It would be interesting to find out how many people use the Maclean's article or Mike Rowe's reasoning as a rallying point to not complete the ice bucket challenge, and then go on to continue not donating to anything.
I understand some of the reasoning, but I think there are far more positives that can't be quantified in simple dollars and cents from this movement that far outweigh any counterpoint.
The Following User Says Thank You to sa226 For This Useful Post:
I think the point of his rant was that people should investigate the charities that they want to give to. And not so much that not enough people have this disease but rather people have limited funds, they will give to the charities that affect them personally. Rather than just be taken over by social media peer pressure.
I have charities that I support, does not giving to ALS make me a bad person? If I gave $100 to them then for sure I would be pulling money from another charity, ones that I have a personal connection with. I don't want to do that.
saying that, if everybody else wants to do the challenge and donate money to ALS that is great for them.
edit: I think lots of the opposition to this challenge is people do not like the feeling of being forced or pressured to do something.
Last edited by Swarly; 08-28-2014 at 09:46 AM.
Reason: added
From what I've been able to gather over the years, Mike Rowe's a pretty thoughtful guy and I wouldn't classify him as a DB. I thought his explanation was cogent - his main argument was that people shouldn't be pressured into participating, which I agree with.
For the record, I'm pro-ice bucket challenge. It's been a great campaign and I have used it as a way to introduce my three-year-old son to the idea of giving back and charity, and he's asked a lot of questions about these matters (as three-year-olds do).
So yeah, it's a good thing overall, but a person should be allowed to not participate without criticism if that's his or her choice.
__________________
We may curse our bad luck that it's sounds like its; who's sounds like whose; they're sounds like their (and there); and you're sounds like your. But if we are grown-ups who have been through full-time education, we have no excuse for muddling them up.
This is my feelings on this also. My brother was challenged and he was being pretty arrogant about not doing it, then he posted a bunch of crap about wasting water etc trying to find a high road which caused a facebook fight leading to him deleting his account.
If you don't want to do it just ignore it, simple as that. If someone hasn't done it just leave them alone simple as that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Igottago
If people don't want to do it they shouldn't do it, its totally fair. There's no need to go into some long explanation about why. You have your reasons. And the people that have done it shouldn't act like they are some kind of humanitarian hero, and they certainly shouldn't look down on those who didn't do it. Most people on facebook that did the challenge probably still couldn't really tell you about the disease, they did it becuase it was trendy and an attention grabber. Luckily the by product of humans being lemmings in this case, is that it actually has raised a lot of money.
I generally find these sweeping trends on social media pretty annoying, and in some ways I found the ice bucket challenge annoying -- but it was effective. I even participated in it myself. If none of my nominees end up doing it that's fine too, their decision.
Same as the Maclean's article. You shouldn't give to the ALS foundation because:
1) There just aren't enough people with ALS. Too bad so sad for the people suffering from it.
2) There just aren't enough people with ALS. Too bad so sad for the people suffering from it.
Is he advocating that every single disease based charity shut down except heart disease? Only give to the charity that will affect the most people? We don't factor in that ALS affects much younger people than heart disease, generally? We don't factor in that ALS means worsening suffering, locking able minds in bodies that can do less and less? We don't factor in that lack of exercise (not being overweight as many presume) is a prime cause of cardiovascular disease while there is no controllable lifestyle factor to avoid getting ALS?
It would seem that Mr. Rowe has not done HIS research. He claims that the ALS foundation won't know how to handle this huge windfall. My ass. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, the ALS foundation isn't even breaking even this year given the budget cuts they have seen from the federal government as Obama has been forced to tighten the purse strings. Next year they won't have an icebucket challenge windfall and will REALLY be forced to cut research grants.
And I saw a very good article the other day about the "cannibalization factor". The person said that while it is true that it is likely that 50% of the money raised by the icebucket challenge will be diverted from other charities (not in my case; I am giving the same amount to all other charities this year + the $50 I gave to ALS) it is ALSO true that this kind of grand marketing could well introduce charitable giving to people not prone to donating. It could well be creating "life long philanthropists".
I went around yesterday collecting money for the Ottawa Humane Society "Run for the Animals". I did NOT bring around the Humane Society financials and show each person where their money was going. I didn't pontificate about why the cause was important to me personally. "I expect the person to do a good song and dance before I give to their charity and these ALS people challenging me didn't do a good enough dance." Yep. Sounds douchy to me....
I think his article was well reasoned. It identifies the real issue of donation canibalization.
If you came by asking for donations for the run for animals and couldn't answer "What % of money rasied actually goes to charity and what % goes to run the event?" there is no way I would donate for you. No one should donate to a cause without knowing how the money would be spent.
Races like the one you are running are typically (not neccessarily yours) terrible at converting dollars to research. The ride to Conquer Cancer only gets 50% of the money spent to the groups that do work to fight cancer. So when someone donates $20 they really are donating $10 to fight cancer. Most times you are much better off donating directly to in your case the humane society or just to the Tom Baker Cancer center.
Donating money with out knowing how it will be spent allows charities to be corrupted by event planning groups.
It’s not exactly a zero sum game, but the cannibalism factor in charitable giving is a very serious problem. According to the experts, 50% to 70% of all the money collected as a result of the Ice Bucket Challenge will directly impact future contributions to other charities in an equal and opposite way. In other words, if The ALS Association collects a $100 million - as it’s on track to do - other charities competing for the same dollars will collect between $50 and $70 million LESS. Thus, the largest donations do not necessarily go to those charities that serve the most people or do the best research - they go to those that who market themselves in the most effective way.
Is there any evidence to back up claims like this?
It seems more likely to me that people have freed up money they would not otherwise be donating to charities anyway.
In addition, it has got a lot of people thinking about other charities they want to support and making additional donations to them as well.
It has also created a lot of dialogue about how charitable contributions are allocated and is getting people to dig a little deeper into various charities and how they use their funding.
All good things that are by products of the challenge.
At that end of the year, it will be very interesting to see if the donations to other major charities have really been hurt by this. I'm doubtful that will be the case.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. – A central Kentucky firefighter injured in an “ice bucket challenge” has died a month after a power line shocked him and another man.
Campbellsville Fire Chief Kyle Smith says 41-year-old Tony Grider died Saturday. Grider was a captain with the department on Aug. 21.
He and 22-year-old firefighter Simon Quinn were on the fire truck’s ladder when it got too close to a power line after dumping water on Campbellsville University’s marching band in the charity stunt to raise awareness and funds to fight the disease ALS, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.
Two years after the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge craze on social media, researchers say money raised from the campaign has funded the discovery of a new gene linked to the disease.
The gene, identified as NEK1, has been found to contribute to hereditary Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig's disease. The gene is associated with three per cent of all ALS cases, according to the ALS Association.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to calculoso For This Useful Post:
Watching all the ice bucket fails has proven to be hilarious. Watching so many people underestimate the density of water, overestimate their own strength, and fail to understand physics has brightened my day.
Maybe I'm dense on this topic, but linking the gene to only 3% of all ALS cases seems rather small, right?
Not saying the challenge and subsequent donations were a waste of time, but I'm not sure I'd call that a "breakthrough"
You have no idea what they can do with that the knowledge of that gene though. Now maybe they can use that gene to understand more about the overall disease and make more discoveries.
You have no idea what they can do with that the knowledge of that gene though. Now maybe they can use that gene to understand more about the overall disease and make more discoveries.
Stop being so cynical people.
Agreed - knowledge of the gene certainly pushes the research forward, and could lead to something significant in the future. I guess I just think branding it as a "breakthrough" is a little sensationalist at this point. It's really more like a potential breakthrough, as this discovery could lead to bigger and better things, but it's not huge right now.
__________________
Much like a sports ticker, you may feel obligated to read this
As someone with a neuromuscular disease (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) with a gene that only 6% of patients have, this is huge news. If the 3% that has this gene benefits from this finding, cure or no cure, it would be amazing not only for them, but potentially for everyone with ALS
3% is massive in a field like this
Last edited by doctajones428; 07-28-2016 at 10:28 AM.
You have no idea what they can do with that the knowledge of that gene though. Now maybe they can use that gene to understand more about the overall disease and make more discoveries.
As someone with a neuromuscular disease (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) with a gene that only 6% of patients have, this is huge news. If the 3% that has this gene benefits from this finding, cure or no cure, it would be amazing not only for them, but potentially for everyone with ALS
3% is massive in a field like this
Anything is good. ALS is one of the worst things to have to go through or have a family member go through. It's hard to watch someone you love deteriorate so quickly to the point where they cannot move or communicate and you know their brain is still functioning normally. I lost my grandmother to ALS and I hope this brings some hope to finding a cure.
Identifying Genes is like a puzzle piece on a puzzle, everytime you find one you will often find others that connect, as with all genes you are not just looking for one, but a number of that that in conjuction are the problem, so this is quite significant since often discovering a key gene will speed up and help narrow down the research.
__________________ Allskonar fyrir Aumingja!!
The Following User Says Thank You to Thor For This Useful Post:
