If It Starts With Cancer, Where Does It End?

I have decided to start using the "one stone" method of writing in order to maintain some sense of regularity with my blog. So, anytime I write a letter to the editor of The Telegraph in Macon, I'll post it here too. Sometimes I write in response to another writer and in those cases I may include their letter to better understand the context of mine.

Below is a letter recently published in The Telegraph that may make sense to many people upon first reading it. On the surface it seems good intentioned and written from a sense of caring for others. However, what it comes down to is using the government to take private property from individuals in order to give it to those "more deserving".

The second letter is my respone to the first.


Published June 16, 2007

Blood-related cancer research needs support

In the past 20 years we've seen enormous progress in research and discovery of new treatments for blood-related cancers, particularly in childhood leukemia and some adult blood cancers. Despite this progress, however, the prognosis for many blood cancers remains bleak, with hundreds of thousands of patients facing unnecessary suffering and death.

Our enormous progress is being undermined and could soon be reversed due to inadequate federal funding, just when we need commitment and conviction the most. Over the last four years federal funding for cancer research has been flat or declined as research has become more expensive. Reduced support for cancer research could lead to delays in the development of new screenings and treatments that could help detect cancer early and save lives. Some research groups have already terminated lifesaving clinical trials.

As someone who has seen too many lives lost to blood cancer, I don't understand how anyone would think our country can afford to curb its investment in blood cancer research.
Leaders in Congress say they are committed to funding the fight against cancer, but so far they have given it a lower priority than hundreds of other programs. The House of Representatives proposed a 1.5 percent increase for the National Cancer Institute, the nation's premier cancer research institution, far less than the average 6.4 percent increase for other health and education programs. With the increased costs associated with medical research, that does not even keep pace with last year, let alone the declining budgets of the last few years.

I urge Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, as well as Georgia members of the House of Representatives, to support residents here in Georgia living with blood-related cancer and those who will be diagnosed with the disease by committing to increase funding for cancer research - at a minimum, at the rate of medical inflation.

Simply put: The greater our investment, the more lives we will save.

Dick Brown is executive director of The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Georgia Chapter.


Published June 18, 2007

Government not answer to all our problems

Blood-related cancer is a tremendously large health concern in Georgia, the United States and the world. I agree with Dick Brown of The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Georgia Chapter, on that and the fact that more research would be great and help move us toward finding a cure that much faster.
However, blood-related cancer is no more important an issue than Alzheimer's disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), suicide, heart disease, safe food, good education or secure borders. The problem with the following list is that only secure borders are a constitutional responsibility of government. The other issues are well-intentioned but should not be funded through force by taking hard earned dollars from citizens in the form of taxes. Period.

My feelings on this issue are not without compassion and empathy for those affected with any disease, including cancer, for I have lost family members to cancer and known many others who have had one form or another of the disease. My feelings don't change the fact that it is wrong to take from people what belongs to them, in order to pay for something I want, even if it is in the interest of others.

It is easy to forget people have individual rights that trump communities' (groups of individuals) desires. We live in a nation of law, not mob rule. Just because a community wants something does not mean it has the authority or right to force an individual to forego his or her rights. That would be mob rule, and it is wrong. On top of being sad, it is scary how this nation is willing to ignore or even detest the idea of individualism and individuals' rights, regardless of the reason.
Now, if we want to see more money spent on blood-related cancer research, or any other type of research, we should not push for government (which is well-known for its inability to handle money) to forcibly take more from those who produce. Instead, we should push for government to let American taxpayers keep most of what they earn and at the same time get out of the health-care business altogether.

Governmental regulations, endless paperwork and red tape stifle health-care providers and drive the cost of their services and products to ridiculous levels. If government would get out of the business of health care and let health-care professionals do their jobs, the health-care business and society would be much better off.

Taxpayers could afford to voluntarily donate money to research, and research could be expanded without the permission and regulation of the FDA, thereby finding solutions to cancer of the blood, the prostate, the breast, etc. We have to stop immediately thinking that "government" is the answer to all our problems. Government, more often, is the problem.

Troy Tarpley is a resident of Macon.