>>> Home Page
>>> Go to Navigation/Site Map
>>> Go to Most Recent Posts

The Audacity of Pink Submitted by Michael Fielding on Mon, 10/26/2009 - 6:48am.

Quick: What’s the leading cause of death in women? (Just 57% of American women know the real answer.) No, it’s not breast cancer.

Ok, let’s try again. What’s the leading cause of death in women?

Huh, they’ve gotten to you, too, haven’t they? Komen for the Cure — the nation’s largest private charity dedicated to breast cancer research — has helped fund nearly every advance in breast cancer research by raising more than $800 million since it was founded in 1982. The charity’s pink ribbons and seemingly endless campaigns are everywhere.

It’s cause-related marketing at its finest, but at what price?

You may be familiar with the concept of “pinkwashing,” the term used to describe the corporate partnerships Komen has formed, which has allowed the charity to raise $30 million annually from those partnerships. Consumers are inundated with pink-ribbon promotions and products throughout the year — and particularly in October, “Breast Cancer Awareness Month.” (It’s also Domestic Violence Awareness Month and “Respect Life Month”, but I bet few of us knew that either.)

Komen certainly isn’t the only charity dedicated to breast cancer awareness. The Avon Foundation Breast Cancer Crusade and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation both contribute greatly to the cause as well.

I don’t fault any of them. It’s not their responsibility to raise awareness of heart disease, lung cancer or Alzheimer’s (or any of the other leading causes of death in women that make breast cancer #7 – just slightly ahead of diabetes). They’re focused on one thing, and they do it extremely well.

But do they do it too well? I’ve got mixed feelings about the breast cancer awareness movement. On the one hand, how can anyone conscientiously object to a cause that seeks to save lives? On the other hand, though, Komen and its peer organizations essentially are drawing funds away from research and treatment of the real leading causes of death in women: heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, chronic bronchitis/emphysema/asthma, and Alzheimer’s disease.

This is no case of a negative Ned howling over something about which he knows nothing. Both of my aunts have been treated for breast cancer. And even my mom fought it off late last year. In all three cases it was detected and treated. Period. They all survived it, and we all moved on. I can think of several friends whose own mothers have been treated for the disease as well.

In the end it’s not unlike any other highly treatable disease, such as kidney disease, which runs in my family. But just because I’m at an increased risk for it doesn’t mean I’m going all steely-eyed on the world and dedicating all my energy to fighting it. It is what it is.

With treatable diseases such as breast cancer, most survive. Some die. The point here is that Komen seems to take it stated mission — to “end breast cancer forever” — literally. So its supporters flood the media and the community with their zealous push to paint the world pink. So far they’ve been very successful.

Although heart disease is the #1 killer, breast cancer kills more women at a younger age, and Komen has capitalized on the related emotional aspects of that. But that doesn’t make heart disease any less worthy of awareness.

Heart disease kills eight times as many women (329,000 annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control) than breast cancer (41,000). Breast cancer isn’t even the most common cause of cancer death in women; lung cancer is. That disease kills 70% more women annually than breast cancer.

So the next time someone asks you to donate to the dozens of options provided by Komen, decide if that’s the most appropriate use of your money. Why? Because the National Cancer Institute (NCI) invested less than 5% of its $4.8 billion budget in lung cancer research in 2007. That translates into merely $1,414 per death compared to $23,754 per death for breast cancer research, according to the Lung Cancer Alliance. If that doesn’t convince you to think twice, consider this: Lung cancer takes more lives each year than breast, prostate, colon, kidney, melanoma and liver cancers combined. So why is breast cancer research being funded at more than 20 times that of lung cancer?

Is it because smoking is a major cause of lung cancer? What about the one in five women diagnosed with lung cancer who have never smoked?

And what about heart disease? Let’s move past the risk factors that have stigmatized it — the blame associated with lifestyle choices such as smoking or lack of exercise — because family history is actually the biggest risk factor.

When someone asks you to join the more than one million people who have participated in Komen’s annual Race for the Cure since 2005, think about whether your time might be better spent at a local Start! Heart Walk event sponsored by the American Heart Association or the annual Cupcakes for a Cause fundraiser to support the CancerCare for Kids program. After all, the five-year survival rate for breast cancer is now 87%; for lung cancer it remains at 15%. Research has played a major part in increasing the survival rate for breast cancer. I think it’s time to start allocating our time and finances to increasing the survival rate of diseases that take millions of more lives.

This year Nancy Brinker, Komen founder and sister of the cause’s namesake, was named Goodwill Ambassador for Cancer Control for the World Health Organization. I congratulate her. Although she has done much to change the way we think about breast cancer, it’s about time to realize that American women face greater health dangers than breast cancer.

There are a lot of organizations vying for your time and your dollars, and with so many to choose from, it can get overwhelming. But as Brinker asks us on Komen’s Web site, “Could one person really make a difference?”

Well, it couldn’t hurt to give it a try.

• Contrarian