Please investigate the "SMART METERS" going up on peoples' houses. They transmit powerful 2000 microwatts per quare meter every 60 seconds. Not "twice a day" like the electric company says. THIS IS REALLY BAD PEOPLE!!! GET INFORMED!
Youtube /watch?v=sKoiFJFRy0M

WHY IS NO ONE INVESTINGATING SMART METERS. THESE ARE DEADLY AND THEY ARE BEING PLACED ON ALL OF OUR HOMES. PLEASE REPORT ON THIS. GOT MY SMART METER IN NOVEMBER OF 2009 AND HEALTH ISSUES BEGAN HELP! SEE THIS VIDEO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKoiFJFRy0M

The impediment to breakthrough cancer research in Canada is the lack of cooperation and collaboration both within the country and with other cancer research agencies agencies abroad. Before we can find a cure we need to find the causal mechanism. At the moment there are five mechanisms for cancer that have significant support in the scientific literature based upon empirical evidence, the somatic mutation theory, the aneuploidy theory, the Warburg hypothesis, the epigenetic theory and the tissue field theory. Proponents of these schools of thought consider their model to be correct and the others wrong. To my mind these models are not mutually exclusive but all form part of a more comprehensive whole. What is needed is a new model that accommodates at least the essential elements of each and that also is at once both simplifying and unifying. The money will follow.

They spend so much on fundraising and scaring people into saying how bad the sun is so they can get more money to fight the only natural way to get Vitamin D in sunlight. I am not surprised at all as its all about money not really telling truth as vitamin d and tanning helps way more than it could ever cause. Good reporting

This is very disheartening and maddening! 1) considering the number of people and loved ones contracting this disease; 2) the number of deaths from this disease; 3) the present economy and people trying to do the right thing with whatever funds they can give; and 4) the deceit which is going on, foremost for the patients and the public!!
Those percentages have got to be amended/revised ASAP. They keep saying "the cure is out there", but at this rate of 'research' it will continue to be out of reach for so many needing that cure!!!

I'm concerned over some of the negative impacts that these stories about cancer charities may have.

As a VOLUNTEER fundraiser for a few different charities, I do know that it costs money to fundraise. And, it's intensive work that demands a lot of your time.

It's important to keep in mind that it costs to raise money, for a few reasons:

1. Organizations are less willing to donate products or money for fundraising than ever before. The recession has taken a huge bite out of fundraising.

2. Pay for Performance. I have several friends who work/have worked for charities. They are/were paid very low wages - almost poverty level. These are very skilled and educated people. The charity can't afford to lose them, but people do get tired of living at the poverty level when they have other opportunities. Some charities have "pay for performance". An acquaintaince of mine (Director of a charity) was able to attribute $1M in fundraising to her own programs, and she received a $20,000 bonus on top of her $60,000 salary. Explains the high compensation. I don't think $20K is too much to pay for $1M, do you?

3. Ability to attract volunteers. Don't forget that many of the people who work for charities work evenings and weekends to attract volunteers.

4. Volunteer "perks". There aren't a large # of volunteers willing to give up their time, either. So, paid staff have to do the job when the volunteers aren't doing the work. I've worked in many volunteer organizations that had large #'s of volunteers, and I live in Dartmouth (~ 100K people) so you would think there'd be plenty of volunteers to go around. But it's the same people sitting around the table in many different volunteer organizations, even when it comes to volunteers. I don't regard many of those volunteers as particularly useful, either.

Several people who had been recognized in the community as "super volunteers" were basically coming in to several charities for a free meal. So, while they're not being paid, they are being compensated. They're getting free meals, taxi fare, t-shirts, jackets, bags, essentially volunteer "swag". I know of many volunteers who won't do the job without swag. Pathetic, yes. But "swag" costs money and many charities would be struggling if they didn't provide it.

A little more holistic analysis would round out the picture. I'm hearing too much "rage" from people who don't know enough and those dollars are still needed for research.

Following my DISGUSTED reaction to the news re "financial dispersment" of public donations to CCS I got a call from a Director of Public Service CCS she attempted to tell me the real "facts" as Market Place had not told the correct story I (Breast Cancer victim 2007)interrupted her to state "What a Golden Opportunity to go National and tell the truth clean up your act" .All my help was from volunteers, drivers, peer support. Admittedly the main office directed me to them BUT who is the caring committed force here, it aint the Board of Directors Shame on you CCS

As a mother with a daughter in law fighting for her life with cancer ; i am truly upset over this news but please do it. My gripe is --do they-- the C C Society need prime waterfront real estate to have an office in with lots of staff !! and what about all the tireless volunteers that DO Fundraising ! and the corporations that do a lot of fundraising --why do they-CCS- have to put so much money towards IT. NO MORE MONEY TO THEM--WE NEED A GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT ! THANK YOU

Hi, Could you please link to the 2000 Financial statements? On the Canadian Cancer website they only go back unitl 2005.

Thanks

I have to say that I am suspecting corruption within CBC’s Marketplace reporting. I have seen a series of inadequately researched pieces presented to the public as fact. This concerns me greatly because the show has considerable influence to change public opinion. I am asking myself “is the show being manipulated by high level corruption to influence the public resulting in a shifting in public spending or in attitudes towards government or big business spending”. When I looked at the numbers that the Canadian Cancer Society has, I find that there is a shift in spending percentages, however, as a health care professional I believe that the spending is balanced, effective and warranted. What I find most disturbing is the lack of perspective offered by Marketplace. The question “Why” is the percentage of research funding decreasing was never asked. I find this unforgivable and irresponsible. My opinion of Marketplace as a good source of consumer information has dropped considerably after conducting my own research on this and previous shows. This is not a show that I intend to continue watching and the fact that the CBC endorses this style of flashy reporting gives me pause to question the value of other news from the CBC as a whole. I love the CBC and I regret having to see them slip form quality, unbiased reporting to the splashy news style of tabloids.

In this day and age, where our health guardians like Health Canada, cannot, will not or are unable, to due to some law, protect us from getting cancer, by going after the manufacturing companies who are litterly poisining us, we NEED programs like MARKETPLACE. It makes us aware of people who put profit first before anyone, and provide us with a fighting chance. We have been watching MARKETPLACE since its inseption. In our oppinion it deserves more rewards than it already received. (Its about time someone had the guts to exposed the Cancer Society for what it really is: more interested in WEALTH than HEALTH. My hat's off for Erica, Wendy and all the staff of CBC MARKETPLACE. PLEASE KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.

Another thought...I don't like that the dollars I donate end up in an advertisers pocket...and I am in the business of advertising! Will be an interesting show.

"Proportionate" ... so, in spite of the increased marketing costs (which must be horrendous), has more money been available for cancer research from year-to-year in the last 12 years? I will be watching this show!

I've been wondering for a long time now where all the money goes, now I guess we know

What is going on? 42.8% for fundraising and Administration? 22% for actual research? 35% for OTHER?? If the "OTHER" went to the researchers, it would go a long way to better results.
Don't you get it, the more for research, the faster cures are found, the bigger the benefit and less cancer will be there to cause problems.
It's time to cut the fat. High priced help has to go. Big salary, big holidays, first class airplane rides and luxery hotels are not what I am donating for.
We should start by cutting out the middle man and give directly to the researchers. At least we'd know where the money is going and what it's being used for.
I understand that the Terry Fox foundation gives around 90% of money donated to research. If they can do it, why can't the CCS? Lets get on board with that.
I have made my last donation to the Cancer Society! Never again.

Everytime you print something like this it hurts all charities and there are many good small charities that do the right thing. I happen to work for a small organization. Maybe you should do a segment on charities that are responsible and really try to make a difference. People have no idea how much work it is at a charity when admin staff is so small and you have to run it to certain standards.

If the Cancer Society is doing what you say then shame on them, but I hope people do not think that all charities operate like this.

I am not surprised about this story. Hour after hour, day after day, on everyradio station, t.v. station, (no matter where you are) we are constantly bombarded by fundraisers by the cancer societies. Over the years (around the world) billions of dollars have been raised for "cancer research" or so we thought. No wonder they have not found a cure for cancer, because the majority of the money raised has NOT gone to research. Cancer is such an emotional issue, and it is such a shame that the cancer societies, have used this human emotion to further their financial cause.

i just watched this report on CBC news and feeling to inform this also that in cancer research institute they r spending huge money on director level for advertising themselves rather than research. i know one of friends working on a research center and s/he telling me that on top level, there is no research and they spend lots of money just for some other things than doing research. some scientist does not do any research but spending money and who are really doing research they don't get enough fund for research. specially its happening from the top level. so who investigate this if top level are they corrupted!!!
My english is not rich but hopefully u'll understand what i wanna tell u.