Spending by publicly funded charities on cancer research is "big bucks" and the focus is overwhelmingly on drug treatments and clinical research. Leading the field of charities is the American National Cancer Institute with an annual budget of over £2 billion.
A long way behind is the British Cancer Research Campaign and the Imperial Fund for Cancer with budgets of £50 million, respectively. The Irish lead spender is the Irish Cancer Society with a relatively miniscule budget of "just" £2 million. Most of the money comes from the public, either through taxes or fundraisers like Daffodil Day. Prof Sam Epstein estimates that only 2 to 3 per cent of the US National Cancer Institute's budget goes on research into avoidable carcinogens in air, water, food, home and workplace. The lion's share of the £2 billion budget goes into drug development. The British Cancer Research Campaign - whose campaign slogan is "Fighting Cancer on all Fronts" - spends £18 million on drug development and gene therapy. But on environmental causes of cancer, the CRC spokesperson said: "We don't have a sizeable portfolio of research looking at environmental carcinogens".
The Irish Cancer Society this year allocated nearly £200,000 to laboratory research on cancer drugs, cancer metabolism and gene therapy. On the "preventative" side, £370,000 went on public education where the main campaign focus was on smoking and improving nutritional choices. "Dangerous chemicals in the environment are the least of our concerns," says a spokeswoman.
On the international stage, one of the most elaborate research endeavours was the four-year project carried out jointly by the British-based World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research (combined budgets of some £160 million). These organisations last year published a 670-page report entitled Food, Nutrition And The Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. However, less than two pages were devoted to discussing carcinogenic pesticide residues in food after which it was concluded: "no further judgment is possible".
Critics argue that funding and research priorities of publicly funded bodies should be shifted to produce more comprehensive studies on industrial carcinogens in the environment and their impact on human health. They point out that 36 years after Rachel Carson first brought attention to the dangers of chemical contamination of the environment in her book Silent Spring, the cancer establishment still persists in discounting such evidence as "insufficient".