Charity vs Actual Need

This is the place for topical debate and discussion about anything in the world (non-Queen related).

Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:09 pm

This is interesting, and not at all surprising:



It is in part useless to me as I'm colour blind, but I can appreciate the jist of it. Is the big circle fundraising for ALS or breast cancer? Either way, those two certainly make up two of the four biggest fundraisers with prostate cancer and heart disease in the middle.
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:13 pm

Could someone help my eyes though? If ALS is the biggest fundraiser then that's literally mental. If it's breast cancer then that's a bit more reasonable although still wildly disproportional.
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Tarkus » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:29 pm

ALS includes Motor Neurone Disease, and it's the fourth down on the left column. The top and biggest one on the left is Breast Cancer, the top and biggest on the right is Heart Disease.

Each column, starting on the left, top down: Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Heart Disease, ALS/MND, HIV/AIDS, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Diabetes, Suicide.

Right column, top down: Heart Disease, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Diabetes, Breast Cancer, Suicide, Prostate Cancer, HIV/AIDS, ALS/MND.
 
Tarkus
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:41 pm

Tarkus wrote:ALS includes Motor Neurone Disease, and it's the fourth down on the left column. The top and biggest one on the left is Breast Cancer, the top and biggest on the right is Heart Disease.

Each column, starting on the left, top down: Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Heart Disease, ALS/MND, HIV/AIDS, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Diabetes, Suicide.

Right column, top down: Heart Disease, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Diabetes, Breast Cancer, Suicide, Prostate Cancer, HIV/AIDS, ALS/MND.


No, motor neurone disease includes ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). There's also primary lateral sclerosis, progressive bulbar palsy, progressive muscular atrophy and pseudobulbar palsy. They're all super rare. As far as most neurologists can deduce, Prof Stephen Hawking's condition doesn't match the description of any of them!
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Tarkus » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:46 pm

I'm only saying it as it's printed on the chart, mate- I leave the rest to your expertise. :P
 
Tarkus
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:52 pm

Tarkus wrote:I'm only saying it as it's printed on the chart, mate- I leave the rest to your expertise. :P


Oh right, I thought you were trying to educate me! That said, the chart does seem to say the same as what I said.

Anyway, why this discrepancy?

Well, multiple reasons of course. Diseases seen as 'unfair' always raise more money than those that are seen as due to lifestyle choices. Lung cancer hasn't been included on that chart but kills more than any other cancer and raises far less than the big two there. Of course it's unfashionable because of the smoking link (even though 20% are non-smoking related). Pretty much all COPD is due to smoking.

Then there's the celebrity link. It's no surprise that suicide is nothing but a tiny speck on the fundraising chart. It's a shame there's been no charitable bandwagon in the wake of Robin Williams' death.

The biggest killer worldwide is poverty (through various agents: diarrhoea, malaria, famine) and I'd argue that should be mankind's priority over pretty much everything else on the chart.
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby play it cool » Wed Aug 27, 2014 10:08 pm

I wonder how many of those who can't wait to have a bucket of iced water poured over them and uploaded onto FB think about what they're contributing to.
 
play it cool
We Will Rock You
 
User avatar

 
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 7:56 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:35 am

Well exactly. I'm sure the ice bucket thing was the reason this graphic was made.
ALS is a perfectly reasonable cause to be donating to, but I feel as though it's had its fair share for now. The charity should say "enough", and suggest donations be channelled elsewhere.
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Innuendoes » Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:54 am

 
Innuendoes
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Fri Aug 29, 2014 9:41 am

 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Innuendoes » Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:32 am

Elessar wrote:http://www.anotherirrelevantlink.com


So, Aysha Akhtar, M.D., M.P.H. does not know what they are talking about? A neurologist? Irrelevant? :roll:
 
Innuendoes
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:21 am

Innuendoes wrote:
Elessar wrote:http://www.anotherirrelevantlink.com


So, Aysha Akhtar, M.D., M.P.H. does not know what they are talking about? A neurologist? Irrelevant? :roll:


Irrelevant to the thread, yes. Just as irrelevant as posting a chapter from the works of Sir Isaac Newton would be. I wouldn't dream of questioning him (unless I had Einstein's General Theory of Relativity to back me up), but his work on gravity and refraction has no place in a thread about the psychology of charity.
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Innuendoes » Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:29 am

Elessar wrote:
Innuendoes wrote:
Elessar wrote:http://www.anotherirrelevantlink.com


So, Aysha Akhtar, M.D., M.P.H. does not know what they are talking about? A neurologist? Irrelevant? :roll:


Irrelevant to the thread, yes. Just as irrelevant as posting a chapter from the works of Sir Isaac Newton would be. I wouldn't dream of questioning him (unless I had Einstein's General Theory of Relativity to back me up), but his work on gravity and refraction has no place in a thread about the psychology of charity.


Then you shouldn't have been talking about ALS, should you?
 
Innuendoes
 
User avatar

 
 

Re: Charity vs Actual Need

Postby Elessar » Sat Aug 30, 2014 10:34 am

Innuendoes wrote:
Elessar wrote:
Innuendoes wrote:
So, Aysha Akhtar, M.D., M.P.H. does not know what they are talking about? A neurologist? Irrelevant? :roll:


Irrelevant to the thread, yes. Just as irrelevant as posting a chapter from the works of Sir Isaac Newton would be. I wouldn't dream of questioning him (unless I had Einstein's General Theory of Relativity to back me up), but his work on gravity and refraction has no place in a thread about the psychology of charity.


Then you shouldn't have been talking about ALS, should you?


Do you understand this thread? The graphic in the first post compares death from certain diseases with the charitable donations they receive. A detailed discussion of the ethics of a specific use of research funds and concerns raised by animal rights groups really isn't the proposed discussion. I can't stop you hijacking the thread of course, and if you like I can broaden the discussion to encompass animal charities and bait you by saying that with so much famine and disease affecting humans, it's insane that there are successful charities demanding money to save animals. I could say that, it would certainly annoy you, and I'd certainly mean it, but that's not the discussion I was proposing.

But by all means, hijack away. It would be nice if you could provide some words rather than just unexplained URLs though.
 
Elessar
 
User avatar

 
 


Return to Views Of The World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests