This morning's USA Today blog, "On Politics," highlights Lance Armstrong's cancer forum for Presidential candidates - and why only six candi...
Get answers from our experts and community members.
I just finished treatment for naserpharyngal carcinoma what are the chances of passing it to my kids
View all questions >
By using this service, you accept our Terms of Use. Please read them. The consumer health information on MyBreastCancerNetwork.com is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice or treatment for any medical conditions. You should promptly seek professional medical care if you have any concern about your health, and you should always consult your physician before starting a fitness regimen. Copyright © 2005-2008. The HealthCentral Network, Inc. All rights reserved.
 | We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here. |
USA Today reports:
"Armstrong wants to get the candidates on the record about cancer. 'We made a decision at the foundation to go after these politicians. We're in the position to ask them the questions and we felt obligated to flex our muscles,' he said.
'Listen, all I can go on is what they tell us: scheduling conflicts,' Armstrong said. 'We all know where they are. But what is more important than the No. 1 killer in the country?
'I don't want to call anybody out,' he continued, before calling them out. 'We have two presidential candidates who had cancer and aren't going to be there - Rudy Giuliani and John McCain.' "
If this were a forum where the no-shows felt they could make a big positive splash, I'm betting those "scheduling conflicts" might have magically disappeared. Funding for cancer research is obviously seen as a no-win for some candidates, those who can't seem to find other areas in which to cut spending in order to free up the money. No matter the outcome of the forum, perhaps just showing up will put those candidates who do so in a favorable light with the cancer community.
reply