Donating and fundraising by people with ME/CFS - discussion thread

Sasha said:
Instead, I think it's worth asking ourselves why those PwME who could afford it don't spend some of their money - even a little - on research funding, and try to address those reasons in our messaging.
Click to expand...
But how do we know they don't? I don't like to criticise anyone for their choices of how they spend their money. Most donation is done privately.

I am reluctant to go down the avenue of guilt tripping individuals into donating to research.

People can be informed in a factual way of promising research projects or well run charities collecting research funds, then I think it should be left to individuals to decide, without other individuals spending their limited energy trying to dream up ways to persuade, which inevitably hit the wrong targets, leaving vulnerable pwME feeling bad about not being able to donate, or feeling pressured and donating what they can't really afford.

It reminds me a bit of one of my kids who got really stressed coming up to a set of exams because the teachers were laying it on thick that they all needed to work harder. I suspect those homilies were water of a ducks back on the kids who weren't working hard, and hitting kids like mine who was very diligent, leaving them feeling criticised and stressed by the pressure.

I think it's impossible to target any kind of persuasion techniques only at the intended target without collateral damage to those who see themselves in the firing line.

By all means we should enable researchers and research funds to inform as many people as possible, with and without ME/CFS, providing factual information about how the money is intended to be used. And by all means let's continue hosting discussions about the quality of research being funded. I can't see that we as a forum can do more.
 
Sasha said:
We've talked about why we don't fundraise, and although some of the issues are ME/CFS-specific, I don't think they all are. If I had Parkinson's or MS - non-stigmatised diseases - I still wouldn't keep tapping my social circle for money in order to fundraise.

This raises the question: what kind of fundraising to do other disease charities get their members to do? Are there any ideas that could be copied or adapted to fundraise for ME/CFS?
Click to expand...

I would even suggest that much of it has nothing to do with diseases at all. I have know tremendously many people that are very concerned with environmental/climate issues that fundamentally care about these issues such that they have an impact on their lives (they go to demonstrations, become part of organisations, purchase alternative and less products, change their consumer behaviour, become vegetarians/vegans, stop using aeroplanes, stop using cars, decide against having children etc) and yet I think the large majority will have steered clear from fundraising for various complicated reasons, social and otherwise.

I can still recall when the Livestrong Foundation was a big thing and everybody was walking around with those yellow armbands. I would conclude that they were awfully succesful at fundraising but whether they actually did anything for cancer research I have no idea. I suspect running a charity is like any other business and there is some dependence on luck and other things that are rather complicated.

Sasha said:
I'm going to have a rest now but will then be taking a look at the Parkinson's UK fundraising page and the MS Society's. What pops up first seems to be a lot of 'Join our sponsored run!' and of course, PwME can't do that kind of thing but what we're looking for is ideas that could apply to us, or ideas that we could adapt.
Click to expand...
I think there is a fairly simple solution to that which would be "Run for ME/CFS". Almost any sport event you join you are able to run for cancer, bike for Parkinsons or swim for HIV/AIDS, apart from Mike's self-organised ME/CFS runs (and recently some prominence by WE&ME) I haven't seen anything similar for ME/CFS. I don't think that has anything to do with ME/CFS being controversial, underdiagnosed, misunderstood or the like, I think many people will fancy themselves completing a marathon for a good cause even if they have only a very vague idea what the cause actually is. Throw in some cool ME/CFS merch and I think you'd be able to catch a few people that would be part of such an event. If I sign up for a sports event I can often even choose to complete it for a certain cause, I wouldn't be surprised if ME/CFS simply usually doesn't show up there for reasons that have nothing to do with ME/CFS.
 
I don't think it's realistic - or even justifiable - to expect patients to see a spend on unproven treatments as a waste of money that they should instead have been spending on research, especially since all the research so far has turned up precisely zero in terms of effective treatments. I don't think this should be our messaging.
Click to expand...
The way I look at it, is people have money to invest in improving themselves. Is the best way to spend all of it on speculative treatments and none on research, which is what most people do? Or is using your portfolio in different ways a better use of your resources? Research progress can inform you of which therapies are worthwhile, which are likely to make no difference and which could make you worse. Research progress could lead to new treatments: it has in other fields so it could here also. Also if there is enough evidence for a therapy, people may not have to pay for the therapy out of their own pockets. Research can also help to change attitudes so that people get better support and so potentially preventing people get worse.

I have seen people try lots and lots of therapies and appear to have no money for research (we have the only research fund in our country though some in recent years have given to charities in other countries) and I don’t accept that that is the optimal strategy for progress.
 
Dolphin said:
The way I look at it, is people have money to invest in improving themselves. Is the best way to spend all of it on speculative treatments and none on research, which is what most people do?
Click to expand...
We can't know that. As I said in an earlier post, most donating is done privately. I expect there are some who do both. I don't like sick people being criticised for the personal choices they make. It's none of my business what individuals choose to spend their money on.
 
Trish said:
It's none of my business what individuals choose to spend their money on.
Click to expand...
Someone has to pay for the research. I think it’s an illness community’s responsibility to ensure there is money to pay for research.

Some may feel the best way to do this is write to politicians. I think there can be a place for that. But I argue the most important thing an illness community can do is raise the money themselves, through donating, fundraising, supporting charities raising money, etc.

People with the illness are the people who will benefit from research progress and similarly people with the illness will be the people who will suffer without progress.
 
Dolphin said:
Someone has to pay for the research. I think it’s an illness community’s responsibility to ensure there is money to pay for research.

Some may feel the best way to do this is write to politicians. I think there can be a place for that. But I argue the most important thing an illness community can do is raise the money themselves, through donating, fundraising, supporting charities raising money, etc.

People with the illness are the people who will benefit from research progress and similarly people with the illness will be the people who will suffer without progress.
Click to expand...
If by illness community, you mean all the scattered individuals then I disagree. Thousands of sick people struggling to survive and get through their days should not be told by others that it's their responsibility to donate and fundraise. That's a cruel added burden for individuals to be asked to bear.

But if by community you mean the ME organisations, with their staff including professional fundraisers or volunteers with the capacity to fundraise, then fine, I agree they have an important role in seed funding small projects that if successful may enable application to larger funds to scale up their research.
 
I mean everyone with an illness.

Governments don’t have people who go down the thousands of illnesses and ensure all the promising leads are followed up and commission research into areas they see are lacking. No one does that.

There is nobody ensuring there is prompt progress for research for an illness.

As I say, I believe it is the people with the illness (and to a lesser extent their loved ones) who will benefit from research progress and it is the people with the illness who suffer from a lack of progress.

To most people in society it doesn’t matter too much if there is research progress, they have their own priorities in life.

The more people with the illness who opt in and do what they can to ensure there is money for research, according to their means (financial and otherwise), the better.

I disagree with an attitude that “it is not my problem”.* Whose problem is it? You’re the person sick, you’re the person who will benefit with progress or won’t if there isn’t any.

*Edited to add: this wasn’t aimed at any poster as I try to clarify in my next post.
 
Last edited:
Apologies if I was I was unclear, I was disagreeing that it is not the problem of the average patient to ensure there is money for research (through for example fundraising and donating). I believe it is their problem: they are the people who suffer if there is no progress and they are the people who benefit if there is progress.
 
Last edited:
Still not clear to me, sorry. I'll try an analogy. It's the problem of a sick baby or puppy that has an untreatable disease in the sense that they are the one suffering and who might benefit directly from research.

But it's not the responsibility of that sick baby or puppy to fundraise and donate.

Similarly, many people with ME/CFS are too sick, too poor, too burdened with responsibilities, to fundraise or donate. So it can't be laid on them as a responsibility to do so.

Surely it's kinder and more realistic for those of us who are willing and able to fundraise or donate to do so gladly as a gift to all the community without assigning responsibilities to others whose circumstances we don't know.
 
Sly Saint said:
AfME did something similar.
Action for M.E. Walk with M.E. 2019 | Science for ME

and there was
Walktober for ME Action: A Day To Walk For You (October 30) | Science for ME
Click to expand...

The problem with the Action for ME Walk is that it appears to be pwME walking for ME which is the opposite of what you want to be doing and of what is being discussed. The others appear to be great initiatives by individuals raising funds by doing some form of challenge similar to what Mike does with his marathons, but that is not what I was trying to get at.

Here is some examples to illustrate the problem. If you run the London Marathon you can sign up to do so via a charity, here is a list of those charities: https://www.tcslondonmarathon.com/enter/how-to-enter/charities-with-places. Those are hundreds of charities, a brief look suggests that only Action for M.E. seems to present. The Boston Marathon doesn't seem to include any ME/CFS charities, neither do the NY Marathon or the Berlin Marathon. The Paris-Roubaix Challenge can be ridden for cancer charities but not ME/CFS.

Those are just some random examples I picked out where ME/CFS charities are not represented. Perhaps @Mike Harley knows whether ME/CFS charities seem to be underrepresented at sporting events and whether pointing them towards this might be sensible.

I don't know whether those events actually bring a lot of money for charities and I suspect that it is not the case.
 
Last edited:
Trish said:
But it's not the responsibility of that sick baby or puppy to fundraise and donate.
Click to expand...
Similarly, expecting patients to put in the funds and legwork shouldn't be the norm because what's supposed to happen with rare diseases? The 100 people who suffer from it pool their pocket change and hope for a miracle?

We should strive for governments that cater to everyone without needing to be endlessly lobbied to do so, and more people with money and power helping with problems that don't affect their own lives at all.
 
Trish said:
Still not clear to me, sorry. I'll try an analogy. It's the problem of a sick baby or puppy that has an untreatable disease in the sense that they are the one suffering and who might benefit directly from research.

But it's not the responsibility of that sick baby or puppy to fundraise and donate.
Click to expand...
That is literally infantilising patients. Most patients are adults. They can choose to not take on any responsibility to try to ensure there is money for research. But that has consequences. The fewer people that opt in, the slower and less likely there will be progress.
 
Dolphin said:
I disagree with an attitude that “it is not my problem”.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's not my problem.

But I do think it's not really my job. What are research funds for, if not to fund research? What are charities for, if not to fundraise for research and lobby for better healthcare in the meantime?

They're well placed to do it, and many of us are very badly placed. I'm not even severely ill and I still have a lot more on my plate than I can manage. Also, it's not my skillset, and I have almost no family and only a tiny circle of friends—some of whom are worse off than me because they don't qualify for any of the financial concessions offered to disabled people.

I don't even see many projects seeking funding that I think would make a real difference. I'll give what I can to SequenceME, but I won't ask anyone else to. My closest friend lost her mother to cancer and was very moved by how hard the hospice staff worked to make her mum's final weeks as comfortable and as joyful as possible. I'm not going to ask my friend to give her scant spare cash to one of my charities instead of them because...well, it would be crass.

Sorry if this comes across a bit too strongly (brain not doing very well today!), it's not meant to. I'm just trying to explain why it may seem an unreasonable ask, specially for people affected by ME/CFS. No healthcare, no social support, no earned income, and an illness that deprives many of the wherewithal even to eat a healthy diet.
 
First priority imho should be lobbying government to;
- increase funding
- change the perception of ME
- properly support patients

As patients we all pay taxes, one of the responsibilities of governments is to fund research and provide care for diseases which for ME they have miserably failed in.

Someone in this thread puts the responsibility on the sick patients. I disagree and otherwise I would like a refund for my taxes for the past 18 years haha.

Recognition and support for patients will lead to less pressure on patients and their carers. And this could result in more fundraising.

Recognition of the disease will lead to more funding not only from patients but also from affluent donors.

If ME is taken seriously it would also be a lot easier to fundraise from friends and family.

To put more pressure on severely ill patients to get more funding in this toxic culture who are already dealing with a lot;
- a disease underfunded by governments
- charities that poorly represent them or even worse
- their carers unsupported or even hounded by government agencies for faking their disease
- very little good biomedical research to fund

It is a good idea to look at other diseases and how they are successfully campaigning for;
- awareness
- funding
- lobbying government
- etc

But it is important to keep in mind that most other diseases do not have the same toxic culture, where a patient is fighting government, healthcare and sometimes even patient organizations.

In short; funding is good, but let’s start with government’s responsibility.

To put even more pressure on patients, should not be the first priority.
 
Trish said:
But how do we know they don't [donate to research?
Click to expand...

We don't have data, AFAIK, on how many individuals donate but as per my first post on the thread, the money donated to our ME charities divided by the number of patients we believe are in the UK seems well below that of charities for other diseases. I think it's so far below that it's likely to reflect a lower proportion of donors and not just PwME not being able to donate as much individually. (If anyone has better data, please post it.)

I don't like to criticise anyone for their choices of how they spend their money.
Click to expand...

I didn't intend to imply any criticism and I don't at all think badly of PwME who don't donate. We're all just doing our best to get through difficult circumstances.

I am reluctant to go down the avenue of guilt tripping individuals into donating to research.
Click to expand...

I 100% agree with you that guilt-tripping is not appropriate. I also don't think it's an effective way of getting people to donate.

People can be informed in a factual way of promising research projects or well run charities collecting research funds, then I think it should be left to individuals to decide, without other individuals spending their limited energy trying to dream up ways to persuade, which inevitably hit the wrong targets, leaving vulnerable pwME feeling bad about not being able to donate, or feeling pressured and donating what they can't really afford.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, just presenting facts doesn't tend to engage people. All charities are in the business of persuasion, but you're very right to point out that, especially for ME/CFS, any persuasion needs to be done in a way that doesn't leave vulnerable PwME who are in poverty feeling left out and guilty. Having these considerations raised is one of the reasons I'm finding this discussion so valuable.

I can't see that we as a forum can do more.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that the forum does anything other than discuss the issues and possible solutions. (And it's doing an excellent job!)
 
Last edited:
The key issue for me is that, without biomedical research and the effective treatments that would result, PwME are stuck in hell. Poor funding has led to poor research outcomes, and has for decades. Our charities are trying to raise money for research but they're not raising anything like what we need. The big funding bodies aren't coughing up. Our situation is desperate, and we need a ton more money for research.

Trish said:
Thousands of sick people struggling to survive and get through their days should not be told by others that it's their responsibility to donate and fundraise. That's a cruel added burden for individuals to be asked to bear.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Donating and fundraising is not our responsibility. No one should feel bad about not doing it. In a rational and humane world, our governments would have been pouring money into research for years. But they haven't done this, and they're unlikely to start, so if we want to get out of this hell together then the money has to come from somewhere.

This gives us an opportunity, not a responsibility. Those of us who are in a position to do it, on however small a scale, can see this need for funding as an opportunity to help ourselves and other PwME. We can weigh that opportunity against other things that we want to do and decide whether or not to take it. To raise money successfully, the opportunity needs to be presented in such a way that there are non-financial ways to support research, and so that PwME who are too unwell even to write a letter or sign a petition in support know that there is no burden on them and that they are valued.

You're absolutely right, Trish - none of this should be necessary. But I think it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top