It’s October. That means Breast Cancer Awareness Month which, for some unfathomable reason, is considerably better-known and -commemorated than ‘most any other “Month.” We’re urged during this month to think pink. The problem is, most companies and organizations are hoping we don’t actually think at all.
Everywhere we go, we’ll be confronted with special “pink” items that “support” breast cancer awareness or research in some form or fashion. I’m not at all against supporting breast cancer awareness or research. Breast cancer has impacted my own family, so I’m not “cold” on the subject. However, I believe we need to support these things in a thoughtful manner, or it’s useless at best and potentially counter-productive.
Who and What Are You Supporting?
When considering special “pink” items, we ought to stop and think about who and what we’re really supporting.
Many purchases this month will result in support for the Susan G. Komen Foundation. The Susan G. Komen Foundation, in turn, helps fund Planned Parenthood, a practice I consider sneaky and underhanded. (When a citizen donates money, he expects it to be going to the organization he chose to support, not some other organization.) Not only is this dishonest, it calls into question the motives of the Foundation.
Planned Parenthood, as I’ve pointed out before, stands for the primary purpose of promoting lifestyle choices that contribute to breast cancer risk. Hardly a logical choice for breast cancer awareness/research funding! The claim is that they’re funding Planned Parenthood’s provision of mammograms. The problem is, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms. Planned Parenthood clinics provide referrals and, in some cases, help arrange for funding through other organizations. However, this being the case, the obvious choice would be to fund the organizations that actually provide funding. Planned Parenthood’s purpose is to provide abortions and birth control, not to fight cancer.
Less morally-charged and perhaps less obvious, as well, is the fact that many products supporting breast cancer-related organizations this month are illogical choices. One of the best ways to help prevent cancer is to encourage a healthy lifestyle: the consumption of healthy foods that provide a multitude of vitamins and minerals to keep the body strong, the (general) avoidance of junk foods and sugar that depress the immune system and feed cancer cells, and the avoidance of synthetic chemical cleaning supplies and personal care products that overload the body with toxins and, in some cases, actually contribute to cancer.
But how many of the products that draw you in this month for their support of breast cancer research are actually part of a healthy lifestyle? I don’t know about you, but I don’t tend to see a lot of carrots and broccoli with pink ribbons on the labels. What I do see is lots of toxic cleaning supplies, and numerous body care and cosmetic products that contain phytoestrogens (plant substances that act like excess estrogens in the human body) and other carcinogenic (cancer-causing) ingredients.
Does that really make sense? That’s kind of like buying a fur coat because the manufacturer says they’ll donate 2% of the purchase price to PETA’s anti-fur campaign.* If you want the fur coat, buy the fur coat, but don’t kid yourself about the company’s dedication to the elimination of furs. Recognize it for what it is — a slick marketing technique.
*Just to be clear, I don’t have an issue with fur. I’m just pointing out the counter-productive nature of buying a product that contributes to something because the manufacturer says they’ll pay to help fight the thing.
There is also the fact the the Koen foundation only gives a small fraction of the funds they receive to finding a cure while their executives receive ridiculous salaries each year.
That’s outside my scope of knowledge. Do you have any more information about that?