from the world's big
The Challenges of Fundraising
Myra J. Biblowit has served as a director of Wyndham Worldwide Corporation since our separation from Cendant in July 2006. Ms. Biblowit was a Cendant director from April 2000 until the completion of Cendant's separation plan in August 2006. Since April 2001, Ms. Biblowit has been President of The Breast Cancer Research Foundation. From July 1997 until March 2001, she served as Vice Dean for External Affairs for the New York University School of Medicine and Senior Vice President of the Mount Sinai-NYU Health System. From June 1991 to June 1997, Ms. Biblowit was Senior Vice President and Executive Director of the Capital Campaign for the American Museum of Natural History.
Myra Biblowitz: You know, I think it’s been easy in the sense that everyone understands what it is and there’s no one who hasn’t been touched in some way, a mother, a daughter, a sister, a friend. We’re not starting with “Let me tell you what breast cancer is” everyone knows about it, it’s come out of the closet, there’s no stigma, it’s very different from what it was when Evelyn started and I think everyone wants to be supportive either because they’ve had a personal experience or almost for an insurance policy, if I do support it, then maybe I won’t have that personal experience. So it’s an easy subject to broach with people and people are incredibly responsive.
Question: What has been the scope of your international efforts?
Myra Biblowitz You know, most of the money that we have raised, we have raised in the United States, though we have dispersed it internationally. So we have added on grantees now in Canada, France, Belgium, Spain, the UK, Italy, the Middle East and Latin America. For the most part we’re still deriving the bulk of our money in the United States though we’ve had some wonderful help from companies and Estee Lauder up in Canada and some programs in the UK. For the most part the money has been derived here because the tax incentives for philanthropy that exist in the US, don’t exist elsewhere.
Question: Is the government giving enough money to breast cancer research?
Myra Biblowitz: No, you know, the amount of money has at the very best stayed flat and if you factor in inflation it’s decreased. The whole NCI budget for cancer is five billion which may sound like a lot but when you look at what the tobacco industry spends about 15 billion advertising cigarettes to teenagers or the pet food industry spends about 14 billion advertising pet food
it’s a small drop in the bucket. In all about 11 billion is spent on cancer research across the NCI, the National Cancer Institute, pharmaceuticals and private organizations like the breast cancer research foundation. So it’s not a lot of money and the federal budget has certainly diminished if anything and the pity is that there has never been a moment in time when knowledge, scientific knowledge is advancing at such a rapid clip, it’s a hungry animal. So that if you could feed it, the answers will come more quickly. Dr. Larry Norton at Memorial Sloane Kettering Cancer Center who is our scientific advisor and has been since the inception of the foundation says truly the only thing that stands between today and cure is money.
Question: What could inspire the government to spend more money on research?
Myra Biblowitz: You know, it’s a tough question, what inspires the government, if I knew the answer, I’d be very smart. I don’t know what inspires the government but obviously there have been other calls on the federal dollar as you know, the war and other things and one can only hope that under new leadership there might be an enrichment of the federal coffers. Because right now if you are a researcher, you spend half the year writing a federal grant and you have only a slim percentage of chance that that will get funded. Only 8% of approved grants actually get funded and the pity is then there’s a brain drain, people are actually leaving the field in droves, they get this tremendous education, they have the vision, they have the drive but if they can’t get the dollars to move their research forward, they can’t pursue what they’ve been trained to do. We try to put dollars, private dollars in the hands of researchers who have new ideas, often to help them get the base data that will make them competitor for the limited federal dollars. It’s like a chicken and egg, you can’t compete for the dollars until you have the data. You almost have to have finished your research or know the answer
before you can start. So an organization like ours plays a critical function, often teeing people up to compete for the limited dollars and often moving research forward that might otherwise languish for decades and at the end of the day it’s people’s lives.
Although breast cancer awareness is high, challenges still exist in raising funds for research.
Sallie Krawcheck and Bob Kulhan will be talking money, jobs, and how the pandemic will disproportionally affect women's finances.
Vaccines find more success in development than any other kind of drug, but have been relatively neglected in recent decades.
Vaccines are more likely to get through clinical trials than any other type of drug — but have been given relatively little pharmaceutical industry support during the last two decades, according to a new study by MIT scholars.
Want help raising your kids? Spend more time at church, says new study.
- Religious people tend to have more children than secular people, but why remains unknown.
- A new study suggests that the social circles provided by regular church going make raising kids easier.
- Conversely, having a large secular social group made women less likely to have children.
Be fruitful and multiply<p>Scientists in the United Kingdom collected data on more than 13,000 mothers and their children. Most of them were religious, but 12 percent were not. The data included information on their church habits, social networks, number of children, and the scores those children achieved on a standardized test.</p><p>In line with previous findings that religious women have more children than secular women in industrialized countries, a connection between at least monthly church attendance and fertility was confirmed. However, religious parents showed they could avoid the pitfalls that having more children can bring. </p><p>Typically, more children in a family leads to reduced cognitive ability and height in each <a href="https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/37/6/1408/729795" target="_blank">child</a>. Some studies find that children do less well in school for each <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13524-016-0471-0" target="_blank">additional sibling they have</a>. This makes a kind of intuitive sense, as parents with more children would have to divide their time, energy, and resources among more people as families expand. One would expect that the larger families would also lead to things like lower test scores. </p><p>Despite the expectation, the children of religious parents didn't have lower scores on standardized tests. There were small positive relationships between the size of the mother's social network, the number of co-religionists helping out, and the children's test scores. However, this association was small, didn't show up in all of the testings, and was unrelated to other variables. </p> These effects might be explained by the size and helpfulness of the social networks around the more religious. Women who went to church at least once a month had more extensive social networks than those who never go or who attend yearly. These social networks of co-religious people mean that there are more people to turn to for help with child-rearing, a point also demonstrated in the data. The amount of aid women got from their fellow churchgoers was also associated with a higher fertility rate. <br> <br> Conversely, an extensive social network was associated with fewer children for secular women. This finding is in line with <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1207/s15327957pspr0904_5" target="_blank">previous studies</a> and suggests that the social networks comprised of co-religious individuals differ from those found elsewhere.
So, how quickly should I join a local religious group?<div class="rm-shortcode" data-media_id="6RrmYM8M" data-player_id="FvQKszTI" data-rm-shortcode-id="9eb4740a7d1e10108a75fd2ed627a90f"> <div id="botr_6RrmYM8M_FvQKszTI_div" class="jwplayer-media" data-jwplayer-video-src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/6RrmYM8M-FvQKszTI.js"> <img src="https://cdn.jwplayer.com/thumbs/6RrmYM8M-1920.jpg" class="jwplayer-media-preview" /> </div> <script src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/6RrmYM8M-FvQKszTI.js"></script> </div> <p>The study is not without its faults, and more investigations into the relationship between fertility, childcare, ritual, and social networks are needed.</p><p>These findings all show correlation, not causation. Though it might be said the results point towards causation, various alternative interpretations of the data are apparent. The authors note that most religions are explicitly pro-natal. It is possible that religious women have internalized these values and simply choose to have more children than secular women do.</p><p>This idea is similar to a potential interpretation of why large social networks have the opposite effect for secular women. The authors suggest that, in some cases, these more extensive social networks are associated with work and exert an anti-natal influence. Again, the people who build such networks may be people unlikely to have large families under any circumstances.</p><p>However, the researchers' hypothesis endured. The help religious women get from their church-based social networks allows them to have larger families than those who lack these support systems. In some instances, these support systems also prevent the adverse effects of larger families. </p>
The community religion offers<p>As we've mentioned <a href="https://bigthink.com/culture-religion/what-is-secular-humanism" target="_blank">before</a>, religion offers a community, and a community provides social capital. As religion continues to decline in the West, the social bonds of faith communities that used to tie social communities together begin to decay. However, as has been noted by a variety of observers for the last few decades, fewer and fewer new organizations appear ready to replace religion as a source of community in our lives.</p><p>While many different organizations might offer social support that religion once provided the whole of western society, this study shows that different social circles can differently affect the people in them. This finding must be considered by those trying to find new communities to join or the authors of future research. </p><p>The community offered by religious groups provides real benefits to those who join them. As this study shows, having the support network religious community offers allows some parents to avoid pitfalls that bedevil those lacking similar support. It suggests that previous studies demonstrating that group ritual offers benefits like increased amounts of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797612472910" target="_blank">group trust</a> and <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1069397103037002003" target="_blank">cooperation</a> are onto something and that those benefits have a variety of applications. </p><p>While this study is not without its blind spots, it offers a strong starting point for further investigations into the nature of ritual in our modern lives and how local support networks remain vital in our increasingly globalized world. </p>
What would it be like to experience the 4th dimension?
Physicists have understood at least theoretically, that there may be higher dimensions, besides our normal three. The first clue came in 1905 when Einstein developed his theory of special relativity. Of course, by dimensions we’re talking about length, width, and height. Generally speaking, when we talk about a fourth dimension, it’s considered space-time. But here, physicists mean a spatial dimension beyond the normal three, not a parallel universe, as such dimensions are mistaken for in popular sci-fi shows.
Health officials in China reported that a man was infected with bubonic plague, the infectious disease that caused the Black Death.
- The case was reported in the city of Bayannur, which has issued a level-three plague prevention warning.
- Modern antibiotics can effectively treat bubonic plague, which spreads mainly by fleas.
- Chinese health officials are also monitoring a newly discovered type of swine flu that has the potential to develop into a pandemic virus.
Bacteria under microscope
needpix.com<p>Today, bubonic plague can be treated effectively with antibiotics.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Unlike in the 14th century, we now have an understanding of how this disease is transmitted," Dr. Shanthi Kappagoda, an infectious disease physician at Stanford Health Care, told <a href="https://www.healthline.com/health-news/seriously-dont-worry-about-the-plague#Heres-how-the-plague-spreads" target="_blank">Healthline</a>. "We know how to prevent it — avoid handling sick or dead animals in areas where there is transmission. We are also able to treat patients who are infected with effective antibiotics, and can give antibiotics to people who may have been exposed to the bacteria [and] prevent them [from] getting sick."</p>
This plague patient is displaying a swollen, ruptured inguinal lymph node, or buboe.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention<p>Still, hundreds of people develop bubonic plague every year. In the U.S., a handful of cases occur annually, particularly in New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado, <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/plague/faq/index.html" target="_blank">where habitats allow the bacteria to spread more easily among wild rodent populations</a>. But these cases are very rare, mainly because you need to be in close contact with rodents in order to get infected. And though plague can spread from human to human, this <a href="https://www.healthline.com/health-news/seriously-dont-worry-about-the-plague#Heres-how-the-plague-spreads" target="_blank">only occurs with pneumonic plague</a>, and transmission is also rare.</p>