I was also shocked recently to find out that the American Cancer Society has a corporate deal with GSK, where they endorse the nicotine replacement products threatened by the e-cigarette – strangely enough, I only found out via the comments on my own article on the
links between big pharm and the anti-ecig campaign.
I am not sure if the corporate deal is still continuing – I can find no mention of the deal on either GSK’s website or ACS’s website, although there is mention of it in an
FDA document and in the book
To Profit or Not to Profit.
Deeper digging reveals that this is not the only conflict of interest that the American Cancer Society has.
Take mammograms, for example.
That’s not surprising as the ACS is a big supportor of mammograms.
If everyone followed its guidelines the annual costs would go into the billions.
Interestingly, though, the ACS relies on those profiting from mammography for its research, governance (members of the industry sit on its advisory committees) – and of course funds!
Samuel S. Epstein, MD and chairman or Prevent Cancer says that:
In virtually all of its important actions, the ACS has been strongly linked with the mammography industry, ignoring the development of viable alternatives to mammography.
The ACS exposes premenopausal women to radiation hazards from mammography with little or no evidence of benefits.
Source:
American Cancer Society: The World’s Wealthiest “Non-Profit” Institution
Just why are ACS so keen to get funds? Apparently, they are not short of cash.
Despite repeatedly running campaigns claiming they are short of cash and desperately needed funds for cancer prevention/treatment, it is one of the richest charities in the US, with current reserves approaching one billion.
What does it need all this money for?
A lot of it goes on operating costs and benefits for employees. In 1992, for example, the Wall Street Journal reported that, in addition to 11 million dollars worth of assets, much of it in Real Estate, the Texas chapter had invested in 11 Ford Crown Victorias for its senior staff.
In total, according to Epstein, in the American Cancer Society, for every $1 spent on direct service, $6.40 is spent on compensation and overheads.
Some of it goes on political lobbying, and donations to political parties, a practice which may be illegal. Indeed, the Charities Information Beureau has stated that it does not know any other charity that makes donations to political parties.
Meanwhile, the Council Of Philanthropy has stated that the organisation is “more interested in accumulating wealth than in saving lives.”
Like this post? Keep up to date with us by signing up for our email updates.
No related posts.
Uncategorized
“Some of it goes on political lobbying, and donations to political parties, a practice which may be illegal. Indeed, the Charities Information Beureau has stated that it does not know any other charity that makes donations to political parties.”
The American Cancer Society is NOT permitted to donate to political parties under the US tax code designation for non-profits. For instance, The American Cancer Society (www.cancer.org)supports US Health Care Reform, but can not advocate for any one specific plan over another.
American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network or ACSCAN (www.acscan.org) is the nonprofit, nonpartisan advocacy affiliate of the American Cancer Society. It is a separate organization which works through the democratic political process to advocate on behalf of citizens about cancer-related issues.
I see, all the sources above were lying, then? Whereas you, an anonymous coward, are not?
YOU WROTE:
Sunday, 29 March 2009
The American Cancer Society
We haven't liked the American Cancer Society since their spokesperson compared smokers to mass murders.—————————-
But if someone clicks to see the reference article, it quotes 'Serena Chen' of the 'American Lung Association.'
LOL