Have social priorities tainted awareness campaigns?By Chase Dooley
Online Editor September 27, 2014 It’s difficult to focus on homework after a long, rather stressful day at high school, when all you can focus on is Ice Bucket Challenge drama.
To be honest, stressing-out over high school is a pebble’s ripple in the Pacific ocean compared to issues afflicting humans breathing on this wee planet we named Earth. I am thankful I don’t have Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or breast cancer, HIV/AIDS, diabetes, prostate cancer or leukemia. I’m blessed not to be diagnosed with Heart Disease or suffering with depression. I’m especially thankful I don’t have to pay pesky utility bills. Is it fair enough to say that? It is unfortunate to be diagnosed with a disease from too-numerous lists of maladies that each, steal the soul of someone unknown. In some cases, that soul is a celebrity we once worshipped or a baseball player we glorified. In some cases, that soul is your wife or husband or sister or brother—maybe your mother or father? Is it fair enough to ask that? Now, is it too far to say, in honest perspective, that an awareness campaign has outstretched to the point where it has begun to lose its purpose? Regardless, my attention has been bolted to the foundation of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, an awareness campaign for Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease. So far, this Ice Bucket Challenge has paid off immensely with $94.3 million raised since July 29, according to the ALS Association’s webpage. That’s an impressive increase of nearly 4400 percent from the same time last year. Not to mention, only 28% of the donations goes to research according to ALS Association's webpage. Now I wish to address an article I’ve read named: “The Worst Part of the Ice Bucket Challenge Is The People Criticizing it” found on Vice.com. To be clear: I am all-for donating any denomination of any currency to any charity foundation or association one wishes to support in effort to aid research of a disease and creation of a cure to abolish it from Earth. Do what you wish with your money; I cannot prevent you. But ALS is a disease that affects 5,600 people in the U.S. each year according to ALS Association’s webpage. In the same time, 32,052 people are diagnosed with AIDS according to the CDC’s webpage. “The incidence of diabetes in 2012 was 1.7 million per year; in 2010 it was 1.9 million,” taken from American Diabetes Association’s website. Compared to other, well-known diseases, ALS is fortunately less diagnosed, less widespread. This also equates to less deaths than to diabetes or AIDS. Note the donations compared to deaths in the figure. Angelina Fanous, the author of the Vice article, begins with a description of life with ALS and that even includes a morose video (until he kisses us goodbye). It’s a morose opening to what-seems-like a furious story on people with opinions. My question I asked when I read it: how is the life of the people who live with Heart Disease? Or Leukemia? How about Parkinson’s? I get that living with ALS (or any disease for that matter) is difficult, but note you’re not the only afflicted person in the world. And ALS is surely not the worst disease you could possible be diagnosed with, but it’s definitely not the least. Remember you could be that guy (or gal) with the unknown inside you. It is not my goal to debate what should be a priority—for the human race to focus attention on. It is a miracle that, everyday, we survive the things we do. The world is a hostile place that we attempt to make cushioned for our children to endure when we’re gone. But this does not mean to follow a blind path—following someone’s roll just to fit in. “...Donating without dumping buckets of water on our heads disconnects us from the cause. It’s about being apart of something,” said Angelina Fanous in her Vice article. Oh. Since when has donating to a cause been about “being apart of something?” Do you expect to receive a sticker with the words: “Great job!” or “You did it!” printed on it? You donate to have a chance at aiding society by providing your choice charity money to research and find a cure for a disease. Not to fulfil your self-righteous and narcissistic social agenda. It’s the individuals with the blithe notion that if they pour a bucket of water over their heads they will spontaneously contribute to funding a cure of a disease. Then we have the individuals who don’t know why they’re pouring water and ice over their heads—oh, because their benighted friends challenged them to? Is this our desperate attempt to find a niche within society? In a way: to flock like sheep? But in the end, who cares right? It spreads awareness… right? Should we not place the paramount maladies in focus that claim the most souls? Is it unfair to suggest that? Perhaps, so. |
You may also like: |