One has to be very careful on examining the statistical methodology of these statistics and the confounding factors involved in the statistics within North America. This area of statistical study of funding disparities, is a mathematical science in itself. I started out my conversation by saying "both are hideous diseases requiring attention." I stand by that - all I am advocating is for a sensible look at the disparities between the type of research . I hear the frustration from cancer research people wanting money for research. However, most of the popular and TV commercial supported cancers get all the funding well prostate cancer and others are left without. Unacceptable in my books. Hence I do my best to raise money from corporations to give to the Canadian cancer, Cancer Society, and other groups. What I find surprising is that you have taken approach that it is no competition. I disagree with that. There is vast competition for dollars for research, after talking to cancer, researchers themselves and various laboratories that do research. They compete rigorously for "cancer dollars'. Prostate cancer is getting the short end of the stick( as I view it) , especially if you look at mortality versus funding. However, there are other comparative analysis studies done as well. I personally raised many thousands of dollars for cancer research within my province. About 88% of it went to breast cancer upon my further investigation. About 5% went to Prostate cancer. Next time I raise money which will be in the spring, I will designate it on some of the underfunded cancers and research such as prostate cancer and various other cancers that do not get the high profile or TV commercials...and consequently, the funding for research .

How would you align cancer research funding . Of course, and I will reiterate, any cancer is hideous and yes, all deserve funding. But obviously when you target dollars to funding, there must be some rationale. Agreed? What would be your rationale for funding? Mortality rates? Complexity? Frequency of disease? When I talk to the people that do prostate cancer research, they are very frustrated that they get bypassed quite frequently. What they are advocating for, and I am advocating for is a wholesome second look at how we provide funding for prostate cancer. More men die of prostate cancer than people die of breast cancer in North America, however, funding is not aligned with respect to mortality, frequency, or other factors. How is money aligned in North America and does it have a regionality to it? Does it have a gender bias to it? Does it have other hurdles that we can make funding more effective and efficient and targeting the quickest wins for the most amount of people? Complex questions and complex studies. However, the underline denominator is the prostate cancer does not get the appropriate funding that it should, from my studies . I have yet to see a Canadian commercial on TV, for awareness or otherwise .... etc . These are tough questions and I certainly would like to hear from our community and their experience based on the aforementioned. Thank you for your concern. James on Vancouver Island.