"When cancer charities cause cancer, who is responsible" ?

[Orb Skewer]

From Clive Bates-The Counterfactual

When cancer charities cause cancer, who is responsible? « The counterfactual

 

[AgentAnia]

Several interesting articles on the subject of accountability and backlash in the past few days. Replying to a comment to his blog post, Clive Bates has this to say:

The interesting thing with charities is that they have a special status. In return for lenient tax treatment and a few other privileges, they have to show public benefit. Everyone involved has different forms of accountability. Were one to commence a campaign on this issue, it would be a matter of finding who or what holds each of the various perps to account or at least constrains them (eg. rules on proportionality and non-discrimination, professional standards bodies, judicial review Ombudsmen etc) and then being rather relentless about it. But the starting place has to be simply asking.

The New York Post ran a related article: http://nypost.com/2013/10/16/the-great-anti-mike-revolt/. It mentions a group called NYC Clash (New York City Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment).

Another blog (Oh What NOW?: http://niklowe.blogspot.com/2013/10/is-this-real-cause-of-rise-in-lung.html) takes it on as it relates to WHO's recent revelation on air pollution as a leading cause of lung cancer:

"Since the effect of the anti-smoking campaign has been to prevent the genuine cause from being publicly acknowledged, there is a very real sense in which we could say that the main reason for those 30,000 deaths a year from lung cancer is the anti-smoking campaign itself".

Those who have suffered from the ANTZs' draconian prohibitionist regime aren't lying down meekly and taking it any more. Those who have caused harm by their actions and policies, no matter how well-intentioned, will be held responsible. Accountability's a b*tch, ain't it?

 

[BuGlen]

I found this bit particularly interesting:

This gets to the heart of their charitable status, which under the Charities Act 2011 requires a them to have a charitable purpose that meets a test for a ‘public benefit requirement‘ (it is worth reading this – it applies equally to the stance they take on e-cigarettes).

Do we (U.S.) have the same type of liability ordinance(s) regarding our charitable and public health organizations?

 

[AgentAnia]

[....]Do we (U.S.) have the same type of liability ordinance(s) regarding our charitable and public health organizations?

Good question. I hope Bill Godshall or Placebo will chime in here...

 

[Uma]

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2005/10/nyc-citizens-lobbying-against-smoker.html

Dr. Seigel's finishing comment:
"Instead, the greedy public health groups are going out and getting larger and larger square pegs. And I think the desperation and futility of their hammering is becoming obvious to just about everyone except for them."

 

[cdsaint66]

Wow, that's quite a flurry of articles taking the fight to those doing the harm. Shocking, and I love to be shocked that way.

 

[Bill Godshall]

BuGlen inquired:

Do we (U.S.) have the same type of liability ordinance(s) regarding our charitable and public health organizations?

Since nonprofit organizations are incorporated by States (although all states have somewhat different criteria), States can take actions against nonprofits for violating state law.

And since the IRS approves tax deductable status for nonprofits, the IRS can revoke their tax deductable status due to violations.

But I don't anticipate any States or the IRS to take any actions against non profits that have been funded by drug companies to lie about e-cigs and to lobby for sales and usage bans.

 

[Berylanna]

BuGlen inquired:



Since nonprofit organizations are incorporated by States (although all states have somewhat different criteria), States can take actions against nonprofits for violating state law.

And since the IRS approves tax deductable status for nonprofits, the IRS can revoke their tax deductable status due to violations.

But I don't anticipate any States or the IRS to take any actions against non profits that have been funded by drug companies to lie about e-cigs and to lobby for sales and usage bans.

What about that Web site that ranks charities according to how they spend their money and other criteria? Also, do any of these charities get ANY gov't funds?

 

[aikanae1]

What about that Web site that ranks charities according to how they spend their money and other criteria? Also, do any of these charities get ANY gov't funds?

Yes those charities do get tax dollars. There's been posts on this forum before from anti-smoking groups pushing for ecig bans and in the fine print, some gov't agency is listed as funding their effort.

 

[Berylanna]

Yes those charities do get tax dollars. There's been posts on this forum before from anti-smoking groups pushing for ecig bans and in the fine print, some gov't agency is listed as funding their effort.

I'd say can we ask the gov't to stop funding them but I bet it's a circle: the group lobbies the gov't for funds, the gov't gives the group funds, which it spends on lobbying the gov't.....

Hmmmm, how can I get in on this? The Official Save the Green Children With Big Ears charity?