The Problem with How Cure Progress is Measured
Last week, the JDCA put out it’s newest, shortest, and possibly most surprising report to date: How Do Non-Profits Measure Cure Progress? We contacted the high-ups of the four charities to find out what ( if any) measures are used as indicators of cure progress. The results are illuminating, and show exactly why progress has been so slow to come.
So just what do non-profits measure themselves by? Unfortunately, nothing that has any tangible effect on cure progress. The three main areas include: expanding the general diabetes knowledge base, publishing reports in scientific journals, and attracting new talent. While the importance of each varies depending on the charity, these are the major guideposts they use.
Clearly, none of these are good indicators of how close we are to curing this disease, or if research is progressing in the right direction. In fact, looking at these three measurements, it’s quite clear how many research areas could be flawed in their approach. If a major goal is to gain new talent, could many promising projects get dropped in the effort to have a portfolio that looks more attractive to scientists? If publishing reports is a major goal, than will we wind up conducting research in a different manner than if we were solely trying to get rid of this disease?
I suggest you read the report ( at one and a half pages, it’s the shortest we’ve ever done) to get some of the finer details. Do you disagree with these measurements? Do you think this system needs to change? If so, sign up for the Alliance and show your resolve for a Practical Cure. Only by banning together can we cut through the oversights that are crippling true progress to a cure, and your simple show of support is the first step in that direction.
We’ll soon be using the Alliance soon for bigger things, and if you’re serious about a Practical Cure, you’ll want to be a part of it.
Until Next Time