Why is always particulary breast cancer that people raise money for?
Why is always particulary breast cancer that people raise money for? I mean Tom Green lost his left testical due to cancer, but nobody raises money for testical cancer, or what about lung cancer, stomach cancer, skin cancer, bone cancer, etc etc, but most people only raise money for breats cancer specifically. Makes one wonder, is it all being done out of favortism??? What I mean is, if a women loses her breats thats more important then a man loses his lungs????
Community Service - 6 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
Actually my boyfriend asks me this question all the time and I don't know the answer either. I would really like to know to.
2 :
Actually breast cancer is very common so it has lots of people raising money for it. She gets it and her whole family is into helping her so they support it. And there are lots of of other organizations that raise money for different types of cancer there just not as big.
3 :
The four most common cancers are: Breast Cancer Colon Cancer Lung Cancer Prostate Cancer Lung cancer was attacked long ago by going after the cigarette industry Prostate Cancer is so slow growing that some doctors suggest not doing anything about it in older men.
4 :
They probably pour more money into recruiting, they do kind of come and go, I grew up with Easter seals, of course muscular dystrophy on labor day weekend, in the 80's it was all about raising money for aids....don't worry about it too much, if you want to support lung cancer bear in mind that the american lung association is the oldest charity in America
5 :
Because breast cancer is one of the most prevalent forms of cancer. Aside from non-melanoma skin cancer, breast cancer is the most common form of cancer in women. Breast cancer is the number one cause of cancer death in Hispanic women. It is the second most common cause of cancer death in white, black, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native women. Most people have been affected by breast cancer in someway even if they haven't had the cancer -- its affected a female family member, a close female friend, a female co-worker -- it's at least hurt them and, in many cases, it's killed them.
6 :
The Breast Cancer Screening Mistake Millions Make… Posted By Dr. Mercola | October 15 2010 | 18,197 views A Close to ZERO Percent Benefit … In the latest study, researchers analyzed data from over 40,000 Norwegian women with breast cancer and found that those who had mammograms and were treated by special breast cancer medical teams had a 10 percent lower breast cancer death rate than women who had neither. However, they also found that women over the age of 70 who were treated by the special teams had an 8 percent lower death risk from breast cancer, even though they had not received mammograms. What this suggests, and what Dr. H. Gilbert Welch wrote in an accompanying editorial, is that mammograms may have only reduced the cancer death rate by 2 percent -- an amount so small it may as well be zero. So the fact remains that there is no solid evidence that mammograms save lives. Past research has also demonstrated that adding an annual mammogram to a careful physical examination of the breasts does not improve breast cancer survival rates over getting the examination alone. Now, if mammograms were completely safe and capable of reducing your cancer death risk even a small amount, you might be able to make an argument for their use. But mammograms are not only ineffective … they're unsafe as well
Read more discussions :
