Why does prostate cancer only get half the funding of breast cancer, even though they are both as common?
There were 185,895 men diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2005. (The second leading cause of death, among men.) There were 186,467 diagnosed breast cancer cases in 2005. Why does breast cancer research get twice the funding, and nearly all of the media spotlight? http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/prostate/statistics/
http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/statistics/
Gender Studies - 13 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I deeply question your resourses,
2 :
Probably because prostate cancer is more embarrassing for men? I'm not sure, it's a good question.
3 :
Men also get breast cancer not just women, it is not a gender issue. Men are the only ones who can get prostate cancer (not saying that is a good thing) there are many campaigns, add's, prostate cancer month is in october, ribbons, charities, events, social functions all in the cause to try to stop or help treat prostate cancer. Same with breast cancer. That's like saying why does cancer have more funding then AID's or something stupid like that! I think some people on here like to feel like victims and create drama, you are a diva. I myself have donated all i can to prostate cancer foundation, you dont think i care about my Son, partner, father, friends?? Get over yourself.
4 :
Men are way less likely to seek help
5 :
Because there are two boobs and only one prostate gland. It needs half the funding.
6 :
It's a matter of publicity. There's often a sense of psychological embarrassment in men to having cancer in areas in any way related to the reproductive functions. Societally people tell you that you're less of a man if you lose your prostate, and so there's a resistance to talking about it, so there isn't nearly as much advocacy. There aren't all those walk-a-thons and the like. Breast cancer, on the other hand, has HUGE organizations backing it (like Susan Komen), and its victims and survivors tend to talk about it a lot more. Breast cancer sufferers and survivors are exalted for soldiering on, whereas prostate cancer survivors are ridiculed for being "less of a man." It's an awful double standard, and it's perpetuated by men and women alike, unfortunately. edit: after reading those CDC figures, while the diagnosis rate is nearly the same, the survival rate is much higher for those with prostate cancer. Perhaps breast cancer does, in that sense, deserve more funding, but certainly not several times as much.
7 :
Simply because society values women more than men. Men are also 4 times as likely to kill themselves, but thats pretty much ignored as well.
8 :
The U.S. National Cancer Institute prepare and submit an annual budget proposal directly to the President for review and transmittal to Congress. These proposals describe in detail the optimal amount of funding needed to make the most rapid progress against cancer and to provide NCI with the resources necessary to lead the National Cancer Program. The proposals are submitted to Congress each year and reflect the Administration’s budget and management priorities for the next fiscal year, Congress considers the proposals and then recommends appropriations for all Federal Government agencies. Final appropriation amounts must be approved by both the House of Representatives and the Senate and signed by the President to be enacted into law. I know of far more people both within my personal circle and those in public life who have died from breast cancer than prostrate cancer. Perhaps this has something to do with the way the funding is decided. It cannot be proposed that any of those (the NCI, Congress or House of Representatives) who decide the funding are run by women, maybe like me they are more aware of family members which this cancer has killed and it affects their decisions on where the funding should go. This would also explain why more publicity is given to the disease. Maybe men are their own worst enemy here and by being secretive and less willing to speak out about the cancer they have influences those who make the funding decisions.
9 :
Its amazing how often you hear feminists complain that healthcare funding for women is less than for men, but the facts don't support this at all. In the UK for example: "A man diagnosed with prostate cancer has only one-quarter of the cash spent on research into his disease compared to the amount devoted to a woman’s breast cancer. The wide discrepancy shows the scale of the discrimination against men. The two diseases kill similar numbers" http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article579050.ece This issue is a bit like the 'sexist' wage gap - feminists just refuse to see sense.
10 :
You might well ask. The last report on cancer cures I read said that 67% of women with breast cancer are cured, and 44% of men with prostate cancer. That is quite a discrepancy.
11 :
Basically because there are 'sexist charities' and sexist journalists who place more emphasis on women's health. Cancer is the common enemy and I think that the resources for breast, cervical, prostrate, and other forms of cancer should not be allocated along sexist lines. The charities should be merged and their resources should be pooled. Those charities refusing to comply should be struck off the charities register.
12 :
Yes, it is true and this has been going on a long time. The process of funding science and medical research is an intensely political one, and feminists have 'gamed' this system much better than MRAs. Moreover, feminist organizations like NOW have actively campaigned against addressing this discrepancy. But the discrepancy is larger than just prostate cancer versus breast cancer. In EVERY major health category, (cancer, infectious diseases, cardio-vascular disease, kidney and liver disease, victims of violent crimes, victims of occupational injuries, suicide,...) there is more money spent for female medical/prevention research than male medical/prevention research, and more spent for female medical care/prevention than for male medical care/prevention. And in EVERY major health category, the rate of male victims/sufferers is higher. And EVERY attempt to address these discrepancies in funding has been successfully fought tooth-and-nail by feminist bigots. I have to give these femi-bigots credit, they have certainly mastered the art of bigoted politics.
13 :
Prostate cancer forms in the tissues of the prostate. Except for skin cancer, cancer of the prostate is the most common cancer in American men. It was estimated that more than 186,000 men in the United States would be diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2008 . In most men with prostate cancer, the disease grows very slowly. The majority of men with low-grade, early prostate cancer (which means that cancer cells have been found only in the prostate gland) live a long time after their diagnosis. Even without treatment, many of these men will not die of prostate cancer, but rather will live with it until they eventually die of some other, unrelated cause. Nevertheless, it was estimated that nearly 29,000 men would die from prostate cancer in 2008. Maybe because prostate cancer is less life threatening?
Read more discussions :
