Commercializing Cancer

[proteanmix]

Does anyone feel that breast cancer has some weird misplaced consumerism attached to it? I see all these advertisements and events for finding a cure but the associated paraphernalia that goes along with it leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. Here's an excerpt from an essay (http://bcaction.org/index.php?page=welcome-to-cancerland-2) by Barbara Ehrenreich written a few years ago about her experiences with the "Cult of Pink Kitsch:"

...and bears are only the tip, so to speak, of the cornucopia of pink-ribbon-themed breast-cancer products. You can dress in pink-beribboned sweatshirts, denim shirts, pajamas, lingerie, aprons, loungewear, shoelaces, and socks; accessorize with pink rhinestone brooches, angel pins, scarves, caps, earrings, and bracelets; brighten up your home with breast-cancer candles, stained-glass pink-ribbon candleholders, coffee mugs, pendants, wind chimes, and night-lights; pay your bills with special BreastChecks or a separate line of Checks for the Cure. "Awareness" beats secrecy and stigma of course, but I can't help noticing that the existential space in which a friend has earnestly advised me to "confront [my] mortality" bears a striking resemblance to the mall.

Do we commercialize other forms of cancer like this, or even other diseases like heart disease or AIDS? Why does breast cancer specifically lend itself so well to this type of consumerism? Could increasing survival/decreasing mortality rates allow for more levity concerning this disease?

[EffEmDoubleyou]

This may sound glib, but I think it's because the breast cancer ribbon is pink. Women are the overwhelming sufferers of breast cancer, and lots of women enjoy buying things that are pink. If way back whenever, whoever does the ribbons made the breast cancer ribbon olive green, none of this would have happened.

[heart]

Does anyone feel that breast cancer has some weird misplaced consumerism attached to it? I see all these advertisements and events for finding a cure but the associated paraphernalia that goes along with it leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. Here's an excerpt from an essay (http://bcaction.org/index.php?page=welcome-to-cancerland-2) by Barbara Ehrenreich written a few years ago about her experiences with the "Cult of Pink Kitsch:"



Do we commercialize other forms of cancer like this, or even other diseases like heart disease or AIDS? Why does breast cancer specifically lend itself so well to this type of consumerism? Could increasing survival/decreasing mortality rates allow for more levity concerning this disease?

Thank you! Yes, it deeply disturbs me. People should donate to the causes that are important to them, but the commercialization of breast cancer really does leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Edit: And having a cute, pink fuzzy little teddy on one's desk to show support or whatever doesn't make one even begin to understand what it must be like to face the possiblity of death and have to fight for one's life while undergoing economic hardships etc. How empty such gestures must seem to real people going through such. People who really want to help and are able would do best volunteering to drive someone back and forth to chemo or something like that or give money directly to the breast cancer associations.


This may sound glib, but I think it's because the breast cancer ribbon is pink. Women are the overwhelming sufferers of breast cancer, and lots of women enjoy buying things that are pink. If way back whenever, whoever does the ribbons made the breast cancer ribbon olive green, none of this would have happened.

Red is the color for HIV/AIDS isn't it? Red should have had a near equal appeal. I like reds better than pinks myself.

[EffEmDoubleyou]

Red is the color for HIV/AIDS isn't it? Red should have had a near equal appeal. I like reds better than pinks myself.

Maybe, but AIDS is not as universally lamented as breast cancer because the perception is that AIDS can be avoided while breast cancer simply happens. I'm sure that's part of why red AIDS products would not be as popular. I don't think it's the color, because Project (RED) stuff sells.

[YourLocalJesus]

I think it's because people likes tits, and want them to stay attached to women.

[oasispaw]

Thank you! Yes, it deeply disturbs me. People should donate to the causes that are important to them, but the commercialization of breast cancer really does leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Edit: And having a cute, pink fuzzy little teddy on one's desk to show support or whatever doesn't make one even begin to understand what it must be like to face the possiblity of death and have to fight for one's life while undergoing economic hardships etc. How empty such gestures must seem to real people going through such.

Red is the color for HIV/AIDS isn't it? Red should have had a near equal appeal. I like reds better than pinks myself.

i totally agree. i think the original point was to raise awareness, which it has, but i find myself annoyed with all of the pink crap. they should give instructions on how to do a proper breast exam with the stuff.

Maybe, but AIDS is not as universally lamented as breast cancer because the perception is that AIDS can be avoided while breast cancer simply happens. I'm sure that's part of why red AIDS products would not be as popular. I don't think it's the color, because Project (RED) stuff sells.

i just bought a red cell phone and when it arrived it i noticed that it happened to be a project (red) promo. i think apple has a (red) ipod as well. and there are red heart and red dress pins to help raise awareness of heart disease, more specifically, heart disease in women. also, wear red days and walks and stuff. i live in activist-city so i may be a little more exposed to this stuff than people in other parts of the country.

i randomly end up with red 'awareness' items because i like red stuff more than other colors.

[creativeRhino]

I think the merchandise thing is a collision of public education, public perception, a good business strategy and our consumer culture.

My mother died of breast cancer long ago (early 1980s), back then chemo was a "new thing" and no thought was given to becoming a "survivor" as the 5 year survival rate was bad - but now where I am it is 80%. Because of that I've done some volunteering work with cancer organisations.

perception/education :

Depending on where you live the breast cancer rate is in the vicinity of 1 in 10 women getting it. So it is an easy thing to campaign on because of the "relevance" to the average woman.

Research has shown that many people tend to be in denial about cancer and fear actually getting symptoms checked out. So, all the publicity tends to remind people it is better to get things "sooner" rather than later.

Business strategy:
Cancer organisations (maybe for research, patient support or advocacy) seeking money can find the going tough to compete with all the other equally worthy causes. So making a very public thing (such as having pink stuff in supermarket checkouts etc) is more pervasive (spread and timing) than having people going around collecting, holding the ubiquitous fun run etc. Now the flow-back to the charity tends to be very small, but every bit helps.

Producers of "stuff" have an interesting sub-industry that takes all sorts of plain products and turns them into "branded promotional material" as freebies for conventional businesses. The drug industry is notorious for that, so this stuff joins all those fundraising chocolates etc in being harnessed for the charities. A good line of business for manufacturers - so the purchase stimulates one part of the economy and odd-on even China will get a little boost.

Consumer Culture:

Charitable donations are a "luxury" - they do nothing to meet a person's immediate basic needs, and will ever so slightly slow down progress in saving/borrowing for discretionary things.

The "brand" thing is very powerful these days and so having pink things becomes a "virtuous brand" - in a weird sort of way a "conspicuous consumption" (saying "see, I care and I financially support!").

Having been involved in various fund raising activities I'm very aware of the research that tends to indicate that the "average" person (ie not super weatlthy philanthropists etc) tends to like to have "something to show for it" - and the stuff does this. Where I live if you get anything in return (ie a lottery/raffle ticket, toy etc) you can seldom claim a tax deduction, but there is a distinct group that prefers the stuff to getting a deduction. I would rather give $ direct for that reason and mostly because more money gets to the actual cause.

So, it is really a clever way of normal businesses in the relevant niches to capitalise on the charities needs of fundraising and public education. Good all around on that point, but it still fills the world with more cheap unnecessary "stuff". Why do we need more "stuff"????

[wildcat]

Does anyone feel that breast cancer has some weird misplaced consumerism attached to it? I see all these advertisements and events for finding a cure but the associated paraphernalia that goes along with it leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. Here's an excerpt from an essay (http://bcaction.org/index.php?page=welcome-to-cancerland-2) by Barbara Ehrenreich written a few years ago about her experiences with the "Cult of Pink Kitsch:"



Do we commercialize other forms of cancer like this, or even other diseases like heart disease or AIDS? Why does breast cancer specifically lend itself so well to this type of consumerism? Could increasing survival/decreasing mortality rates allow for more levity concerning this disease?
You commercialize anything that brings the maximum profit.
The lawgiver does not exist in a vacuum.

[BerberElla]

T

Edit: And having a cute, pink fuzzy little teddy on one's desk to show support or whatever doesn't make one even begin to understand what it must be like to face the possiblity of death and have to fight for one's life while undergoing economic hardships etc. How empty such gestures must seem to real people going through such. People who really want to help and are able would do best volunteering to drive someone back and forth to chemo or something like that or give money directly to the breast cancer associations.


And donating outright somehow does?

[Jasz]

i think it is great they have been able to mobilize so many people. the only thing is that breast cancer has one of the better survival rates. other cancers should get at least as much attention if the goal is to help everyone. but how do you mobilize people around "pancreatic cancer", or "lung cancer" where there is a big "it's your own fault" stigma?

[shortnsweet]

I hate the whole commercial aspect of "breast cancer awareness".
We're definitely all aware that breast cancer exists, 1 in 3 women develops a growth in her breast, 1 in 8 metastasizes. Check your breast on the first of every month, etc.

Its useful information, but its common knowledge now. Take all that money spent on pink frying pans and teeshirts and use it to find a cure! There are also other, less detectable diseases/cancer forms out there that we need to start worrying about as well.

[Morgan Le Fay]

Disease is a commercial opportunity. Drugs are big business.

I can't say I've noticed anything specifically different about the publicity surrounding breast cancer. It waxes and wanes.

EDIT. In the UK that is. We do have the pink "theme" and yes, that's annoying.

[shortnsweet]

This may sound glib, but I think it's because the breast cancer ribbon is pink. Women are the overwhelming sufferers of breast cancer, and lots of women enjoy buying things that are pink. If way back whenever, whoever does the ribbons made the breast cancer ribbon olive green, none of this would have happened.

Right. Aids had red but that phase kind of fizzled out.

[ajblaise]

Breast cancer, I've heard, is the most common kind of cancer in the US. So it makes sense that so much attention gets placed on it.

There's consumerism attached to every major health and political cause. Other than the regular criticisms of consumerism, I don't see anything especially worse about this kind.

[BerberElla]

Breast cancer, I've heard, is the most common kind of cancer in the US. So it makes sense that so much attention gets placed on it.

There's consumerism attached to every major health and political cause. Other than the regular criticisms of consumerism, I don't see anything especially worse about this kind.

Ditto, I don't see why anyone would be annoyed by anything that motivated people who wouldn't normally give a toss, to donate and be aware of this issue.

[oasispaw]

You commercialize anything that brings the maximum profit.
The lawgiver does not exist in a vacuum.

speaking of vacuums... (http://www.amazon.com/Dyson-DC07-Vacuum-%252d-Pink/dp/B000FFIK5W)

[Sytpg]

The misguided (association) of "loss of femininity" due to breast removal is the subconscious stigma played with. It can be quite powerful and there aren't many comparable cases which can so-well be used by the consumerism mindset.

[heart]

Ditto, I don't see why anyone would be annoyed by anything that motivated people who wouldn't normally give a toss, to donate and be aware of this issue.

How much of the purchase price actually goes toward donation and equally important where does the donation money go?

Critical Questions to Ask (http://www.thinkbeforeyoupink.org/Pages/CriticalQuestions.html) (Think before you pink)

Corporations are making money off an emotionally charged issue and people may believe they are helping the cause far more than they are. That's why I think direct donations would be far better.

It does raise awareness, but the dangers seems to be that it may lead one to believe that more money and support out there is going to innovative, helpful breast cancer research, mammograms or support for patients than acutally is because people get all wrapped up in the feel good aspect of the pink campaign and don't want to anaylze the hard facts of the matter.

It may also lead non-critical thinkers to believe the products carrying the pink ribbon on them have been tested to be totally healthy and wholesome and in someway associated with breast cancer prevention. (The article discusses the issue of "pinkwashers")


As an aside, people who aren't living in the US may not realize how incredibly pervasive the pink campaign is here now.

[Tiltyred]

I have my deep suspicions about the whole breast cancer industry. Like ... why is breast cancer so on the rise? Um ... how about because we get our breasts squashed and XRAYED once a year? And the clinic I have been going to routinely calls me back for a second exam because there was some problem with the first one. They clear me after the second exam. Meanwhile they get to bill me twice. I've discovered this is typical of that particular clinic from talking to other women who go there, so now I'm wondering if it's typical across the board.

My mother is a survivor of Stage 4 -- and she had her exam every year on the dot. She went from clear to Stage 4 in like six months. Most breast cancers are not found on xrays, they're found on exam.

I dunno ...

[beyondaurora]

Here's my opinion...

The only way most people are going to support a cause is by making supporting that cause trendy.

So, as sad and annoying as it is that people are like that, if the cause is benefiting from their spending, then so be it.

[heart]

[So, as sad and annoying as it is that people are like that, if the cause is benefiting from their spending, then so be it.
[/COLOR]

Like I said this morning, how much does the cause really benefit from the purchase and where does the money go? People don't check, people don't think they just buy. There's so much pure emotionalism and feel goodism going on and not enough fact seeking.

[nozflubber]

What makes you think its just Breast Cancer? I think all cancers and HIV have this sort of "meandering progress" to them that researchers and drug companies take to them, but it's not like its easy to fix a failed immune system. It is EXTREMELY difficult to medicate what the human body is normally supposed to do by itself....

There's really no other alternative except for letting sick cancer people just die the fuck off, and letting Long Term nonprogressors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nonprogressors) become the norm rather than the minority. Barbaric, passive euthanasia, or Capitalistic driven medical progress - which one will survive the bestest, next on CANCER CHEF!!

[ptgatsby]

As an aside, people who aren't living in the US may not realize how incredibly pervasive the pink campaign is here now.

All of the things you mention are done by design. It's an engineered marketing scheme. (See aslo: Diamonds, which is one major reason why I dislike them so. (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/fluff-zone/1138-diamond-rings.html?highlight=diamond))

The Pink thing in particular annoys me to no end because 3/4 of my grandparents died from cancer, two of breast cancer. And they were long drawn out affairs, as it tends to be. So I support the research, when I don't think it's just work-making, but the marketing aspect is very disrespectful, simply because of its predatory nature.

[beyondaurora]

Like I said this morning, how much does the cause really benefit from the purchase and where does the money go? People don't check, people don't think they just buy. There's so much pure emotionalism and feel goodism going on and not enough fact seeking.

You have a great point. The link that you referred to earlier mentioned that only 50 cents of a $14.95 "DVD for the cure" goes to charity. For someone who is already intending on making a $14.95 donation, choosing to make this purchase without being fully aware of the distribution would be a great loss for the charity.

However, if it takes making charitable giving trendy in order to get 50 cents more than you otherwise would (from someone who was not already intending on making a donation), in my opinion, it's worth it.

[heart]

All of the things you mention are done by design. It's an engineered marketing scheme. (See aslo: Diamonds, which is one major reason why I dislike them so. (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/fluff-zone/1138-diamond-rings.html?highlight=diamond))

The Pink thing in particular annoys me to no end because 3/4 of my grandparents died from cancer, two of breast cancer. And they were long drawn out affairs, as it tends to be. So I support the research, when I don't think it's just work-making, but the marketing aspect is very disrespectful, simply because of its predatory nature.

Yes, you've put it the best, predatory in nature and disrespectful to people who have suffered from it.

I think it also does damage through making people think the issue gets more support and research money than it really does. People get desensitized to the issue.

I totally agree with you on the diamond issue too.