tymon_tm wrote:Dez33 wrote:Then to the charity itself, like we really needed a charity blowing most of its donations on promotional activities to make us aware of cancer? No thanks, I have two dead relatives that make me acutely aware of cancer. I prefer to put my money into more meaningful organisations.
what? do we need a charity that deals with a deadly desease many patients have no clue about? I'm curious to know what 'meaningful' means according to you, but I think I'll pass.
What he means is that, after the first few years, Livestrong didn't give any money to actually dealing with cancer. It was all 'raising awareness'. So those hundreds of millions of dollars didn't go to research, didn't go to doctors, didn't go to clinics, didn't go to patients... There was no direct link between Livestrong and materially helping any cancer sufferers.