So after learning about ancestral lifestyle and health and watching the Burzynski movie, the hubby and I've stopped donating to conventional non-profits like American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, etc. because they are mouthpiece for conventional wisdom and the pharmaceutical companies. We have also stopped participating in Walkathons for cancer, autoimmune diseases (like MS) etc.
We would rather give my money and/or time to ancestral efforts/projects/research.
Anyone else have this similar experience?
When friends and family try to ask for donations for these causes, what do you tell them?
Often, there is still a genetic predisposition to cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses. Having BRCA (1,2) genes, for example, puts women at a much greater risk for being diagnosed with breast cancer...at birth, before anything has even had time to intervene. So even if she eats everything right, I don't think it would be fair to blame her for failing to control her body. Cancer research money led to the discovery of those factors so that women could be tested (if they wanted to) to understand their increased risk so that they could manage lifestyle factors, or in extreme cases, consider removing their breasts.
Environmental causes, such as radiation from natural disaster/war, etc. also play a role. At a high enough dose of say radiation, I think it would be difficult to try and control the affected through diet alone. I don't think diet alone will end cancer diagnoses.
I don't think those organizations are directly tied to pharmaceutical companies. True, they do tend to advocate for low-fat diets and adhere to other CW guidelines, but they also raise awareness, give advice about pre-cancer screenings, exercise, quitting smoking and offer hope to those who are already suffering. Prevention is great (if you are interested in ancestral approaches), but I have doubts that diet alone will save someone who is in stage 3 and hoping for a cure.
Organizations like that aren't only interested in the cure. They also invest in understanding the interplay between biological causes, emotional reactions (I worked on a breast cancer research project investigating family members of those diagnosed) in the affected and their family members, and environmental causes (e.g. BPA). They do tests on cortisol and recovery rates, how social support affects recovery, etc. It is much more than just the body.
I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "conventional" non-profits. Organizations like that also give survivors a chance to celebrate life through walks and meeting others.
I may be biased because I used to run with a children's brain tumor foundation. The organization also raised money to have an author write a book for young children confused about their medical condition, sent children with illnesses to special summer camps for those who couldn't afford it, and in general, gave parents a chance to meet eachother through walks and socialize and connect. There's a community element to many non-profits. It's not just about the "biology" behind things.
After seeing several cancer charities fund raising by selling sugary junk food, I've completely stopped supporting charities like this.
I'd much rather donate my time to worthwhile organisations and try to raise as much awareness as possible about the importance of good nutrition.
Yeah, I have a real hard time donating to friends for their various cycles and runs and walks and such. But I try to think of it as supporting them, not the organization. It's not really a conversation I'm willing to have with them because I'm not about to get into why I think SGK is evil when their own mother survived breast cancer.
And I balance it out by trying to give to things I find worthwhile. I'm eyeballing the Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund.
I am kind of put off by this post and the way you're stating it, and I want you to know why, because I am sure you don't mean to come off like this.
It sounds like you're walking around with plenty of class privilege. Sure, give your money to causes with integrity, and honor your own integrity, but geez - I can't help but wonder - you want to come look someone like my husband in the eye and say you're not going to donate to the Muscular Dystrophy Association because it's not progressive enough in supporting nutrition for the gimp masses, when he & his peers didn't do a damn thing to earn being born with a severe genetic quirk? And seriously, MS? It seems to me the more you know about nutrition and light (rather ancestral concepts) the more you'd be behind the cutting edge research on MS. There's a reason it's so prevalent in the Pacific Northwest. And if you want to come look my good buddy in the face and tell her that you think the scientists who are giving her longer and better quality of life with their (conventional, FDA approved) pills are not a good use of your money, go ahead. I don't want to get decked.
There's nothing wrong with being a little communitarian and looking out for the greatest good for the greatest number of people - or just keeping in mind that you're damn lucky to have the education and ability to direct your resources according to your pet interests.
In the past, I have support MS Walkathons and Breast Cancer charities.
This year I will be donating to the Vitamin D Council.
Fortunately, the only thing my family has solicited me for was Girl Scout cookies. I simply ignored the FaceBook posts--they know I am gluten-free... :-)
What is your take on food allergies? 6 Answers