upset about, I think, is that this is a big hole in funding for screening poor women.

wingedbride · February 2012

I think most people in the US are idiots. And most people in the US love Komen and republican fundies, etc. We are sending a message repeatedly to these idiots that hating PP is the right thing to do because all they are good for are abortions and it's right to hate that. That's the thing that scares. More big legit agencies that do this, the more solid it seems to the idiots.

salimoo · February 2012

ReturnOfKuus:
I don't think people who give to Komen realize how shady they are in general. Good intentions, you know, and you'd think that such a publicly visible corporation... er, I mean, charity, would be able to be trusted.
What people are the most upset about, I think, is that this is a big hole in funding for screening poor women.

Yep.

Fortunately, I have seen a lot of my friends giving to PP instead of Komen in the past few days, so that's cool. Maybe this is what needed to happen to bring the shady stuff to light.

BobLoblaw · February 2012

ReturnOfKuus:
I don't think people who give to Komen realize how shady they are in general. Good intentions, you know, and you'd think that such a publicly visible corporation... er, I mean, charity, would be able to be trusted.

I totally agree. People would just rather buy pink shiit and think their money is making a difference.

FallinAgain · February 2012

_Fenton:
OK, so if that's the case, why would anyone give money to Komen ever again? If that's where you want your money to go, give to PP directly. If I'm going to donate to anything, PP is one of my top choices. I would never give to Komen and assume some of that money gets to another specific organization.
I get that it sucks that it's because of religious reasons. But what if it was because of a personal falling out between the leaders of the two organizations? Does it matter why? It is what it is and people should adjust their charitable giving accordlingly.

I think that's exactly why Komen really screwed themselves with this move. People donated to Komen to support the end of breast cancer, mostly in response to dynamite PR and marketing. I doubt many thought much beyond that. Before, most people thought of them as this wonderful organization dedicated to ending breast cancer in the name of the founder's dead sister. Now, they've made themselves look like an organization operating with a political agenda, even at the expense of the stated cause. That in turn has caused a lot of people to take a closer look at where Komen spends the money, and that ain't pretty.

The reason matters because politics matter. A personal falling out would look petty. This looks like a charity pushing a political agenda, and it plays on fears that reproductive rights are being infringed upon more and more in a variety of ways. Just as I would not contribute money to an anti-legal abortion candidate, I won't support an organization with an anti-legal abortion policy.

I'm really surprised you aren't more pissed about this.

Kitkatpattywhack · February 2012

My family participates in the race for the cure every year. We are one of the main sponsors. We also raise money once a year for the American cancer society. Komen with PP have held many several screening clinics and awareness projects in our area. So I've always been pro komen, but I take issue with them pulling funding from pp. We have a committee meeting on the 16th and I'm pretty sure we will be pulling sponsorship. This whole thing seems super shady and very political.

boxerfan · February 2012

My friend is a breast cancer survivor, and she's very involved in the Komen race for the cure. The only times I've given money to Komen, have been to donate to her fundraising efforts. I guess I always thought about it as supporting my friend, by giving money to a cause that's close to her heart. And to be honest, I didn't look into the Komen organization too closely. But now that all this has happened, I will definitely think twice about making that donation. I'm sure I'm not the only person in that position, so I think this might have a big effect on their donations.

scienarasucka · February 2012

EssBe:
They spend roughly the same amount of money on research and screening ($75M and $67 M respecitvely).
Meanwhile, they spend $141M on "awareness." I wonder if that includes the fees for their "for the cure" lawsuits.

I read $1M per year on trademark infringement lawsuits.

Also, Nancy Brinker, Susan Komen's sister, pulls a $531,924/year salary.

Shady shady shady.

I actually do know someone who got a Komen grant. It was a big deal. But it doesn't change that only 1/4 of the money that SGK pulls in actually goes back out. Plus the people making the pink crap see a lot of profit, too. It's such a scam.

pdxmouse · February 2012

FallinAgain:
I think that's exactly why Komen really screwed themselves with this move. People donated to Komen to support the end of breast cancer, mostly in response to dynamite PR and marketing. I doubt many thought much beyond that. Before, most people thought of them as this wonderful organization dedicated to ending breast cancer in the name of the founder's dead sister. Now, they've made themselves look like an organization operating with a political agenda, even at the expense of the stated cause. That in turn has caused a lot of people to take a closer look at where Komen spends the money, and that ain't pretty.
The reason matters because politics matter. A personal falling out would look petty. This looks like a charity pushing a political agenda, and it plays on fears that reproductive rights are being infringed upon more and more in a variety of ways. Just as I would not contribute money to an anti-legal abortion candidate, I won't support an organization with an anti-legal abortion policy.
I'm really surprised you aren't more pissed about this.

1) I'm wondering if I should start referring to the other side as "pro-illegal abortion" because I think people forget that's the end result.

2) I'm wondering what Fenton thinks Komen does as an organization. AFAIK, they don't have any facilities that do research or screening directly. All they do is fundraise, so questions about where that money is going are pretty darn pertinent to their mission.

3) It's really embarrassing how many non-USians I've seen online that are pretty shocked that we don't have basic screening available to everyone. "So you just wait and see if something seems wrong?"

4) The levee analogy only works if you currently have little bits spilling over right now as we speak, and the faster you get sandbags there the quicker homes can be saved. Sure, a long term plan is needed, but what about the thousands of women who could be saved with early detection now?

5) I probably shouldn't be, but I'm a little heartened that the attacks on PP are making so many people realize how important women's healthcare is. I was scared at first that the attacks wouldn't be challenged so much because it's "just abortion". I don't even think most of the defenders are hairy-legged feminists. Wooo! Mainstream!

DaringMiss · February 2012

To the best of my knowledge, SGK's funding to Planned Parenthood over the last 5 yeas provided 170,000 clinical screenings (i.e. having a medical professional check your breasts) and 6,400 referrals for mammograms in 19 different clinics. (taken directly from a PP email and website.)

Note: even if you are on state medical aid, you need a doctor's referral for a mammogram. If PP is providing your OBGYN care, they would be the ones to make the referral.

Planned Parenthood has set up a fund to which people can contribute to replace the money that SGK has pulled.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/politics-policy-issues/komen-foundation-ends-funding-breast-cancer-screenings-after-years-political-pressure-38620.htm

My mother has Stage 4 breast cancer. I will not walk or contribute to SGK ever again.

EssBe · February 2012

Yeah, Brett and I both do the BR Race with our office teams, and I do the Memphis one with my family as well. We talked about it last night and we're adding the registration money to our normal PP donation. I think we might make it a separate donation in Karen Handel's name.

scienarasucka · February 2012

I found Brinker's response to be laughably disingenuous.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/02/146258585/komen-says-efficiency-not-politics-drove-planned-parenthood-change?ps=sh_sthdl%3Fsc%3Dfb&cc=fp

BULLSHIT it's not political. You don't hire an extreme right winger VP and then try to claim that defunding PP isn't political.

FallinAgain · February 2012

scienarasucka:
I found Brinker's response to be laughably disingenuous.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/02/146258585/komen-says-efficiency-not-politics-drove-planned-parenthood-change?ps=sh_sthdl%3Fsc%3Dfb&cc=fp

BULLSHIT it's not political. You don't hire an extreme right winger VP and then try to claim that defunding PP isn't political.

Yes. In some weird way, I'd have more respect for Komen if they said that they will no longer contribute to groups that provide abortions. At least that would be honest. But I'm not sure honesty is their strong suit.

Has anyone been following the comments on their FB page? Despite their best efforts to DD the negative ones, there are thousands.

pdxmouse · February 2012

scienarasucka:
I found Brinker's response to be laughably disingenuous.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/02/146258585/komen-says-efficiency-not-politics-drove-planned-parenthood-change?ps=sh_sthdl%3Fsc%3Dfb&cc=fp

BULLSHIT it's not political. You don't hire an extreme right winger VP and then try to claim that defunding PP isn't political.

I don't doubt it's political for a minute. But I would give Komen the benefit of the doubt if they could show that they have a way to get poor women screening just as efficiently as they can through PP. I doubt they can, PP is pretty much everywhere and already set up to deliver these services, and you can't get much more efficient than already existing infrastructure.

FallinAgain · February 2012

pdxmouse:
scienarasucka:
I found Brinker's response to be laughably disingenuous.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/02/146258585/komen-says-efficiency-not-politics-drove-planned-parenthood-change?ps=sh_sthdl%3Fsc%3Dfb&cc=fp

BULLSHIT it's not political. You don't hire an extreme right winger VP and then try to claim that defunding PP isn't political.
I don't doubt it's political for a minute. But I would give Komen the benefit of the doubt if they could show that they have a way to get poor women screening just as efficiently as they can through PP. I doubt they can, PP is pretty much everywhere and already set up to deliver these services, and you can't get much more efficient than already existing infrastructure.

I'd give them the benefit of the doubt if they could point to other orgs that have had funding pulled for "efficiency."

Also, I wonder how much donation money went to Brinker's plastic surgeon.

scienarasucka · February 2012

FallinAgain:

I'd give them the benefit of the doubt if they could point to other orgs that have had funding pulled for "efficiency."
Also, I wonder how much donation money went to Brinker's plastic surgeon.

I almost said something about the amount of money spent on Botox, but deleted it.

You'd think they could have sprung for a better stylist, though, that hair is atrocious.

FallinAgain · February 2012

No part of her head, other than her swollen lips, moved. at. all.

scienarasucka · February 2012

Interesting. And completely unsurprising.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-official-resigned-over-planned-parenthood-cave-in/252405/

Komen (I may lose my lib card for this)

Re: Komen (I may lose my lib card for this)

Choose Another Board

Search Boards