Dan McKechnie

MORE AWARENESS The focus for breat cancer charities should be funding research, not making things pink.

Breast cancer needs more research, less shilling

Adrian Lahola-Chomiak
Gateway Writer

Oct 26, 2011

If you’re not already aware of the scourge of breast cancer, I recommend you get out from beneath the rock you’ve been living under and be bombarded by the relentless barrage that is the pink ribbon campaign. Because as all of us who grew up walking for the cure know, October marks yet another month of ribbon-adorned products and fundraising campaigns. But while raising awareness has its place, at this point, it needs to step aside and let a focus on research take over.

The first troubling aspect of the month is that to seem like a caring corporation, all you have to do is splash a coat of pink over your standard product alongside a message about breast cancer awareness. Pink granola bars, yogurts, newspapers and t-shirts are rolled out every year to raise awareness about a condition which has become a charity darling. Companies want to be associated with the cause more then they actually want to help — but superficial awareness gained from marketing can never replace the value of education about the real problems faced by those with breast cancer.

Among consumers, there seems to be an attitude that purchasing products branded with the ribbon equates to contributing to the effort. We’re at the point where posting a cryptic Facebook status update or changing your profile picture counts as advocacy. The increasing trend of this kind of involvement in the movement, rather than a focus on combating the central issues with breast cancer — diagnosis and treatment — is problematic.

Of course, many people do go beyond Facebook. Charity walks and runs pepper the October calendar and elicit a huge outpouring of support anywhere they happen. But rather than focus on raising meaningful awareness, they seem more concerned with building solidarity in communities. It’s hard to argue against the empowerment some people feel when surrounded by their peers, but the challenge facing breast cancer treatment now is not a deficit of community support. Allocating time and resources here is inefficient.

Getting people talking about breast cancer was important 20 years ago. Then, the main problem faced in treatment and research was the wall of silence erected by a society squeamish about the prospect of discussing breast illnesses. The challenges associated with initiating a discussion about the warning signs and treatments in the face of such stigmatism must have seemed insurmountable. But now that those problems have been addressed, the campaign’s incessant promotion of the word breast is outdated.

Worse, aspects of the campaign, like the advocacy of more mammograms, actually has real negative effects. According to an article by Ellen Walker for the New England Journal of Medicine, the increased rates of breast

cancer screening leads to overdiagnosis of certain cancers that are not deadly, often leading to unnecessary surgery. John Keen, a diagnostic radiographer, wrote in a communication in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine that there is only a five per cent chance that a mammogram will save a woman’s life. Balanced with the risks and wasted time with overtreatment, it’s not clear that pushing for more screening is the best use of our efforts at this point.

The money spent on promotion means that fewer resources go toward actually researching cures. Last year alone, according to information made available by the Canada Revenue Agency, the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation spent only 33 per cent of what it took in on charitable programs, including research grants. Considering the amount spent on events, advertising, and administration, a 2:1 ratio of dollars spent fundraising to dollars spent on charitable programs emerges. While this may be the case for some charities, it doesn’t have to be like this. Take for example the Salvation Army, who out of every dollar donated puts 87 per cent toward charitable programs.

The dogma of empowerment and solidarity as central tenants of the pink ribbon movement has become so pervasive as to undermine the role of breast cancer charities in society. I recognize that to those closest to the problem, the support evident in the walks and branding of the pink ribbon campaign likely elicits some strong emotions and bonding. However, the movement no longer reflects the main issues surrounding curing breast cancer. Instead it perpetuates the practice of slactivism and emotion in place of valuable education.

Next October, the campaign should reorient itself to serve the needs of today’s society — one in which comfort with the word “breast” has been established, and awareness with the cancer has been thoroughly raised. It’s time to put down the pink products, and focus our efforts on funding more effective treatnment and real prevention methods.

© Gateway Student Journalism Society — All Rights Reserved