Since October is designated as Breast Cancer Awareness Month, CU has added that pink is an acceptable alternative to black. Since Boulder is very progressive in their social awareness and politics, they should do the right thing and refuse to bow to the marketing of pinkwashing.
Pinkwashing is a term used to describe how companies use so-called "causes" as a way to market their products. The Susan G. Komen (For the Cure) Foundation is the entity which very effectively marketed their pink ribbons and pushed for breast cancer awareness. The NFL has donned various pink uniform parts over the last half decade, along with putting a pink ribbon on the field.
At stores around the country, thousands of products now sport a pink ribbon that indicate that money will be donated to Komen with each product purchased. The problem with all the effort going to the pinkwashing is that very little of the profits are going into breast cancer research. Many of the products donate less than a penny per purchase, and a sizable number of those will only do so if consumers mail in their proof of purchase. Worse yet, many products with the pink ribbons actually raise their price during the campaign, using the illusion of charity work to increase their bottom lines.
Critics of the pinkwashing campaign point out that many of the products that partner with Komen contain known carcinogenic ingredients that have been tied to causing breast cancer. To find out more, check out the Environmental Working Group's SKIN DEEP database about known carcinogens in cosmetics.
And others point out that Komen spends a great deal of money pursuing legal action against other charities for "infringing" on their marketing "rights." This has led to many coming to the conclusion that Komen is more interested in the money it raises than actually finding a cure.
Groups taking issue with the "marketing" emphasis include Breast Cancer Action and Think Before You Pink. They are actively pushing for action from the federal government to eliminate known toxins and carcinogens from cosmetics and other personal care products. After all, an ounce of prevention is worth more than a pound of cure, and a hell of a lot more than pink helmets and towels at football games.
Komen has also angered many by taking stands that appear to be politically motivated. The backlash to Komen cutting funds to Planned Parenthood (the largest provider of mammograms in the US) led to a severe drop in participation in Komen sponsored "3 day for the Cure" events. Komen also ended their financial support of embryonic stem cell research in 2011.
Dr. Samuel S. Epstein is an internationally recognized expert on cancer and cancer prevention. He is the founder and chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition. He was also the whistle-blower who made public the dangers of growth hormones given to cattle. In 2009, he published a book called Toxic Beauty which outlines the dangers of the ingredients used in cosmetics and other personal care products.
Is there really ANYONE in the US or the modern world that is NOT "aware" of breast cancer? Not unless they live in a cave. Maybe it is time to end the marketing of this terrible disease and begin the process of eliminating it.
Maressa Brown at The Stir points out that The American Cancer Society only spends 26 cents for every dollar it raises to actually fund cancer work. The majority of the remainder goes to fundraising and overhead. If you think that is bad, know that only 13 cents out of every dollar at Komen goes to cancer work. Fighting cancer (or pretending to) is BIG business, and business is just fine, thank you.
----------------
Please note -- The author of this blogpost has published a number of articles about breast cancer and also spent a year and half as a stage four cancer patient caregiver.
No comments:
Post a Comment