The Politics Of Cancer

"The Politics of Cancer Revisited," by internationally renowned authority on cancer causes and preventions, Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., backed by meticulous documentation, charges that the cancer establishment remains myopically fixated on damage control--diagnosis and treatment, and basic genetic research with, not always benign, indifference to cancer prevention research and failure of outreach to Congress, regulatory agencies, and the public with scientific information on unwitting exposures to a wide range of avoidable causes of cancer. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Cancer Society (ACS) are also accused of pervasive conflicts of interest, particularly with the cancer drug industry.

The commercialization of the breast cancer movement is challenged in this analysis of how breast cancer has been transformed from a stigmatized disease and individual tragedy to a market-driven industry of survivorship.

This book examines the politics of cancer, explains how our government is intrinsically tied to cancer research efforts, and documents how major political actors make cancer policy and are influenced in their decision making by political, social, scientific, and economic variables. Is whether we contract cancer—and whether we survive the disease, if we get it—largely just a result of good versus bad luck, or are these outcomes regarding cancer tied to the policies and actions of our federal government? Cancer-treating drug development and approval is overseen by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, billions of dollars of federal money are devoted towards cancer research, and exposure of citizens to potentially cancer-causing environments or chemicals is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Additionally, all of these factors can be affected by the political motivations of our most powerful politicians. The Politics of Cancer: Malignant Indifference analyzes the policy environment of cancer in America: the actors, the political institutions, the money, and the disease itself, identifying how haphazard U.S. government policy toward cancer research has been and how the president, Congress, government bureaucracies, and even the cancer industry have failed to meet timelines and make the expected discoveries. Whitman Cobb examines funding for the National Cancer Institute and the roles of the executive, Congress, policy entrepreneurs, and the bureaucracy as well as that of the state of cancer science. She argues that despite the so-called "war on cancer," no strategic, comprehensive government policy has been imposed—leading to an indecisive cancer policy that has significantly impeded cancer research. Written from a political science perspective, the book enables readers to gain insight into the realities of science policy and the ways in which the federal government is both the source of funding for much of cancer research and often deficient in setting comprehensive and consistent anti-cancer policy. Readers will also come to understand how Congress, the president, the bureaucracy, and the cancer industry all share responsibility for the current state of cancer policy confusion and consider whether pharmaceutical companies, for-profit cancer treatment hospitals, and interest groups like the American Cancer Society have a personal incentive to keep the fight alive.

Written by a highly regarded historian of science, this meticulouly researched, eminently fair, and very provocative book attempts to answer the question: Why, given all the time and money spent on cancer research, can't we get consistent answers to the most fundamental questions about prevention and treatment?

This book examines the politics of cancer, explains how our government is intrinsically tied to cancer research efforts, and documents how major political actors make cancer policy and are influenced in their decision making by political, social, scientific, and economic variables. Is whether we contract cancer—and whether we survive the disease, if we get it—largely just a result of good versus bad luck, or are these outcomes regarding cancer tied to the policies and actions of our federal government? Cancer-treating drug development and approval is overseen by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, billions of dollars of federal money are devoted towards cancer research, and exposure of citizens to potentially cancer-causing environments or chemicals is regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency. Additionally, all of these factors can be affected by the political motivations of our most powerful politicians. The Politics of Cancer: Malignant Indifference analyzes the policy environment of cancer in America: the actors, the political institutions, the money, and the disease itself, identifying how haphazard U.S. government policy toward cancer research has been and how the president, Congress, government bureaucracies, and even the cancer industry have failed to meet timelines and make the expected discoveries. Whitman Cobb examines funding for the National Cancer Institute and the roles of the executive, Congress, policy entrepreneurs, and the bureaucracy as well as that of the state of cancer science. She argues that despite the so-called "war on cancer," no strategic, comprehensive government policy has been imposed—leading to an indecisive cancer policy that has significantly impeded cancer research. Written from a political science perspective, the book enables readers to gain insight into the realities of science policy and the ways in which the federal government is both the source of funding for much of cancer research and often deficient in setting comprehensive and consistent anti-cancer policy. Readers will also come to understand how Congress, the president, the bureaucracy, and the cancer industry all share responsibility for the current state of cancer policy confusion and consider whether pharmaceutical companies, for-profit cancer treatment hospitals, and interest groups like the American Cancer Society have a personal incentive to keep the fight alive.

Award-winning author, Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., whose 1978 book ""The Politics of Cancer"" shook the political establishment by showing how the federal government had been corrupted by industrial polluters, has written a book that is sure to be of equal consequence. ""Cancer-Gate: How to Win the Losing Cancer War"" is a groundbreaking new book. It warns that, contrary to three decades of promises, we are losing the winnable war against cancer, and that the hand-in-glove generals of the federal National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the private ""nonprofit"" American Cancer Society (ACS) have betrayed us.These institutions, Epstein alleges, have spent tens of billions of taxpayer and charity dollars primarily targeting silver-bullet cures, strategies that have largely failed, while virtually ignoring strategies for preventing cancer in the first place. As a result, cancer rates have escalated to epidemic proportions, now striking nearly one in every two men, and more than one in every three women. This translates into approximately 50 percent more cancer in men, and 20 percent more cancer in women over the course of just one generation.

Between 1990 and 1993, breast cancer activism became a significant political movement. The issue began to receive extensive media attention, and federal funding for breast cancer research jumped dramatically. Describing the origins of this surge in interest, Maureen Hogan Casamayou attributes it to the emergence of politically potent activism among breast cancer survivors and their supporters. Exploring the creation and development of the National Breast Cancer Coalition (NBCC), she shows how many of its key leaders were mobilized by their own traumatic experiences with the disease and its treatments. Casamayou details the NBCC’s meteoric rise and impressive lobbying efforts, explaining how—in contrast to grassroots movements founded by dedicated individuals—the coalition grew from the simultaneous efforts of a network of women who invested their time, energy, money, and professional skills in the fight for increased funding for breast cancer research. This multiple leadership—or collective entrepreneurialism, says Casamayou—was crucial to the NBCC’s success framing the issue in the minds of the public and policymakers alike.