Have you ever gotten slammed in the head by one of those "ah ha" moments? Well, I was driving home the other day, thinking about two friends who are walking in one of the breast cancer walks and it hit me - not totally or specifically about "the cause" of breast cancer, but somewhat. What hit me, specifically, took me back to a donation I had made last year for a friend's daughter who was jumping rope for the American Heart Association. I felt like a tidal wave of "donate for the cure..." causes came to mind, and frankly, I got angry. I started thinking about "the cure" for heart disease, lung cancer, type 2 diabetes, ...and to a certain extent, for breast cancer. These first three diseases are truly classified as lifestyle-related diseases, and with many forms of breast cancer, lifestyle factors such as poor nutrition, sedentary lifestyle and and obesity contribute directly to this disease as well. My anger came from the thought that we're donating money to cure diseases that are preventable. Why aren't we donating to "the prevention of" versus "the cure of" these diseases. It seems to me that if we took steps to prevent the disease, there would be no need to cure it. But perhaps that's too simple, or too logical. Or, get real, right? That's what politics and lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry are for!
As I commented (or more likely ranted) in an earlier blog about "scrutinizing", employ some objective, distanced, critical thinking the next time someone asks you to donate "for the cure" - make sure you think how many ways the cure for that disease may not be needed if preventative strategies were more aggressive.