Britain slumps to bottom of cancer survival tables telegraph.co.uk 22 points by RickJWagner 6 years ago
ptah 6 years ago bottom of table for countries with universal healthcare is not that bad jamasb 6 years ago It absolutely is when you consider the strength of the research communities surrounding cancers and their treatments in the UK. jbrooksuk 6 years ago I’ve heard that “charities” such as Cancer Research UK are actually business who invest very little of their income to actual research, instead paying relatively a lot more for media and payroll? tonyedgecombe 6 years ago £545 million spent on research and £42 million on public information out of £672 million raised. So approx 13% spent on administration. ptah 6 years ago yes it should be better, but i would like to see a full comparison Junk_Collector 6 years ago Here is the actual study for your perusalhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147020451...Unfortunately, it only covers the 7 countries that funded the study, but it is much more in depth than the news article.
jamasb 6 years ago It absolutely is when you consider the strength of the research communities surrounding cancers and their treatments in the UK. jbrooksuk 6 years ago I’ve heard that “charities” such as Cancer Research UK are actually business who invest very little of their income to actual research, instead paying relatively a lot more for media and payroll? tonyedgecombe 6 years ago £545 million spent on research and £42 million on public information out of £672 million raised. So approx 13% spent on administration. ptah 6 years ago yes it should be better, but i would like to see a full comparison Junk_Collector 6 years ago Here is the actual study for your perusalhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147020451...Unfortunately, it only covers the 7 countries that funded the study, but it is much more in depth than the news article.
jbrooksuk 6 years ago I’ve heard that “charities” such as Cancer Research UK are actually business who invest very little of their income to actual research, instead paying relatively a lot more for media and payroll? tonyedgecombe 6 years ago £545 million spent on research and £42 million on public information out of £672 million raised. So approx 13% spent on administration.
tonyedgecombe 6 years ago £545 million spent on research and £42 million on public information out of £672 million raised. So approx 13% spent on administration.
ptah 6 years ago yes it should be better, but i would like to see a full comparison Junk_Collector 6 years ago Here is the actual study for your perusalhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147020451...Unfortunately, it only covers the 7 countries that funded the study, but it is much more in depth than the news article.
Junk_Collector 6 years ago Here is the actual study for your perusalhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147020451...Unfortunately, it only covers the 7 countries that funded the study, but it is much more in depth than the news article.
bottom of table for countries with universal healthcare is not that bad
It absolutely is when you consider the strength of the research communities surrounding cancers and their treatments in the UK.
I’ve heard that “charities” such as Cancer Research UK are actually business who invest very little of their income to actual research, instead paying relatively a lot more for media and payroll?
£545 million spent on research and £42 million on public information out of £672 million raised. So approx 13% spent on administration.
yes it should be better, but i would like to see a full comparison
Here is the actual study for your perusal
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S147020451...
Unfortunately, it only covers the 7 countries that funded the study, but it is much more in depth than the news article.