Ever wonder where your money goes when you make a charitable cancer contribution? Well, here's the lowdown on how the Susan G. Komen Foundation spends their donated funds.

For 25 years, this world's largest and most progressive grassroots network of breast cancer survivors and activists has allocated 33 percent of all dollars for research and awards, and 29 percent for education. Fifteen percent of donations are spent on screening, eight percent on fundraising, and eight percent on administration. Finally, seven percent goes towards treatment.

Komen professionals say they are extremely careful about how they spend the dollars entrusted to their care. And that makes me happy.

Beginning in October, Mercedes-Benz will sell 1,000 of its special-edition E350 to benefit women's cancer research. The company will donate $1 million dollars through the sales of the special-edition E350 to support Saks Fifth Avenue's Key to the Cure. This is the fourth year Mercedes-Benz has released a special-edition vehicle to benefit cancer research for women.

"We've produced this special-edition of our most popular model to help combat one of the biggest threats to women's health in this country and help bring women's cancer treatment options and prevention one step closer," said Carol Goll, General Manager, Brand Experience Marketing, Mercedes-Benz USA. "Mercedes partnership with Saks Fifth Avenue and the Entertainment Industry Foundation (EIF) offers us a unique opportunity to make a meaningful contribution to a cause that affects us all."

Funds raised for Key to the Cure will benefit programs including EIF's Women's Cancer Research Fund, the Cleveland Clinic, Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center and the Nevada Cancer Institute.

Safeway, a major-chain grocery store, announced that it has raised a whopping $5.1 million dollars during its Prostate Cancer Awareness Month fundraiser in June. In just six years, Safeway has raised more than $17.8 million dollars to benefit the Prostate Cancer Foundation for prostate cancer awareness and research.

In addition to the traditional solicited customer donations at checkstands they do each year, Safeway also attributes its fundraising success this year to Safeway employees who held parking lot barbecues, carnivals, book sales, and raffles.

As I said in an earlier post about Safeway's fundraising abilities, they are one of the most effective organizations to raise donations for cancer charity. Because it is seldom possible to get out of a grocery store without spending several hundred dollars, adding one more dollar for a worthy cause is easy to agree to do.

Right here in Gainesville, Florida -- at the University of Florida to be exact -- the vaccine for cervical cancer is now available for college students. This vaccine -- called Gardasil -- could prevent women from contracting the human papillomavirus (HPV) which can cause cervical cancer and genital warts. Almost 30 of the more than 100 different strains of HPV are sexually transmitted -- and sometime in their lives, 50 percent of sexually active men and women will contract genital HPV infection. Many will not know they have it and will spread it unknowingly to sexual partners. Protection can come in the form of Gardasil which is approved for use in women between the ages of 9 and 26.

Women who are not sexually active are the best candidates for this vaccine because it is clear that they have not yet been infected. The vaccine is not effective for women who already are infected with HPV. And those who don't know if they are infected can determine if they have HPV through a routine Pap smear. If they do not have HPV, the vaccine is indicated. Once the vaccine is indicated, it is delivered in three separate doses over a six-month period of time. Each dose costs $120 -- which may discourage students from this option.

About 9,700 women in the United States will develop cervical cancer in 2006 and this cancer will kill 3,700 of these women. This vaccine -- if received well by young women who can afford it -- should prove a breakthrough in cancer research and prevention.

I have a Vera Bradley purse -- a backpack, actually -- that is black with pink ribbons and little multi-colored flowers sprinkled all over the fabric. The print is called New Hope and a portion of the proceeds from the purchase of this bag go toward breast cancer research. Now there is a second print available that also carries hope for a cure. Hope Toile is the name of this bright, cheery, perfect-for-summer, pink bag -- and like the purse I have, part of the sales will benefit the Vera Bradley Foundation for Breast Cancer. Since 1994, Vera Bradley has raised more than four million dollars for breast cancer research and this pattern -- which also shows up on accessories such as umbrellas, wallets, belts, eyeglass cases, and watches -- symbolizes renewed hope for a cure. And while I don't have this purse yet, it is on my wish list for a time when I need something new and fresh and hopeful.

In a universal health system, care is rationed by medical priority when determining where health dollars will be spent and what types of treatment will be covered. In the UK, a debate is taking place between British scientists who are recommending that unproven or disproved complementary therapies not be funded and therapists of complementary medicine who argue that many of the alternative therapies have been proven effective and should be funded for patients who can benefit from such therapies. This has opened up a whole new discussion in defining exactly what alternative or complementary therapies are and what place they have in modern medical practice.

Meanwhile, Prince Charles, a strong advocate of alternative therapies and organic foods, spoke to World Health Assembly members of the World Health Organization about the need to consider making better use of traditional therapies, particularly acupuncture and herbal medicines, to improve health care around the world.

"I believe that the proper mix of proven complementary, traditional and modern remedies, which emphasizes the active participation of the patient, can help to create a powerful healing force in the world,'' Charles said. "This is where orthodox practice can learn from complementary medicine, the West can learn from the East and new from old traditions."

Prince Charles is concerned that if we do not recognize the wisdom and value of the past, much of that knowledge will be lost. Putting aside politics, monarchy and scandal, I am gaining more respect for the Prince of Wales the more I learn about his perspectives concerning health and the environment.

Few would disagree that the health care system in this country is breaking down. If you are one of the 45 million without health insurance you already know how difficult it is to get health care, and if you have medical insurance you continue to watch as your insurance premiums and deductibles go up year after year. Medicine has become more about money and less about patient care. We are told we spend more because we have the best health care system in the world.

But as Maggie Mahar points out in her new book, Money-Driven Medicine: The Real Reason Health Care Costs So Much, "We spend twice as much as Japan on health care -- yet few would argue that our health care system is twice as good." Mahar, a seasoned financial journalist, takes an in depth look at what she calls America's complicated and increasingly dysfunctional health care system, and what she finds is disturbing. Frankly, from a patient's perspective, it's reprehensible.

Doctors aren't allowed to function as doctors in putting a patient's needs first -- no -- medicine is business and corporations decide on a patient's treatment. To put it bluntly, medicine is a market-driven $2 trillion industry rife with competition. To cite just one example of what is taking place, and to illustrate how medicine truly sees itself  -- Milwaukee hospitals spent more in one year on advertising than fast food business did. Reviewers are calling Mahar's book a thoroughly researched and carefully reasoned study. I call it gutsy because she takes no prisoners and she isn't keeping any secrets. Until the day comes when doctors are allowed to practice medicine once again, with the priority on the patient and not corporate profit, the wheels on this buggy are going to keep falling off one by one until the axle completely splits in two. A must read for anyone who wants to understand how the system works and what motivates the players. The patients aren't even in the game. And that is what is truly appalling. 

In Medical News Today, is the feature one percent reduction in cancer mortality would be worth nearly $500 billion dollars. With the ever-increasing costs of the latest in cancer drug treatments -- and what a life is worth in deciding whether or not to allow access to  drugs for cancer patients needing them -- this is an interesting and valid perspective in calculating costs of disease. According to a new study by economists Kevin Murphy and Robert Topel of the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business, a one percent reduction in mortality from cancer would be worth nearly $500 billion in social value of improved health and longevity. These estimates in dollars are based on the enjoyment of consumption and time during additional years of life, rather than how much a person earns.

"Since the benefits of cancer research are large, substantially greater research expenditures would be worthwhile," Murphy and Topel wrote. "A war on cancer that would spend an additional $100 billion on research and treatment may be worthwhile even if it had a one-in-five chance of reducing mortality by just one percent."

According to the researchers, from 1970 to 2000, gains in life expectancy added about $3.2 trillion per year to national wealth. While the economists are advocating in favor of additional research dollars, I believe the information from the study applies equally well when arguing if it is economically feasible to treat every cancer patient with drugs that will extend life. So for those who keep their focus on the pragmatic bottom line, and argue we simply cannot afford to treat everyone with expensive life-extending drugs, this is compelling evidence that in the long-run, you are losing money by not spending money now.