We all have a great respect for Lance Armstrong and his accomplishments, but I just watched him on "This Week" on ABC news, and he made me a little upset when he said we needed to spend more money on Cancer research than we are presently doing. Sorry, but I am really peeved that we continue with the "cut and kill with chemo" routine instead of really curing this disease. Below is my comment:
"I am writing in response to Lance Armstrong's comment that more money is needed for cancer research and money could be better utilized by this country. This comment was made on Sunday's This Week with George Stephanopoulos.
I do not believe that more money is needed for cancer research, but I do believe the monies spent for cancer research should be better utilized. If a ware on cancer was declared in 1971, what has happened to all the money allocated since then? With all the money spent in the past 34 years, you would think that we would have a cure by now.
Why do I feel this way? I'll tell you why. In 1981 my aunt was diagnosed with breast cancer -- no mammogram involved with the diagnoses. She had surgery. My sister had regular mammograms, but in 1999 she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had the same surgery as my aunt, but had breast reconstruction. In December 2004, I was diagnosed with breast cancer and had the same surgery as my aunt, but without reconstruction. And no, we were all past the age of 50 when diagnosed, so it is not a situation of inherited disease. Not much progress against this disease, if you ask me."
If we had been spending the money on the RIGHT research, instead of frivolously on wild ideas from researchers trying to just get funding for their fiefdoms, perhaps we would have cured all types of this multifaceted disease by now.