Herceptin Riders Peaceful Protest Ride

**Nasty** · 22nd January 2008, 05:08

Originally Posted by smoky

You’re obviously looking for a fight about it - why don't you find somewhere else to masturbate in public

I'm not going to argue about the facts - people die from breast cancer, $6mil will help some of them - end of story.
Emotional blackmail - I would say cancer is a rather emotional subject

Who are you to judge what’s in 'poor taste' - as for my comment about sir Ed, it was not detrimental to him or his memory at all, so what are you on about

I think that is a set of pratish comments to make ... If 'sir ed .. blah blah " .. realise that mens issues are even more underfunded that womens .. if he died of prostate cancer .. it would still be underfunded ... accept that as a fact .. because of the efficacy of the test process. Anyone can judge poor taste ... and you telling someone to bugger off cause you don't like what they say or their reaction to your comments is bloody piss poor.

**Nasty** · 22nd January 2008, 05:12

Originally Posted by forkoil

I'm on the side of getting the best outcomes for the most people given the limited funds available for health. It bugs me that these single issue causes are promoted so vigorously, and dare I say it, partic by women, as if their gender is somehow hard done by. You dont hear men jumping up and down about prostate cancer, and other serious effects of prostates problems. I guess because we put some faith in the medical profession to do the best they can. The fear is that if enough people shout hard enough, they skew the fund allocation to the detriment of another group, who suffer in silence and dignity.

I hear men jumping up and down about prostate cancer all the time. its not about sides ... this is a peaceful ride .... with Hecepton there is a chances and it improves significantly .. with prostate cancer there has been no improvement on the efficacy of testing which means less than 50% are accurate ... this is one of the reasons its not readily funded as a screening programme ... but it is not a problem for a doc to stick a finder up your arse and check for swelling etc.

I agree that sometimes its like the ones who scream loudest get funding ... but it really doesn't work like that. I can't get the drug that could help me cos I am too "healthy" for their stupid system ... no matter what jumping I do it doesn't make it change. hercepton is a life and death drug with a good efficacy ... why not scream ... and no I am not on the ride I just think you are picking a fight cos you want to.

**maxworldbiker** · 22nd January 2008, 09:55

People, just back up a little, ok??? This thread is NOT INTENDED to be a debate or competition about who is most deserving of cancer drug funding. Rather than mud slinging and insults and opinionated rantings about why one group gets attention over another (which should perhaps be taken somewhere else for a decent fight, if that's what you're looking for????), what we really need is a bit of support on this. It's about saving lives. Not playing God or preferring one group over another. To assume that it is merely about selection is to miss the bigger picture.

I believe I've said somewhere else on this forum that to go cap in hand to the government for blanket funding for ALL cancer drugs will never work because we'd have to get the whole damn country behind it and that will never happen. Its easier to eat an elephant one bite at a time, and if we can get a u-turn on one type of cancer drug, it will pave the way for the rest to follow. All I'm trying to do here is get enough people to support the need to get a drug funded for women with breast cancer. I've got my fork into the elephant, people. You have to start somewhere, and that's what I'm doing.

Anyone who hasn't got anything positive to contribue on this particular thread, which is meant to be about the ride and what its trying to do, should maybe take their whining someplace else. I'm not interested in fighting with anyone as I don't have the time for it, but I don't want to see this thread to turn into a bunfight.

Get behind this, don't get behind this, whatever you want to do is fine, just don't throw shit around in a place where all people want to do is make a positive difference.

**forkoil** · 22nd January 2008, 11:31

Stop being so precious. If you come onto a public forum like KB u will risk being commented on, criticised and thats healthy, mein fuhrer. I happen to disagree with the targeting of funding to particular drugs for the reasons I've given, and I have a perfect right to say so. Thats what mods are there for.

**maxworldbiker** · 23rd January 2008, 13:47

Freebie place on offer, sponsorship all paid for. Check out the website for details.

**ynot slow** · 23rd January 2008, 21:37

Originally Posted by forkoil

I'm on the side of getting the best outcomes for the most people given the limited funds available for health. It bugs me that these single issue causes are promoted so vigorously, and dare I say it, partic by women, as if their gender is somehow hard done by. You dont hear men jumping up and down about prostate cancer, and other serious effects of prostates problems. I guess because we put some faith in the medical profession to do the best they can. The fear is that if enough people shout hard enough, they skew the fund allocation to the detriment of another group, who suffer in silence and dignity.

The main thing is the right to have the right to live,be it breast,prostate,colon,lung,testical,brain,skin cancer,if the cost is $10 mil for all types of treatment to prevent the cancer spreading so what,it's just a prick that they cost of preventative treatment is outweighed by percieved cost of not treating,same with say hip replacements,isn't it cheaper to replace it asap and have the person working after say 6 weeks than give them painkillers for 12 months,with time on benefit due to unable to work,and maybe doing more damage to the person.
Hell the government wasted money on various buildings(toilets)extravagance.

Thing is most men don't talk about their illness's unlike women and although breast cancer is running behind prostate cancer,when combined with all cancers,if the women saved is your partner or mum isn't that all that matters.Likewise if your dad or you need care for prostate or testical cancer wouldn't you like treatment asap.I know of a couple of people having had treatment in Melbourne due to delays as no specialists are/were available within 6 weeks of surgery.

**ynot slow** · 23rd January 2008, 21:42

Originally Posted by maxworldbiker

Freebie place on offer, sponsorship all paid for. Check out the website for details.

Take me.Checked website,bloody hectic schedule.

**forkoil** · 24th January 2008, 08:30

Originally Posted by ynot slow

The main thing is the right to have the right to live,be it breast,prostate,colon,lung,testical,brain,skin cancer,if the cost is $10 mil for all types of treatment to prevent the cancer spreading so what,it's just a prick that they cost of preventative treatment is outweighed by percieved cost of not treating,same with say hip replacements,isn't it cheaper to replace it asap and have the person working after say 6 weeks than give them painkillers for 12 months,with time on benefit due to unable to work,and maybe doing more damage to the person.
Hell the government wasted money on various buildings(toilets)extravagance.

Thing is most men don't talk about their illness's unlike women and although breast cancer is running behind prostate cancer,when combined with all cancers,if the women saved is your partner or mum isn't that all that matters.Likewise if your dad or you need care for prostate or testical cancer wouldn't you like treatment asap.I know of a couple of people having had treatment in Melbourne due to delays as no specialists are/were available within 6 weeks of surgery.

I agree with you. However this thread and my argument is against campaigns that promote or target one particular drug, because the purse string holders will tend to oil the squeekiest wheel and rob peter to pay paul, keeping the total drug budget the same. Thus less vocal groups get less of the cake (such as men). This is unfair. Drug campaigns should be to increase the total drug budget, rather than purely self interested.

**Nasty** · 24th January 2008, 08:33

I am so in if you can take me .. I can do write ups etc.

**forkoil** · 24th January 2008, 09:34

Originally Posted by Nasty

I am so in if you can take me .. I can do write ups etc.

Oh Nasty, you are so out, and just because you are pretty good with the lingo on here, doesnt mean u can do the newspaper thing

**Nasty** · 24th January 2008, 10:07

Originally Posted by forkoil

Oh Nasty, you are so out, and just because you are pretty good with the lingo on here, doesnt mean u can do the newspaper thing

hehehe .. how little you know ....

**forkoil** · 24th January 2008, 10:24

Originally Posted by Nasty

hehehe .. how little you know ....

c'mon, you want to tell .....

**maxworldbiker** · 24th January 2008, 14:16

Nasty (ARE you nasty??? I'm scared, if y'are... and I might cry if ya nasty to me on the ride. Either that or I'll kicky'ass.

Welcome, and thanks for your PM. I've pm'd ya back to tellya to pick your chance from what's on offer, PM me back and we'll take it from there.

At the risk of sounding like a cracked record, Team Forum, we have to tear off at these government ARSEHOLES (why can't we have fonts ten feet tall?) one strip at a time. I have learned from campaigning experience that if you target one brick in the wall and get it out, its easier to ping off the next one, and that way you can get the whole wall down, as its harder to hold the fkr up with bricks missing. Don't scream at us for championing one cause over another here. Just trust the time-proven process of initially small capitulation. If we can get it, its the first step to getting the floodgates open for ALL cancer drugs to be funded. What the hell is the point of paying tens of millions for a posh new stadium if you can't fill it because everyone's dead from cancer?

Herceptin funding is an issue that has been in the headlines for a long time now, constantly, so aside from being close to my heart for many reasons, its the logical one to pursue prima facia, in an election year, and its SOOOOO not aiming to be about robbing funds from one health area for another. Its about trying to get cancer funding INCREASED, and if that comes down to taking them away from sport advertising campaigns that can do with maybe twelve million dollars instead of fifteen, or allocating "surplus" funds to it, that's all good.