ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, December 04, 2017

#MORETHAN4

I have to admit, the low percentage of cancer money dedicated to researching pediatric cancers kind of shocked me.
Joey Bosa, defensive end, Los Angeles Chargers. The other day, I was discussing with Bosa a column he was doing for The MMQB about a teenage boy he’d met in Houston, Sean, who had twice beaten cancer. Bosa decided to let Sean design his cleats for “My Cause, My Cleats,” the program in which the league allowed players to wear cleats designed to promote whatever cause is nearest and dearest to them. Bosa decided on pediatric cancer. So instead of asking Bosa for his Most Valuable Possession, I’ll let him pen his feelings about his Most Valuable Cleats, designed by his high-school buddy.

“Sean educated me on a lot of things about cancer. He told me, ‘Did you know that out of all the money raised for cancer research, only 4 percent goes to pediatric cancer?’ That just shocked me. That is not my world at all. I never even thought of it. I just thought how unfair that seemed. Four percent? Four percent? That just made a huge impact on me … I asked Sean if he wanted to design my cleats this year. I think he was pretty excited about it. I connected him with my rep at adidas, and I let Sean do whatever he wanted. You probably know breast cancer is pink. Pediatric cancer is gold. So they came up with these cleats.

“It’s Sean’s message to the cancer community: CHILDREN DESERVE #MORETHAN4. I love it. I think it’s fantastic. And I hope America gets to see his message from coast to coast.”
That's ridiculous. It makes no sense to devote so much research and health care money to old people who have already lived their lives at the expense of children who haven't had the opportunity to live them yet. The NFL should trade pink for gold.

The NFL is doing a lot that is wrong and is justly suffering the consequences of Roger Goodell's stupid decisions. But one recent initiative I do like is the way they are permitting the players to use their cleats to support various causes.

Labels: ,

71 Comments:

Blogger Matthew December 04, 2017 8:03 AM  

Boomerposts incoming.

Blogger Salt December 04, 2017 8:08 AM  

St. Jude's and Shriners, a better investment than season football tickets.

https://www.stjude.org/

Blogger Desdichado December 04, 2017 8:11 AM  

It'd be hilarious if in the wake of the absurd Steinle court decision a group of players designed some White Lives Matter imagery. Solid white socks with a b&w picture of Steinle on them, maybe.

Instead of taking a knee during the anthem, they could come out and moon the black performers during the halftime show or something.

Blogger U PC BRO? December 04, 2017 8:15 AM  

Yes @2. You want to support pediatric cancer patients, give to St. Judes.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 04, 2017 8:16 AM  

Boomerpost here; it's been nearly two generations since Roe v Wade announced to the world (including the world's children) that a plurality of prospective mothers viewed "new life" as a nuisance, and its extermination as "her choice."

At what point do you wish to date the beginning of our "Grizzly Man Political System," where that same plurality of citizen/voters began a full court press to force everyone to live in their delusion-saturated world?

At what point did the "Never-dad Cad" PUA ethos, celebrating willing pill-sterilized girls (whose backup plan is misopristol or a D&C) attain respectability?

Anonymous Icicle December 04, 2017 8:16 AM  

The NFL should trade pink for gold.

Also prostate cancer. More common than breast cancer, and we have less effective treatments for it.

Blogger Raggededge December 04, 2017 8:21 AM  

This is Nate's favorite topic...I'm going to get my popcorn.

Anonymous JamesV December 04, 2017 8:23 AM  

I'm not sure this decision by Goodell was stupid if the goal was to get more women watching the NFL. He is appealing to their solipsistic nature.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 04, 2017 8:27 AM  

US (and Western) society has exhibited all the bitchy narcissism of a Sex In The City rerun for over 50 years. The Grizzly Man (collectivized) Insanity is so bad that recycling fetal body parts through Planned (non)Parenthood isn't even a scandal, much less the capital crime of the millennium.

We have a Death Becomes Her political and social ethic because our society is so sick that proper description is impossible.

Whether one believes a manic boom of this amplitude will be followed with a cataclysmic bust of similar proportion, or that God's Wrath has built to Biblical proportion, no society that sails this far off the edge of Sanity Map can avoid what's coming.

Blogger The Observer December 04, 2017 8:28 AM  

That's ridiculous. It makes no sense to devote so much research and health care money to old people who have already lived their lives at the expense of children who haven't had the opportunity to live them yet.

Old people have money, children don't.

Anonymous The Original Arrogant Steelers Fan December 04, 2017 8:30 AM  

It's not a very nice thing to say, but just about all of these charities are naked scams.

Speaking of which, the entire cancer industry is a scam. We now know that everything from organic bananas to hydrogen peroxide to apple cider vinegar cures caner (alkalize the body and, poof, it disappears?).

The only treatment that absolutely does not cure cancer is radiation therapy.

Anonymous Kazkus December 04, 2017 8:36 AM  

I learned this when my 5 month old was diagnosed with Neuroblastoma in 2012. We are now very careful of which groups we will give money to.

OpenID bc64a9f8-765e-11e3-8683-000bcdcb2996 December 04, 2017 8:38 AM  

I'm thinking that when "research" is limited to "Gee, let's try THIS!" then old craash test dummies are probably better because
meh, no great loss of life anyway.
Pediatric/ genetic is a dicier zone to paddle in.
Only 4% ?
Let's look at how much actually goes to actual "research", including experimental treatment, from ANY "charitable/ activist/event fund from donations, and corporate deductible sponsorship.
Especially "Children's","Woman's", or "animal's" ....anything.
CaptDMO

Blogger dc.sunsets December 04, 2017 8:43 AM  

Old people have money, children don't.
Meaningless. The 4% figure simply reveals the social hierarchy of importance.
1. A new baby? (negative, based on the cost to abort one.)
2. A child? (low, based on how many adults now choose the child-free life, how much parents whiz away on booze, drugs, cigs, etc., and how complacent are parents about the batguano crazy experiments in "education" now in vogue, not to mention the social and environmental catastrophes promised by the immivasion of tens of millions (if not hundreds of millions) of culturally alien people.)

People actively support the replacement of their very own kids by the children of Mestizo, Somali, Pakistani, et.al. invaders.

Given this, I'm actually surprised the 4% figure is as high as it is.

Anonymous SidVic December 04, 2017 8:50 AM  

I don't think the 4% of total is as bad as it sounds. While childhood specific cancers are present; in some respects all cancer is cancer. Cells that grow without control. Thus, understanding the basic mechanisms through which this occurs can translate into treatments across the cancer type spectrum. The % funds that go to work that could impact a childhood cancer is much higher. Additionally, funding tagged for metabolism or endocrinology could very well easily impact cancer treatments.
A conservative case can be made that the federal research effort should be highly geared to basic research (companies won't do it) and that treatments should be left to companies with profit motive (the goverment does everything slow and inefficiently).

Blogger Brad Richards December 04, 2017 8:51 AM  

I don't know where that 4% figure comes from - I couldn't find a source for it. However, I expect that's about what it shoudl be.

Cancer is caused by damaged cells that misbehave, by replicating out of control. Research on how to target and kill misbehaving cells is largely independent of the age of the patient. More important is likely the source of the cells: treatments for breast cancer may (or may not) be equally effective on pancreatic cancer.

There is some room for child-specific research when it come to understanding the causes of specific cancers that occur more frequently in children. Also in checking the safety and effectiveness of specific treatments. If the 4% is a real figure, this may be the kind of research it covers.

Anonymous Rien December 04, 2017 8:51 AM  

"all the money raised for cancer research, only 4 percent"

By "raised" does that mean only of the money that people voluntary donate to cancer research?

Then the onerous goes directly to the people donating or not donating. Not necessarily to anybody else.

Anonymous Faceless December 04, 2017 9:13 AM  

You can always get women to vote by claiming you believe in the "women's issues" of transferring money to women. They don't care if that money comes from men or children, because a sick major subset is incapable of forming emotional bonds with either.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 04, 2017 9:19 AM  

Matthew wrote:Boomerposts incoming.

Yup.

Blogger Aeroschmidt December 04, 2017 9:26 AM  

Makes no sense?

Old people are the ones with money.

It's like noticing the disparity of medical spending between the US and Nigeria.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 04, 2017 9:26 AM  

bc64a9f8-765e-11e3-8683-000bcdcb2996 wrote:Let's look at how much actually goes to actual "research", including experimental treatment, from ANY "charitable/ activist/event fund from donations, and corporate deductible sponsorship.


Are you a Boomer? My crazy sidebar social science predicts prevarication.

I mean, obviously the real issue is common sense gun control. How can we spend all this time worrying about X when Y is also bad, nay, WORSE?

Anonymous Children's Lives Matter December 04, 2017 9:31 AM  

As someone who has had breast cancer twice now, I think it's ridiculous how much money and attention goes to breast cancer "awareness" and allegedly to researching cures. Allegedly, because from what I understand, not very much of the money donated to the cause is actually used for research.

There is increasing awareness in medical research that lifestyle has something to do with many cancers, including breast. Sugar consumption, sedentary lifestyle, etc. It takes very little funding to tell people to live more restrictively. But no one wants to hear that it might be their fault, and it's all political, which is why breast cancer gets the most attention. And, of course, much of this is driven by big pharma.

I doubt the lifestyle of children has much or anything to do with most pediatric cancers, since the patients haven't lived long enough to destroy their own health. Therefore, it merits special research. However, politically, this is probably a loser. I suspect there is not nearly as much money to be made through pediatric cancer, partly because they represent a relatively small number of patients, but also because, for some societally sick reason, we don't as a nation actually value our children very much. If we did, we wouldn't be having so few of them, aborting them, herding them into a failed educational system, and drugging them into oblivion.

Be careful where you donate your money. Personally, I refuse to give one penny to conventional cancer charities, like Susan B. Komen. From what I understand, donating directly to children's hospitals might be a better bet. Also, to charities that house patients' families, since they often have to travel for treatment at significant cost.

Blogger Ceasar December 04, 2017 9:33 AM  

The "only 4%" is a lie. Just like the "there are 450 million children battling hunger in the US". Why do you want children to die? Btw, cancer research helps all cancer patients in developing cures.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 04, 2017 9:34 AM  

#BlackChildrenMatter

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 04, 2017 9:35 AM  

Ceasar wrote:The "only 4%" is a lie. Just like the "there are 450 million children battling hunger in the US". Why do you want children to die? Btw, cancer research helps all cancer patients in developing cures.

Lol, spell your name right first, then jump in the deep end.

Anonymous rienzi December 04, 2017 9:42 AM  

11. The Original Arrogant Steelers Fan:"The only treatment that absolutely does not cure cancer is radiation therapy."


I beg to differ. I had prostate cancer that was just about as bad as it could be without being out of the prostate. After enough radiation to kill the population of Hiroshima, the cancer is gone. Not just knnocked back. Gone completely.

Thanks for the information on organic bananas and apple cider vinegar. I'll try to incorporate them into my diet on the chance that you may be correct as to their efficacy. I'm generally pretty leery of these homeopathic "miracle cures", but then who knows? The body is a pretty complex organism.

Blogger The Chortling December 04, 2017 9:43 AM  

Meanwhile, back at NFL HQ. SJW fires rage out of control.

hearsay?

Capitulating to the antics of players disrespecting the national anthem, the National Football League agreed to donate nearly $90 million over the next 7 years to support left-of-center social justice causes.

If that act alone isn’t enough to raise eyebrows, where the NFL is reportedly planning to get the money certainly will.

According to one of the athletes at the forefront of the protests, San Francisco 49ers safety Eric Reid [#35 in the photograph below], the windfall will come at the expense of the league’s planned financial support for breast cancer and military charities.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/12/02/nfl-will-cut-breast-cancer-military-charity-funds-pay-players-89-million-social-justice-activism-source-570469

Blogger Catenian December 04, 2017 9:52 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Pre-Boomre December 04, 2017 10:00 AM  

Two reason why paediatric cancer research may be a low priority:

1. As already discussed, research on adults applies to children as well.

2. Proportionately very few children die of cancer.

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/mortality/age#heading-Zero

And yes, radiation therapy did cure my highly aggressive cancer very quickly - for the time being at least. I'll try the organic bananas and cider vinegar as well just to be safe.

Blogger Nate December 04, 2017 10:02 AM  

I would have to see the source of this claim. Cancer Research Funding is bigger than most realize. in the US alone about 5 billion is raised every year for it. World wide the number is more like 11 billion. Since organized fund raising began decades ago over 4 trillion has been raised.

To put that in perspective... St Jude received about 20 million in 2016. Now that doesn't mean you should feel bad for them. they have over 100 million in cash... and when according to the auditor are basically sitting on 4 billion in terms of net worth... only 700 million of which is property and equipment.



Blogger rumpole5 December 04, 2017 10:07 AM  

Boomer here. Yes children do deserve more than 4% for cancer research. When they grow up they pay into medicare and social security! And, While we're at it, how about a tax credit to encourage Millennials to get married, stay married and birth some more of those children. On top of the regular child credit, Every married return should get an extra $500 credit for the first kid, and $1000 for the second, and $1500 for those thereafter. A lot of those married household kids would be western culture imbued (or white if you like) kids who would then go on to pay into MY social security. Also, maybe if Millennials had kids they would be less likely to have those stupid little "kid substitute" dogs that shit all over MY lawn.

Blogger Desdichado December 04, 2017 10:09 AM  

Children's Lives Matter wrote:As someone who has had breast cancer twice now, I think it's ridiculous how much money and attention goes to breast cancer "awareness" and allegedly to researching cures. Allegedly, because from what I understand, not very much of the money donated to the cause is actually used for research.
Well, if it specifically says it's about "raising awareness" then I wouldn't expect any of it to go to research. I have no patience whatsoever for "awareness" campaigns anyway. Pure virtue-signaling. It makes the participants feel good and tell others about how good they are like they're doing something to make the world better without actually requiring them to do anything at all.

OpenID b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 December 04, 2017 10:14 AM  

What % of all cancer is pediatric cancer?

And that isn't just from a what helps more people standpoint. It factors into the difficulty of running controlled experiments. If a doctor in Boston has an idea, they probably aren't going to find more than a dozen kids within an hours drive that have the same type/stage of cancer, and then he has to get them all on board for the treatment options.

Meanwhile, desperate geriatrics are a dime a dozen.

WB

Blogger Amy December 04, 2017 10:15 AM  

Cancer research is the railroad-landgrab of the 20th/21st centuries. Dupe the plebes into funding your work, ..., profit!

Not that it’s all wasted or lost, just that it preys on emotions, as all advertising (or (((advertising)))) does, to separate people from their money.

Anonymous BBGKB December 04, 2017 10:27 AM  

‘Did you know that out of all the money raised for cancer research, only 4 percent goes to pediatric cancer?’

To be honest I am surprised that much actually goes to cancer research. UNICEF only has 5 cents out of every dollar going toward actual charity work & is the biggest poisoner of kids in the world. Many charities only have 10% of the money raised going toward their goals.

Blogger Almodavar December 04, 2017 10:36 AM  

"It makes no sense to devote so much research and health care money to old people " It makes lots of sense Vox. It's a much much larger market, and if you are developing new cancer drugs, you develop for the ones that will bring you the best return. Besides, many of those drugs can then be used for pediatric cancer.

Blogger Almodavar December 04, 2017 10:40 AM  

@11

As someone who survived cancer thanks to radiotherapy, I call bullshit.

Blogger Patrick Pham December 04, 2017 10:45 AM  

Children don't have income accrued over an entire career of work or a voice in the political system. The only advocates for them would be most likely their parents. Old people, on the other hand, can freely advocate for society to take care of them - when it would be the least utilitarian thing to do. That's why boner pills and hair dye are multi-billion dollar industries while children's chemo meds are not.

Blogger Chris Mallory December 04, 2017 10:52 AM  

From what I could find, that 4% number applies to Federal money spent at the National Cancer Institute. I could not find a total spent on cancer including private monies.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 04, 2017 11:16 AM  

b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 wrote:Meanwhile, desperate geriatrics are a dime a dozen.


Well, the wages of sin is death, so dying is effectively an admission of guilt. But hey, I'm sure we'll have immortality science by the time *I* get older...

Blogger Arthur Isaac December 04, 2017 11:27 AM  

They don't care if that money comes from men or children, because a sick major subset is incapable of forming emotional bonds with either.

Something that the survivors of the Titanic showed us. It's all talk until lives are on the line. Watch the actions, not the words.

Blogger Silent Cal December 04, 2017 11:34 AM  

My six year old grandson was diagnosed with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) two years ago. Thanks to excellent care (Wolfson Children's Hospital) and much prayer, he is doing very well.

September is Childhood Cancer Awareness Month. My daughter and her friends put a lot of effort into making gold bows for people to put on their mailboxes.

The best way to help a family who has a child with cancer is through direct support (GoFundMe,ect). You can also help by donating to your local children's hospital.

I don't expect to ever watch another NFL game, but I have to get credit to Coach Tom Coughlin, Tim Tebow, and the Jacksonville Jaguars for their support of Wolfson Children's Hospital in Jacksonville.

Blogger NO GOOGLES December 04, 2017 11:35 AM  

While I agree with the point of children cancer patients being prioritized because they have their life ahead of them if cured - mathematically the 4% figure is not surprising.

Children get cancer in much smaller numbers/much lower rates than older people. Cancer is chiefly the disease of age after all. That being said, our broken society spends so much breast cancer research for the same reason as a lot of ridiculous or evil priorities: the principle evil of the West is telling women "no" or making them feel bad. So everything else must be sacrificed to the idol of feminine prerogative.

Anonymous view December 04, 2017 11:59 AM  

Proportionately very few children die of cancer. glad you brought that statistic to my attention, it makes it easier for me to Love God

Blogger Elder Son December 04, 2017 12:20 PM  

@26 Pharmaceutical companies can not patent mother nature. If they can not copy/replicate the cure, the cure doesn't exist.

Blogger Elder Son December 04, 2017 12:22 PM  

@44 God is not responsible for cancer.

Anonymous iforgotmyscreenname December 04, 2017 12:30 PM  

I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of cancer funding went to Boomers.

Blogger Elder Son December 04, 2017 12:55 PM  

Most cancer research funding goes to the tit.

Anonymous BBGKB December 04, 2017 1:03 PM  

NY Giants player tells people not to come to the game

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/3/olivier-vernon-disgruntled-nfl-fans-dont-come/

Blogger Johnny December 04, 2017 1:37 PM  

>>Capitulating to the antics of players disrespecting the national anthem, the National Football League agreed to donate nearly $90 million over the next 7 years to support left-of-center social justice causes.

Now as a bystander I can't know what the possibilities are, but this seems like another really dumb deal on the part of the NFL. Amazing really. If they are going to do this and not have it be a lure for being pressured into coming up with more loot, they had to write some teeth into it. Something like we will do such and such, and the players understand that any player who gets involved in a political display will be subject to disciplinary measures up to and including being dismissed from the team. Instead the stupid thing is open ended and anticipates that 'good will' will get it done among the players. With so many already pandered to players, that seems unlikely

Blogger Johnny December 04, 2017 1:43 PM  

Medical research goes to whatever portion of the population wants it. Most men don't thing about this stuff, and thus get little research money. A whole lot for breast cancer and not much for prostate cancer, the man's problem.

As best I can recall about half of all medical expense is spent on the last nine months of life. The only way to fix it is to allow for earlier termination life. I am not keen on the gov deciding on when I should die, but otherwise I can go along with the idea if properly implemented.

Blogger Elder Son December 04, 2017 2:08 PM  

I am not keen on the gov deciding on when I should die, but otherwise I can go along with the idea if properly implemented.

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is also big enough to take away everything you have.

And people wonder how we got to where we are in the first place.

A whole lot for breast cancer and not much for prostate cancer, the man's problem.

The mans problem: infatuation with everything tit. Tit awareness 24/7. By and large, it is the men who raise money for tit cancer. Our Sheriff Dept. does it annually. Almost every auto shop participates in Race For Ta-Ta Awareness.

OpenID doktorjeep December 04, 2017 2:14 PM  

Well it certainly IS the apex of boomerism that money to extend the (useless lives) of (useless) old boomers is spent at the expense of saving the lives of the young.

In a way, one of the things the boomers fear most is having to face consequences for their actions so far as eating like a kid at a birthday party every day might shorten their lives.

This is going to be one of the battles of our times. As the mass voting block boomers scratch and claw for every last moment on this earth, as has been their hiding from the concept of death their entire lives instead of preparing for it, expect to see more fat gray-haired boomers past their shelf lives trying to justify organ transplants, yet more tax dollars, and other things for the only.

And we will hear "why do you want to kill granny?"

Remember, one of the core ideals of Obamacare was to get young people into it as a means of subsidizing the old.

Of course if the boomers got their way it would be comical when they end up with swarth hordes outvoting them saying "why don't you just die you old gringo?"

Blogger Elder Son December 04, 2017 2:31 PM  

Well it certainly IS the apex of boomerism that money to extend the (useless lives) of (useless) old boomers is spent at the expense of saving the lives of the young.

The VAST majority of cancer research is on saving the TIT. On the other hand, most money is not spent extending Boomer life, but ADULT cancer research. You are an adult, I presume?

Anonymous Daniel December 04, 2017 3:20 PM  

@2

What Salt said. St. Jude'd does good work. Here is another good organization.

Maggie's mission. Let's do our small part to fight childhood cancers.

https://www.maggiesmission.org/

Blogger MeneMene December 04, 2017 3:39 PM  

rienzi: "homeopathic "miracle cures""

"Homeopathic" does not mean what you think it means. It is not a synonym for "holistic" or "herbal".

Blogger Johnny December 04, 2017 4:23 PM  

We had a neighbor who told this friends that he didn't want to die in a hospital and that when he felt his health was bad enough he would self terminate his life. Not being a lefty wuss, his chosen method was not an intravenous feed. Rather he chose to keep a shotgun parked next to the bed. I believe it can be said with certainty that he did not suffer long.

The way it works out most commonly (I suspect), is that a person has some symptom. It is serious enough that a trip to the hospital is made. At this point the patient is apt to be semi sedated even if not officially on some sedation. They runs some tests and doctor recommends this or that or life will terminate. Most of us will choose to to take the cure. Thus the "(useless) old boomers" are around for a little while longer.

Blogger Danby December 04, 2017 5:09 PM  

Cancer charity is a racket. viturally none of the e.g. breast cancer charities do a single damn thing to cure or palliate breast cancer, particularly the (((Komen))) Foundation. Nothing. Their money is spent entirely on 1) fundraising and 2) awareness. Are you aware? Did you know that women get tittie cancer?!?!?!? Titties with cancer!!! isn't it sad?
That's literally the level and content of their "awareness" campaign.

Oh, and giving some of their money to Planned Parenthood, for procedures that will increase the incidence of breast cancer.

If you really want to help people with cancer, donate to charities that provide free or subsidized treatment and emotional support for people with cancer. St. Jude's, in particular, is fantastic, as is Shriner's, which treated my granddaughter for a different problem.

iforgotmyscreenname wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if 80% of cancer funding went to Boomers.
Since cancer is primarily a disease of people over 50, you do the math.

Blogger LP9 December 04, 2017 5:27 PM  

Medicated post surgery and then I fell, head injury but I am trying to string words, logic together. A Fail but I try.

Mere observation; locally then online.

The American Medical Model is LETHAL. The food supply is lethal, the fork, feminism, NAFTAm GATT, Immigration, MGTOW, SJWers are lethal to you, put it done, put the fruit down EVE!!

"More than what?" The Evil loves cancer killing us when we were forced onto Medicaid b/c we cannot pay or afford then the taxpayer paid for my surgery, it was a sickening reality, I dont want anyone paying for me EVER!

100 years ago it was an oddity that many doctors came to see a child with cancer.

Among abortions, subliminal suicide messages, virtue signaling their misery,refusal to move forward and live life, the pedo elites or the grand master planners el retardos or psychos does not want, fear, 'awake' young people alive per example youtube; there are millions of teenagers and millenials (whom are NOT antifa) that are never going to be drugged taxpaying servants to the corrupt farcical country called America.

The youth will fight or will vote POTUS Trump 2020, refuse evil vaxxing and reject the current non reality on local and national tv. These kids are not tv heads they are for Christ, they are for a traditional normal lifestyle minus the joke of college.

POTUS Trump is a step in the right direction making America less ruined and corrupt, SJW and women ruin everything, yeah they do but we are stuck these sick pple vote to marry the gov't not a nice white man and rage against the (Justice) safety of a Patriarchy to the white and the blacks and Jews, Jews with Jews, whites to white, blacks to blacks and deport, export Islam to Turkey.

Really, if you dont want Trump 2020; Deport yourself.

Blogger LP9 December 04, 2017 5:40 PM  

Stop it, cancer donations never saved mom or me it all goes to administration women w/ their precious salary while they collect their husbands salary and take from the most to the bank and laugh, I mean laugh, because the cancer matter nets them a JOB, among the dire horror show; then pain mgmt is rationed TO CHILDREN, to anyone under 40 per the drug LIE meme.

Go to hell (your evil people know whom you are) for harming, mocking and rationing pain mgmt to the children, young and the old and then genx trying to live.

MoreThan, what did you expect, them to help you or care, your alone, you have no one really, your doctor cannot help you too much. Fight and Pray.


Anonymous Icicle December 04, 2017 6:03 PM  

To be fair, let me offer a counterexample: if I can get a treatment to work in some frail 70-year-old, the treatment should work in a robust 30-year-old.

Blogger Elder Son December 04, 2017 6:31 PM  

But the same treatment that works for a 70 and 30 year old, may not work on a child. Usually because causation is different - microscopic type - embryonic features. Anyhow, off the top of my head, the childhood rate for surviving cancer is up to, I think, increased from 28 percent to 70 percent from the 1960's. Up a little for adults about a 16.5 percent increase.

The bottom line is at @59 and the vaxxing of babies and young children... no one does it like America does it. Besides, TP'sTB are not really interested in cures, but life-long patients.

Anonymous Azimus December 04, 2017 7:44 PM  

Tie SS benefit to number of children birthed and raised to adulthood...45% each for first 2, 10% each for any additional up to 150%

Anonymous Avalanche December 04, 2017 9:30 PM  

@27 "expense of the league’s planned financial support for breast cancer and military charities."

!! They've already pissed off many thousands of patriotic Americans -- and now they're going to short the U.S. MILITARY to (once again, what is WRONG with White people?!) give it to the lying-negro-violent-activists -- and think that, somehow will make patriotic Americans HAPPY!?!? Have they not yet learned that 'paying negroes to not be violent and destructive' NEVER works!?

Anonymous Avalanche December 04, 2017 9:31 PM  

@31 "Every married return should get an extra $500 credit for the first kid, and $1000 for the second, and $1500 for those thereafter."

Aren't we already PAYING that to the illegals and "refugees"?!

Anonymous Avalanche December 04, 2017 9:55 PM  

@53 "And we will hear "why do you want to kill granny?""

And as one old enough to be a granny, but having no kids and no expectations that either of my two nephews will want to 'take me in' -- what I am to do? I am 100% SURE I will arrange to NOT be tied to a bed in a nursing home, crying that 'I can't breath' while negro "nurses" laugh and watch (did you not watch that video? did you not see that head nurse saying somberly how she had done CPR on the 89-yr-old veteran until the ambulance arrived -- when the family had hidden camera footage of that very nurse and her staff laughing over the man's bed as he fought for every literal last breath!? The thing that infuriates me is: she lost her nursing license and her job -- why is she not JAILED for negligent homicide?!)

So, Christianity (or is it only Catholicism?) says suicide is a mortal sin. Why should I NOT kill myself off (hopefully not for many years; hopefully BEFORE I become too debilitated to manage it) to prevent such a horror? WHY is there not an option to opt out painlessly and quickly? Hell, we do it for our beloved pets!

So, can we have a serious discussion of: "what if granny WANTS to be killed, humanely and painlessly?"

(And oh yeah, let's NOT start with: "you shoulda had kids; too bad for you!" I DID NOT, so let's start with all the folks like that; or the ones whose kids can't or won't be able to 'take care of' granny. (My sisters and I are facing that right now with a demented 95-yr-old mother.)

Anonymous logprof December 04, 2017 9:55 PM  

I agree.

A nonagenarian like Jimmy Carter gets cancer?

Eh, cancer sucks, but it's a disease of old age?

A young athlete like Mario Lemieux or Eric Berry gets cancer? Okay, that sucks a lot more.

But a child gets cancer? That is a *true* tragedy.

Anonymous Avalanche December 04, 2017 10:14 PM  

@57 " a person has some symptom. It is serious enough that a trip to the hospital is made."

Everyone should read Atul Gawande's amazing book on end of life, and end of life decision making: Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End. (This guy: https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/atul-gawande ) Both for you parents and for your selves!

Anonymous zebedee December 05, 2017 2:13 AM  

Cancer is a disease that affects old people. According to the following statistics less than 1% of incidences of cancer occur in people under the age of 25. People in the age cohort of 25-49 account for 10% of cancer cases and it ramps up dramatically from there. Those most at risk are in the age cohort 85+. This should come as no surprise since cancer is the result of mutation in cells and the more times your cells divide (over the course of your life) the more likelihood a mutation will occur. In the circumstances 4% of funding for childhood cancers doesn't sound so bad.

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/incidence/age#heading-Zero



Blogger Ben Kurtz December 05, 2017 9:29 AM  

Less than 4% of cancer research money goes to pediatric cancers...

But fewer than 1% of all cancer diagnoses in the U.S. in 2017 are expected to be in persons under the age of 19, and less than 0.3% of all cancer deaths in the U.S. in 2017 are expected to be in persons under the age of 19.

Figures available at:
https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/cancer-facts-figures-2017.html
https://www.cancer.gov/types/childhood-cancers/child-adolescent-cancers-fact-sheet

So yeah... if you want to argue injustice and disproportion, I'll take the other side of that debate: Pediatric cancer research is funded at 13 TIMES the rate that cancer kills kids -- how is that fair to the rest of society?

Sure, a child dying of a brain tumor at age 5 is a terrible tragedy that robbed an innocent soul of perhaps 80 years of life; but a 50 year old man dying of skin cancer is robbed of 30 years of life, and at the same time a wife and several children are robbed of their primary breadwinner and family anchor.

I don't see how first principals decides this duel of the tragedies -- and most adult cancer sob-stories and fundraising efforts center around cancers that often strike down the middle aged (adults 35-60). Susan G. Komen for the Cure (breast cancer charity) was named after a woman who died at age 36. Tina's Wish (ovarian cancer charity) was named after a woman who died at age 54. Ed Randall's Fans for the Cure (prostate cancer charity) was named after a man who was diagnosed at age 47 (he survived with treatment).

Saying that this is about wee innocent children vs. wizened old hags is a false choice. The real tragedies of adult cancers are people cut down in their prime, suddenly leaving behind spouses, small children, relatives, friends and colleagues. A 50 year old man probably has a 35 TIMES higher chance of being diagnosed with cancer in the next ten years than a 10 year old boy (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4544764/). Really old folks have even worse odds, but we can ignore them while observing that the tragic middle aged cases far outnumber the tragic childhood cases.

Blogger Owen December 07, 2017 5:39 PM  

Usually not as aggressive though. And since it affects old men mainly, the "treatment " is to keep a watch on him. My understanding

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts