1 reply to this topic

[StemCells&AtomBombs]

I came across a very interesting story on the CBC done in 1987 just as Rick Hansen was working on completing his Man in Motion world tour to raise awareness and money for spinal cord injury.

You can read a transcription of the key parts of the interview and/or see it yourself by clicking here.

The comments in these interviews are something that we need to consider not only in terms of a cure for spinal cord injury, but also in terms of what we as a society demand of government in terms of caring and curing illness.

Most people on this forum either donate money to research or are involved in raising funds for research, so I think that this interview is important to us and raises a very important question. Why do world governments, who control massive financial resources, rely on private fundraising, or super heroes, to cure and care for its citizens.

This interview is not an attack on Hansen, but raises some very important questions. Of course, looking at all the comments in this interview with 2011 eyes there were some mistaken comments. Some in the interview said that the world would forget Hansen. That once the cameras stopped flashing no one would care about the rights of spinal cord injured people. They were wrong. Rick Hansen has gone a long way in raising awareness and money for spinal cord research, but twenty five years later, there is no cure for spinal cord injury.

[quadinva]

"Why do world governments, who control massive financial resources, rely on private fundraising, or super heroes, to cure and care for its citizens."

I think a big chunk of the answer is found later in your post...

"They were wrong. Rick Hansen has gone a long way in raising awareness and money for spinal cord research, but twenty five years later, there is no cure for spinal cord injury."

(American perspective) Very simply put the goverment's fiscal responsibility is to try to make wise investments for its citizens, or that will benefit the most amount of people. That being said, why would the govt throw money to sci research?...

1)A vast majority of the public would not benefit as they arent sci's.

2)More sci's than not, presumably, are not afflicted beyond the point being functional (many people on here are at the least equally active in society as their ab counterparts)

3)Rick Hansen proves its not a risky investment as hes been buying stock in research that, to date, has paid no dividends

4)SCI, for most, doesnt mean immenent death or may not even mean a drastically shorter life expectancy. If it comes down to saving young lives (ie cancer) or an older person, many would support the prior.

5)There is no money to spend in new places. Granted a great deal of money disappears to heavens knows where, with estimates of the new budget estimating that the U.S. borrows .40 cents of every dollar spent, I couldnt ask fellow Americans to borrow more money to fund a less than promising venture.

6)Do we really have a right to demand funds for our minority's unproven goal? Put it this way, would you demand cash from your neighbor if you were low on gas money and you had a perfectly good bicycle to ride?(and keep in mind youll have to tell them you probably wont pay them back and further you may not get to your destination and will subsequently be back to ask for more money) Asking a favor without assuming theyll give it to you is one thing...but claiming a right to it is another.

7)I think if the ADA is enforced to its intended level, the government has put a decent effort into addressing our rights. Especially when others' more inalienable rights have dwelled at the basement of governments' priorities for an incredible amount of time. Talk to the LGBT, inner city, etc. communities about rights and re-evaluate if you feel like your/our cause should be funded before theirs. In my opinion we have gained a great deal over the past couple of decades. Im greatful to have not been paralyzed before said gains, and in turn appreciate what strides the government has done as well as for the private funds people have donated by their own perogative.

For some, whether by poor luck or a bad decision, SCI is life ending...For many its life altering...With kids going hungry(cliche I know) because of someone elses(their parent/guardian) poor luck/decision/ or even my unintentional oppression, I cannot and will not demand more attention or government money that could be buying them groceries or improving their education. Ill volunteer at a fundraiser all day long with you, because people want to help and im GREATLY appreciative for their kindness. But never would i judge someone for not giving, likewise given the current equation (ie probability of a definite cure, economic climate, social factors, etc etc) I cannot stomp my feet(pun intended) at the govt for more money.

I apologize for rambling, but its late and I think youre taking the brunt of a build up of annoyance fueled by people questoning why we dont get out and fight for this,and the government isnt doing that for us..."If you want something done do it yourself" I plan to do just that, once im gainfully employed, ill throw some money to the cause. For now ill help with fundraising...from private sources...when i can, and say "thank you so much, i really appreciate it" wholeheartedly to anyone that throws a nickel in the jar, because they genuinely want to, not bc the govt allocated the disingenuous donations from tax payers


Sorry for the brevity, ill go into more detail tomorrow morning...kidding...and dont take my disagreement personally.

-Bags