ALS Association Responds to Pamela Anderson’s Accusations On Animal Testing

Pamela Anderson wants you to know that her cause is more important than your cause. And her cause is so important that she’ll trash fundraising efforts of other non-profits in order to promote her own much better one.

In response to the thousands of people pouring buckets of ice on their heads to raise awareness of ALS, the former ‘Bay Watch’ star and long time militant animal rights activist group ‘PETA’ advocate posted a letter to her fans on Facebook outlining her reasons for not taking part in the challenge. She wrote:

Sorry –
I can’t bring myself to do your Ice bucket challenge.
I enjoy a good dare- It’s always good to bring awareness – in fun, creative ways / I don’t want to take away from that.
but it had me thinking. Digging a bit deeper. I found that we may not be aligned – in our messages. So…
– I thought Instead / I’d challenge ALS to stop Animal testing /– Recent experiments funded by the ALS Association, mice had holes drilled into their skulls, were inflicted with crippling illnesses, and were forced to run on an inclined treadmill until they collapsed from exhaustion. Monkeys had chemicals injected into their brains and backs and were later killed and dissected.

This sounds awful. Who wants to see monkeys having chemicals injected in their brains and mice tortured, right? Well, it turns out that the ALS Association denies funding testing that tortures animals and injects Monkeys through their skulls. Not only that, the organization allows donors who object to specific uses of money to withhold it from that particular area.

Finding this out took all of 3 minutes after I spoke with Carrie Monk, a spokesperson for the ALS Association, who sent the organizations official statement on animal testing to The Daily Banter. It says:

Significant advances have been made in ALS and other neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s Disease and Parkinson’s Disease using model systems such as rodents, flies and worms to better understand disease mechanisms and to develop therapies. With advances in technology made possible through research funding from The ALS Association, different approaches to minimize the use of these model systems are being developed. Similar to organizations globally, The ALS Association supports laboratories and scientists that strictly adhere to the guidelines provided by the National Institutes of Health. The Association is committed to honoring donor intent. If a donor is not comfortable with a specific type of research, he or she can stipulate that their dollars not be invested in that particular area.

The Daily Banter also received a statement from Chief Scientist for The ALS Association, Lucie Bruijn, Ph.D., MBA who told us that:

“We are currently not funding primate studies and per our statement, support research that adheres to ethical guidelines.”

If Pamela Anderson has any legitimate sources proving specific tests funded by the ALS Association tortured animals, she should release them immediately. You’ll note that her Facebook post offers up no sourcing whatsoever, so we apparently have to take her word for it. In the age of Jenny McCarthy activism, it isn’t required to use real sources or actual science to make a point, so we may be waiting a long time.

pamela anderson

(Image via Pamela Anderson’s Facebook page)

Regardless of whether the organization does testing on animals or not, donators get to specify where that money goes to, making Anderson’s little protest all the more nauseating. Through the ice bucket challenge, the ALS Association has raised in excess of $41.8 million to spread awareness for one of the most debilitating diseases on the planet. It uses that money to fund much needed research (more than $67 million to date), engages in advocacy that resulted in the enactment of the ALS Registry Act that established “the first central database that will identify cases of ALS throughout the United States and collect comprehensive information about the disease,” funds support networks for sufferers, and promotes public awareness of the disease through media campaigns (like the Ice Bucket Challenge).

But of course Pamela isn’t concerned with any of that, because according to her ‘digging’ some of that money has been used to doing things she doesn’t like. The rest of Anderson’s Facebook post is a collection of cherry picked facts about the inefficiency of animal testing (a subject she is completely unqualified to talk about), with a plea for would be donors to contribute to non-profits Pamela Anderson approves of.

So take note all you charitable folk, whenever Pam Anderson posts advice on who to donate to, be sure to ignore it completely.

 

 

  • Samantha Lee Donaldson

    Here’s the truth: I used to be a die hard member of PETA. That was, until they decided that a giant ‘dead’ fish spillout on the freeway of Los Angeles leading to the death of the truck driver should be recognized by a plaque FOR THE FISH. Good going guys, you really make us vegetarians look ‘completely’ sane. Now, they want an organization which struggles to find a cure for a terrible disease leading to the death of thousands across the nation to stop using ‘mice’. Look, I love mice just as much as anyone but when it comes down to a human life versus a mouse, I choose the human. I wish these morons at PETA would do the same. It’s safe to say I quit PETA immediately after the fish fiasco and despite my continued vegetarianism, I believe that every vegetarian ignorant enough to think PETA knows what they’re doing should just stop for a second and rethink their entire position on Animal safety. After all, a few million pamphlets made of trees to supposedly stop meat eaters from eating meat through the use of disgusting and horrific pictures really isn’t worth the time it takes to pass them out.

  • bastonboogie

    My comments are not spam , what is wrong with your mods?

  • Lawrence Weir

    Jane h gilbert is not a scientist. She has a degree in business from the university of Nebraska

  • john doe

    http://www.alsa.org/research/workshops/animal-models-crucia.html Straight from the ALS website. Mr Ben Cohen there is your facts. Pamela Anderson must of done more research about the matter than you. Irresponsible reporting there Ben Cohen. Get your facts straight before you “write” a article about something you know nothing about. Not a big Pam Anderson fan here. But obviously she did more research and stood by her beliefs. So before you slam someone, learn a bit about what your talking about. Who is Ben Cohen anyway???

  • EthanCooper

    There are a number of factual inaccuracies in this article. First of all, an ALS doctor published this piece: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aysha-akhtar/does-pamela-anderson-have_b_5704971.html in which she clearly states that the ALS Foundation has wasted 7 decades and hundreds of millions of dollars trying to replicate ALS in mice with monumental failure. She begs the ALS Foundation to stop testing on animals and use the more than $80 million (another factual inaccuracy) that they’ve made during this campaign to develop tests on donated human tissue. This ALS doctor confirms that NO advances in ALS have been made and it is because the foundation has wasted all of its money on animal tests. I stand with Pamela Anderson, Russell Simmons, Joanna Krupa, Stella McCartney, and everyone else who has let the ALS Foundation know that they will not donate until they know that their money is going to a cruelty-free organization that is actually working to find a cure to a HUMAN disease.

  • Lucy_P

    Pamela never “trashed” anyone’s fundraising efforts. I read her whole post, and she very apologetically and eloquently explained her reasons for declining. I admire Pamela for staying true to her convictions and for getting people to think critically about what they are funding when they give to charities that support animal testing. How many animals—and human ALS victims—have suffered and died while we continue to waste time and resources on irrelevant animal experiments? It’s time to break out of this cruel paradigm and embrace the many advanced alternatives that are now available to scientists methods that offer human-relevant results and real hope.

  • suzannecarlson

    I so admire this woman for standing up for her convictions. She has a persona, yes, but she’s a smart and savvy businesswomen who knows how to work a brand. But, she’s done tons to make a difference for animals and she should be commended. Thank you, Pam!

  • Question Dodgers

    Notice the use of the word currently “We are currently not funding primate studies and per our statement, support research that adheres to ethical guidelines.”
    Plus more than 70% off funds donated did not even get used for redearch purposes!

  • Gu3vara

    The whole point you are missing here is that Research companies do not look for CURES! The FDA ruled it illegal to find CURES or state that you have. It is ONLY in the interest of both Research companies and the FDA to find something that treats the problem on a mediocre basis. there is NO money or Profit in curing people! It is a SCAM, people are being deceived and conned out of money to fund Animal abuse and to come up with…non specific data that cannot be not used with regards to Humans!
    more than half the money donated goes to payroll as already stated and the rest is wasted on outdated research in laboratories that have below par equipment and no REAL incentive!

  • Kylie Ludgate

    Leave Pam alone. She has done her research and should be applauded for her efforts to save the environment and animals. The author clearly doesn’t respect her mind or her activism, as evidence by the unflattering photo he chose to use. I smell a lot of carnivorous bias in this article and it STINKS.

  • Gilli Sleigh

    I believe that a great many modern human illnesses are caused by human cultural evolution, involving all manner of environmental stimuli, and therefore find it hard to expect experiments on unrelated little defenceless animals will bring any relevant results.

  • Rita

    Would ALS care to post how much of the money raised will be spent on wages?? I will NEVER donate money to so called charities that profit from animal testing, or take large cuts for themselves. Animal testing does not produce reliable results, in turn innocent animals and people both suffer and die.

  • Julie Sumner

    Great, Ben. And you are qualified to talk about it? You post the most uncomplimentary pic you can find and obviously care nought for the animals tortured and killed in the name of inefficient research.

  • ashisbaby

    So despite advances in research including all the post human genome data that shows animal research isn’t a reliable source and all the human cell cultures that have been proven to be much more reliable they still insist on using mice with differing DNA? If anything her fight may be the better one to combat the disease. If we can actually get the researchers to use modern methods then we might find faster advancements in treatment. The real kicker of it is the human cell cultures are a lot cheaper as well so all that money could be put to much better use for more research.

  • Jenna MIles
  • Jenna MIles

    Well that is one of the biggest lies I have ever heard. You cant fund animal testing without funding animal torture, the two are synonymous. I used to believe that animal testing was necessary, now I know it is not just unnecessary, it is downright stupid. ALS is a uniquely human disease. Animals are different from humans and have different reactions. For example, Arsenic is not poisonous to sheep. Penicillin is useless in guinea pigs. Thalidomide showed no negative effects in animals, and according to animal testing, smoking is safe. Vioxx was approved after animal testing, and it caused 60,000 human deaths in the United States alone. Would it be considered good science to test on a dog to find a cure for a cat? No, that would be crazy.
    According to the FDA, 92% of drugs that are found to be safe and effective in animals fail in human clinical trials. The remaining eight percent often have side effects not predicted by animal testing. There are countless alternatives to animals, who go through life ina cage, and go insane in laboratories, and are subjected to tests that would be considered torture if used on a human.
    How many of you would give up your dog, your cat, or your rabbit to a lab to be burned, drowned, electrocuted, operated, on, stuck in a cage, become neurotic, and die alone and in pain? I would rather my dog was dead than go through that.

  • katrina

    I agree with Pam, stop experimenting on animals for anything. These corporations are greedy money hungry scum, who use animal experiments as proof that their only in it to help people with diseases. When, in reality it’s a ploy to steal taxpayer money by paying less in taxes as a charitable organization. The same as do televangelists, who steal in the name of God, by pretending they’re a Church…Americans we need to wake up, before they steal everything. All of this is a distraction from the pilferage of our tax dollars, to the usurping of our freedoms, equal rights, union jobs, etc. VOTE BLUE 11/4/14, so we can take back America and send the carpet baggers packing…

  • Alexandra Strain

    You can also donate to one of the orgs mentioned here: http://www.humaneseal.org

  • Alexandra Strain

    You should have taken 5 min to look into this yourself. Many scientists and doctors have come out against animal testing because it doesn’t work. One source for you is PCRM. Nice job with the pic. And no in no way is she saying she doesn’t care about ALS. Do you work for Fox News? Here’s more for you.

    http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5704971

  • Vera L

    A rat is still an animal. Bloody idiots.

  • Kitten_Resq

    Just a thought but if anyone tests on animals for the express final outcome to benefit humans, why don’t they do all their original testing on humans. It’s a non disputable fact that animals and humans are not alike in too many ways. I for one suggest that those doing “Life Without Parole” be the first ones to start on. Then of course those poor innocents sitting on Death Row who are only wasting time waiting for the day the needle is stuck into them. And then of course those charming peodophiles. They truly could do a world of good for the world that cried for their innocent victims. These are truly the animals that need testing on……

  • kristinhazcats

    “…the organization allows donors who object to specific uses of money to withhold it from that particular area.” BS!!

  • Ken

    The ice bucket challenge is just to get money because this is all about greed! Pamela Anderson knows they are full of shit, they hurt and kill innocents just for profit, they are just lying to cover up for the ignorant people who pay them. They are evil and need to be stopped.

  • GaryDiNardo

    To be safe, donate to a group that you KNOW doesn’t perform vivisection. And shame on anyone who points to NIH standards. They’re a tragic joke.

  • Steven

    Am I missing something? Doesn’t the statement “he or she can stipulate that their dollars not be invested in that particular area” allude to the fact that the ALS association still uses funding to test on animals?

    Is Pamela’s message that nasty? Sounded pretty respectful to me, upholding her beliefs. Probably the most disrespectful rhetoric in this whole conversation… Comes from the author of this “article”.

  • Kathy Williams

    Ben,

    I wish you would educate yourself to the horrific pain and suffering being inflicted on various species under the pretense of conducting research. It’s hardly in the name of science or for the greater good; it’s always about the money – and plenty of it.

    You can start here:
    http://www.lcanimal.org/index.php/campaigns/class-b-dealers-and-pet-theft/vivisectionanimals-in-research

    Ask yourself: do you honestly believe that flys and worms hold the key to curing ALS? Use your brain!

    “Regardless of whether the organization does testing on animals or not…” — No; no “regardless.” She made her point. And you better believe it: they’re not using insects. Even chimpanzees have been proven to be too physiologically dissimilar (cellular makeup, metabolically etc.) to human beings to justify cruel and gruesome experiments – especially since there are viable, cheaper, humane alternatives now available.

    By the way, the word is ‘donors,’ not ‘donators.’

    At least PA is fighting for a cause she believes in. And since I also find vivisection reprehensible, I’ll just ignore YOU completely. How’s that?

    P.S. I just noted your 7 greater causes than animal rights…

    If our government wasn’t wasting billions of our tax payer dollars in grants and agencies (e.g. Army, Military Defense, NASA) to simultaneously – needlessly – torture animals while making a few, select individuals (e.g. Primate Products) disgustingly rich, then we would be able to feed our hungry children etc.

  • Ria Greiff

    They DO test on animals. From the ALS website. The mouse bearing the human gene for mutant SOD1 was the first lab model for ALS based on a known cause of the disease. It remains the most widely used animal model of the disease. The SOD1 rat is also available, and because it is larger, is preferred when surgery is involved (such as for cell transplantation approaches). Rodents are especially important for testing potential therapies, since their nervous systems are much larger and more complex than other animal models.
    The writer of this piece is an idiot.

  • Rasmus Dahl

    As a commenter from outside rhe US you may disregard my comment. You may also disregard my spelling and grammar.

    To the point. Isnt PETA widely regarded as a bunch of semi crazy loonies?

    I know, I know. Queue butthurt….
    Love/ A swedish fellow….

  • Lynn Anderson
  • Adrian chandler

    Interesting that the piece questions her scientific qualifications. I wonder what qualifications this journalist has? You don’t have to be a scientist to have an opinion. Pamela’s opinions come from a kind place and this journalist just returns it with hatred, pedantry and intellectual superiority.

  • Belinda
  • Alex Ballar

    It doesn’t say they aren’t experimenting on animals though, it says“We are currently not funding primate studies and per our statement, support research that adheres to ethical guidelines” What specifically are they doing then? What do they consider ethical? Will they start the primate studies a few months from now? What animals are they testing on?

  • Bruine

    Morons like Ben Cohen here, always think themselves smarter and more clever than the average Joe. It just turns out that Pamela Anderson has a very legitimate point in raising reserves on this stupid challenge (Please see link below from a real life board-certified neurologist).
    Also, a good question to ask is; how much of that money goes to pay the salary of the fundraisers? You’d be really surprised at the answer…
    And how on earth am I to be sure that the money I donate won’t fund animal testing? That is some pretty bold statement from Carrie Monk since it can NEVER BE VERIFIED. And how much is her cut from that fundraise? I’d bet it has 6 figures…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aysha-akhtar/does-pamela-anderson-have_b_5704971.html

    …”Why then, seven decades after Lou Gehrig’s courageous fight against ALS – and hundreds of million of dollars spent on ALS research – is there not one single effective treatment or cure in sight for ALS?

    The answer partly lies in how that money (much from our tax dollars and donations) is spent. A significant portion of our research money has been funneled into creating so-called animal “models” of ALS.” …

  • Elizabeth Costello

    and Ben Cohen get a different career. You suck in writing!

  • Elizabeth Costello
  • Arev88

    The fact that they use innocents living beings against their will– it’s
    wrong. It doesn’t matter how they are doing it. For sure they keep them
    in cages and run some tests one them. The fact that they are
    incarcerated just because we think we are better than them is wrong!
    Humans do not own them and we humans have no right to do the things we
    do to them– the food industry, the cosmetic industry, entertainment,
    clothing, pharmaceutics, etc are wrong… and if we consume, support, or
    promote any of those industries where animal abuse is done– we are as
    guilty as them. There is no debate about that! Just like there is no
    debate trying to see if slavery is wrong, or trying to see if Hitler and
    his actions were right. Speciesims is wrong and the only way to not be
    part of all that, is to go as Vegan as possible! If you want to see some
    facts about what I just said take a look at Earthlings Documentary. If
    you consider yourself a brave man or woman– then watch it all and don’t
    close your eyes or lower the volume, only then you will be able to open
    your mind and your heart!

  • sonia

    “The ALS Association supports laboratories and scientists that strictly adhere to the guidelines provided by the National Institutes of Health”??? This a very concealed way to say they still use sacrifice those animal under ” certain guidelines” … Sorry but there is no right or humane way to kill animals, this is “spoke person crap!”

  • Cindy Myers

    If you think ALS hasn’t used, or isn’t looking into using, “non-human primates” or dogs for testing, you’re uninformed. The following, which I located via a quick internet search, is from the ALS Association’s website regarding a 2010 conference in which animal testing beyond worms, zebra fish, or flies was discussed. Note that besides ethical concerns about testing on creatures that most humans are more likely to identify with due to their closer connections to humans and thus our ability to empathize with their suffering, the discussion included concerns about the higher costs of using primates and dogs. Don’t you think that such testing is more likely to occur with an influx of donations? Because that’s certainly foreseeable. “Elizabeth Fisher, University College London, UK, introduced the topic of large mammalian animal models for ALS and FTD research. Although mouse models are important research tools, drawbacks include the fact that the neuroanatomy and neurophysiology in mice are not fully understood. Furthermore, there are significant limitations in modeling complex behaviors in mice. Non-human primates serve as a model species in other disease areas including spinal cord injury. Despite the obvious advantages of modeling human diseases in more closely related species, the use of non-human primates and other large mammals as model species is associated with significant ethical and practical issues. Panelists also discussed the possibility of using canine models for ALS research. Two naturally occurring diseases with ALS-like features are currently being characterized in dogs. Despite the promise of these canine diseases as new models for ALS, the cost of running preclinical trials in dogs is high. The panelists concluded that the generation of ALS/FTD models in non-human primates, and other large mammals, faces significant ethical and economic challenges that need to be taken into consideration before developing such models.” http://www.alsa.org/research/workshops/advances-in-disease-modeling.html

  • Nicola Massier-Dhillon

    We simply MUST do more research into beating illnesses, because, unlike many species of animals, humans are not overpopulating the planet and destroying it – so we need MORE of us (…um…hope the sarcasm is coming across).

  • Andy

    If you are opposed to animal testing then why would you donate money to an organization that does animal testing, even if you stipulate that your dollars not go towards it?

  • LS_Dude

    7-6-2010 article news article from MDA/ALS magazine, titled “Of Mice and
    Men: ALS TDI Discusses ALS Research Animals” …..”Researchers also
    study animal models to better understand how a disease
    starts and progresses. Some of the more common animal models include
    invertebrates such as worms and flies; rodents including mice, rats,
    Guinea pigs and rabbits; large animals such as dogs, horses, pigs and
    birds; and, finally, nonhuman primates such as monkeys and chimps.”
    While
    the ALS Association may state they only test mice, bunny’s or whatnot,
    their research money is associated with organization that do animal
    testing on all types of animals.

  • Ronnie

    Way to pull be back in Avery…any who, for me it’s about the live animal testing. Plain and simple

  • BoBoBolinski

    No medical charity has any interest in ‘curing’ whatever they research. If there was a cure, they’d be out of business and without a job. No more big bucks rolling in. Mediacl charity is a scam.

  • BoBoBolinski

    “donators”

  • Jay Baker

    Firstly, if Pamela Anderson chose to donate money while specifying which areas it went to, the haters would call her a hypocrite for donating to an organisation that still – in some of its departments – carries out animal testing. Secondly, the patronising nature of this article, tinged with more than a little misogyny in its choice of words and images, is less credible in the realms of journalism as the celebrity opinions it is attacking. Pathetic.

  • Jim

    Arrogant journalism at its finest. Only thing I got from Cohen’s post is how simple it is for pricks like him to be spoon-fed corporate gunk like the rest of the media shuffled around like sheep. Three minutes of research? And he is calling Anderson’s research unfounded? Get out of journalism and go back to gossiping at the water cooler where you belong. Demeaning Anderson “little protest” is easy to do, as you hide behind some ALS clerk’s scripted response. What Anderson is doing is not easy as she is going against the grain to stand for a worthy cause. What Cohen is doing is not only easy, but it’s lazy, arrogant and spineless.

  • Martin Brown

    It seems like your article is more intent on having a go at Pamela Anderson, than finding facts ….. heres is a link at the bottom, its the guidelines that ALS say they work under. It states it on their own site …. you see what can and can’t be done ” with animal tests ” and you will see drilling in skulls is nothing ….. Your so called source came from the mouth protecting its food ….. like asking coke if their drink is safe for children to drink everyday …… Here is just one link ….. but how about because you are so aggressive and vocal about credible sources ….. you look for a more credible ones yourself, than quoting the company thats actually doing the testing ….. REALLY? http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/Guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals.pdf

  • Binge Purr

    “Regardless of whether the organization does testing on animals or not, donators get to specify where that money goes to” Don’t be so gullible. Puhlease.

  • Samurai_Black

    “We are currently not funding primate studies and per our statement, support research that adheres to ethical guidelines.” Is a suit way of saying “We did fund primate studies, and may do so in the future. But we aren’t right now.”

  • Chbran

    I’m not very familiar with this site but this article was clearly written with much opinion inflicted. If that’s how things work around here, I doubt I’ll be back anytime soon.

  • Paul Hoskin

    Pardon me for questioning this but do they not say in their defence that they test on rodents, flies and worms? Rodents are highly intelligent, especially rats which seem to be favourite for testing purposes. I feel their high intelligence is forgotten as they get such a bad press, which in my opinion, is due to to their adaptability and resilience, resulting in their running rings around our ‘superior’ intelligence. Not all intelligent beings are primates or ‘higher’!

  • andymofoburton

    Absolutely appalling writing full of ad hominem attacks and not even an attempt at balancing the argument. Great job Ben Cohen. Did you bother to dig for any sources, other than from someone who works for the organisation, to see if there was any clout behind what was being said? This article is drivel, gutter journalism.

  • Hellen Davey

    Someone has to speak for the animals…..I bet a lot of people are unaware of the fact they can decide where the money goes….so it is saying they do use animals really….we need to know everything….don’t try and make out these big companies don’t animal experiment

    • Joan

      if you research you would see st judes children’s hospital uses animal testing. as much as i am against animal testing on cosmetics and things like that you have to think about if it is a necessary evil and your child had cancer. just food for thought. i’m on the fence with it.

  • Tim Bain

    Well I prefer her words and ways or saying them to you telling me who and what to believe; The challenge is more about celebs getting a chance to make themselves look like good guys and raising their public profile than charity…and although some clown is bound to say lots of normal people have done it, would they have if no celebs were so publicly involved? More to the point, the amount raised is pathetic when you consider the combined pay of all involved…some of the celebs could manage that alone and not feel it. I prefer what the Aussie TV weatherman said.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=la86Dr4Nzpw

  • Chris Whitley

    I am guessing if they put “rodents” in their little knock down of Pamela Anderson then people won’t notice that these are actually mice!

  • arnesknussmm

    So, she’s not entitled to an opinion, because you didn’t like it, you know better, she does not want to contribute to a cause you know she SHOULD, she must be an idiot because she made money based on her looks, she cares about animals because she is a sentimental airhead, and you’re all-round superior to her, since she is a woman who has done things you disapprove. AND people should ignore her charitable causes. Bravo! Lousy blogging.

  • Razor

    Why are people so desperate to discredit a nice thing? You might be tired of seeing the videos on your precious Facebook feed, but the fact that they’ve raised more money in a month than the last three years combined is pretty awesome.

  • Andrew Higgins Crevier

    Here’s the proof, right on their own website (wonder if it will be taken down soon):
    http://www.alsa.org/research/about-als-research/laboratory-models-of-als.html

  • Rachel Kennedy

    The writer of this article, Ben Coen, uses a statement from the ALS to counter Pamela Anderson’s claims. The statement does no such thing! In fact, in essence, it confirms them. Animal testing for drug development is always a sticky issue but let’s not write rubbish in response to those who object, Ben Coen. After all, they have as much right to object as you do to fund raise for ALS!

  • Megaen Kelly

    Just like we can ignore this totally biased, full of holes article.

  • A.Outrage

    “. . . . and per our statement, support research that adheres to ethical guidelines.” This is absolutely meaningless. “Ethical” is relative, especially for agri-business and pharma. How many times I have heard industries use this word only to learn that their definition of ethical is very different than mine.

  • ArrrB

    Um, genius, where’d you get that she’s trashing all this attention whoring in the name of ALS? She was actually doing the exact opposite.

    Additionally, your statement “ALS Association denies funding testing that tortures animals and injects Monkeys through their skulls” doesn’t mean ALS hasn’t ever tortured monkeys, in addition to the rodents they still currently torture.

    What was said was “[w]e are currently not funding primate studies.” Okay, so they haven’t tortured any monkeys today. Yay!–but this absolutely and unequivocally does not refute what Pam Anderson said. Still, good job pissing on someone who actually does her homework instead of going along with the herd like the rest of the chumps.

  • Shelley Colleen

    Sorry, Ben…Pam Anderson is way too easy of a target. All this article comes across as is you feeling superior and trying to make fun of her.

  • Janette Murphy

    so in their own words “We are currently not funding primate studies and per our statement, support research that adheres to ethical guidelines.” so that makes it perfectly acceptable to test on other animals??!! Rodents still feel pain. Testing on any animal is wrong!

  • KT

    Ben, you’re an idiot.

  • TheTruthIsFreedom

    The person who wrote this article is an ass. Maybe we should test on you

  • Joey

    Oh so because they’re not CURRENTLY testing on apes thats fine then is it? At no point has that company said that it doesn’t test on animals. They’ve said they do, just not primates AT THE MINUTE. Well people who care about animals care about ALL species of animal. Not just primates. Mice and rats and even worms are still living things.

    Whatever excuse of a journalist who wrote this piece of sh*te is a waste of air:
    “”But of course Pamela isn’t concerned with any of that, because according to her ‘digging’ some of that money has been used to doing things she doesn’t like”” – TORTURE is something no one is supposed to like. Wake up and realise we’re not the only species on this rock that deserve the right to be able to live without torture. Selfish moron. You’re of a lesser species than someone like Pam.

  • Joe Smith

    ALS Foundation 2013 tax returns to take a closer look at how their funds are spent. Here are the salaries for the leadership of the group: This is why I refuse to give to these charities. Rather give local and know my money is not pissed away on some CEO.
    Jane H. Gilbert – President and CEO – $339,475.00
    Daniel M. Reznikov – Chief Financial Officer – $201,260.00
    Steve Gibson – Chief Public Policy Officer – $182,862.00
    Kimberly Maginnis – Chief of Care Services Officer – $160,646.00
    Lance Slaughter – Chief Chapter Relations and Development Officer – $152,692.00
    Michelle Keegan – Chief Development Officer – $178,744.00
    John Applegate – Association Finance Officer – $118.726.00
    David Moses – Director of Planned Giving – $112,509.00
    Carrie Munk – Chief Communications and Marketing Officer – $142,875.00
    Patrick Wildman – Director of Public Policy – $112,358.00
    Kathi Kromer – Director of State Advocacy – $110,661.00

  • Charlie Bartlett

    Are people that naive that they think their money is going specifically where they want it to go? It’s all over the news and there has been countless undercover documentaries about charities and where your money really goes. It’s disgusting how these charities try to fool us.

  • Tracye

    The ALS website states that they indeed do use animal testing, so this article is nothing but a false jab at ms. anderson. i refuse to participate in this nonsense for the exact reasons that she doesn’t, in addition to what some have also stated- someone is getting very, very rich from all of this. neither of these things helps ANYONE.

  • Charlie Bartlett

    They adhere to ethical guidelines? What is ethical about testing on animals? The so called ‘guidelines’ are just that, guidelines, and do not mean that what they are doing is not torturing or abusing animals (if we did the things to an animal what they do in their laboratories we would be reported, fined, and banned from owning an animal again!). I think there has been enough whistle blowing, documentaries and under cover video footage that show exactly how ethical these guidelines really are! Don’t justify your ‘ethical guidelines’ as an excuse for it to be OK to abuse animals. Grow a pair and tell it like it is, don’t try and sugar coat it so you get maximum donations.

  • Charlie Bartlett

    They deny funding testing that tortures animals and injects Monkeys through their skulls. But then say ‘the organization allows donors who object to specific uses of money to withhold it from that particular area’ So the fact still is, yes, they do test on animals, which is the point Pamela is making. Duh.

  • Tina Carroll

    To the author: Where is your evidence that the money goes exactly where the donor wants it to go? We are supposed to believe this ALS group, who maybe biased considering they are working with 41 million in donations, that this is to be true? Where is YOUR evidence that the money goes to where the donor states? Further, there are some very important keywords in the response from ALS. “We are not CURRENTLY funding research on primates.” Keyword is currently. This means they could have in the past and this also means they could start funding research on primates tomorrow and technically, their statement would still be truthful. If you are going to call out someone on their lack of providing resources for their statement- you should make sure you aren’t doing the same thing. Further, it is a well known fact that with drugs, more of the money go towards advertising than the research behind the drug.

  • I’m Not Batman

    I’m calling bullshit on this. WHAT significant advances? Experts are starting to call out ALSA for not having any significant advances come from their animal testing.

  • Daniel Lombardo

    Love the quote: “We are currently not funding primate studies” So, for the following 5 minutes ALS stop torturing primates… “Guys, I sent in my statement you can proceed with the cranial injections!”

  • General Axe

    “The Association is committed to honoring donor intent. If a donor is not comfortable with a specific type of research, he or she can stipulate that their dollars not be invested in that particular area.” She could have just stipulated her donation not go toward animal testing. She didn’t have to be bitch and try to discourage others from donating.

  • Annefors

    Pamela is a better person than all of you.

  • jim

    She backs Peta. Whats funny about it, is the head of Peta or one of the heads, dont care to research the issue, is diabetic, therefore takes insulin shots, which were developed using research animals.

    • goalie7

      90 years ago Banting used dogs in his research – that is true. Between 80 and 40 years ago in the U.S. experiments were performed on hundreds of impoverished black sharecroppers in a study on certain treatments for syphilis. Many today will have benefitted from those experiments but was it moral? Does the end always justify the means?

  • OldYorke

    Regardless who is right or wrong in this debate, why ruin what could have been an informative article publishing a picture of Ms Anderson so obviously meant to degrade her. Banter and Cohen degrade their reporting.

  • baiatbun

    Well done, Pamela ! Those faggots should do testings on their on body or their own relatives ! Who will also have the right to refuse, of course ! So, ALS has just admitted that they are doing testings on animals ! Shame on you, criminals !!!!!

  • Ben

    A very immature post and we can see where it’s going as soon as we see a silly picture of Pamela Anderson has been used at the very top. It contradicts itself in two sentences saying primate testing is no longer used and people can choose for their money not to be used for it if they wish. Even though the information on primate testing may not be up to date, people should understand that the money they donate may be used towards animal testing. They can then make an informed decision on whether or not they want to donate money to this organisation. The broader point of animal testing not being useful when it comes to developing treatments for human conditions is valid. If you don’t agree with Pamela Anderson it’s up to you. She didn’t get personal and nasty towards anyone when she said her piece so there’s no need to get personal and nasty with her in return.

  • Narcissa

    They keep saying no primates are used, so the rodents don’t count as animals? hypocrites.. Ofc she has the right to her own opinion and if this is the real character of ALS you just gave people the second reason to ignore you.

  • Guest

    So, they keep saying no primates are used, so the rodents don’t count as animals? hypocrites..

  • Guest

    So, they keep saying no primates are used, so the rodent’s don’t count as animals? hypocrites..

  • Sabyen91

    Wow, this thread was inundated with sock-puppets with under 10 posts.

  • Leon J

    This article is ridiculous, it is no wonder this site hardly gets any views with bias assholes like Ben Cohen writing articles. The ALS Association DOES test on animals, people should know where their money is going. The last sentence of this article should say:

    “So take note all you charitable folk, whenever ‘The Daily Banter’ posts advice on who to donate to, be sure to ignore it completely.”

  • lynne

    Moronic “Journalist” attempting to achieve gutter press status. Well done- achieved

  • evy guthrie

    http://www.alsa.org/research/about-als-research/laboratory-models-of-als.html

    Their page says right there they use animal models for testing.

  • SkylarsAUsomeMom

    “different approaches to minimize the use of these model systems are being developed”
    So in other words…SHE IS RIGHT.

  • Aura

    An opinion piece bashing what essentially amounts to the same thing, but from a different perspective. Oh, the self-righteous irony…

    • Avery

      Yes, both expressed opinions but also made claims about facts. So, not really much irony there.

  • katherine

    uhhh….you do realize that by testing on mice/worms it’s still animal testing?

  • timmy

    Please She Supports PETA! They Need To Get There MEDS together!

  • Aaron Wexler

    Wow, plenty of new faces in the comments section. Welcome! You must’ve been directed here by Peta! Now kindly go away.

  • nrgins
  • Monique

    The author of this article must live under a rock to question whether the ALS Association tortures animals. Try to Google it, yourself, Ben. Knowledge is a wonderful thing.

  • Mary Oglesby

    I think it’s sad that a well meaning charitable movement has turned into online bullying. If someone doesn’t want to donate because she disagrees with some aspect of the organization, that is her choice and her right. Pamela Anderson is a huge donor to charitable organizations. To write a smear like this about her is disgusting, and the commenters who are making digs at her for her appearance in such an inappropriate forum should be ashamed.

    • Avery

      I don’t think bullying means what you think it means.
      Also, it seems pretty silly to characterize what a “charity movement has turned into”, based upon a blog post and some of its comments.

      • Mary Oglesby

        You’re right. I don’t know the definition and I base all of my opinions on blog comments. I’m so glad that smart people like you exist so that the rest of us may be educated. My life would crumble without your guidance.

    • Question Dodgers

      Well said!

  • Meh

    She has every right to say what she has said and choose not to donate…BUT i believe a certain someone has Hepatitis C, treatment for that is also tested on animals…Which pretty much makes her statement void in my opinion.

  • Ivy

    It’s always sad when someone who thinks they’re picking the low-hanging fruit, like proving that a porn star doesn’t know how science works, actually ends up getting schooled and finds out that the porn star actually has it right. Piss off with your goofy picture and biased article Ben Cohen.

    • Avery

      “…actually ends up getting schooled and finds out that the porn star actually has it right.”

      I’m not sure which article you read, but that didn’t happen.

  • GOVCHRIS1988

    Its Pam Anderson. She isn’t a person that you would have on the set of Jeopardy……….unless its a softcore porn shoot.

    • goalie7

      They don’t shoot porn on the set of Jeopardy – that’s down the hall at Wheel of Fortune.

  • Seana

    They claim they do use animal testing in their statement. Though they don’t mention monkeys because people think they are cute.

  • bespecific

    I’d still hit it.

  • goalie7

    Saying that a donor can specify that none of his donations will be used for animal torture is the same as saying that a donation to Hamas is conditional on none of the money going to rockets and only to humanitarian aid. It all goes in the same bucket. Donating to one half of the organization frees up money to be used in the other.

    • Michael Stones

      And why wouldn’t someone donate to people defending their homeland against rapist,murdering,landgrabbing SCUM

      • Yojimbo556

        LMFAO that is the funnies thing ive read in a while.

        • Michael Stones

          Pity its true, you are obviously brainwashed like the rest of those who believe in the news

          • Yojimbo556

            No, im just not batshit crazy like you. Take the tinfoil off your head.

  • bespecific

    So, ALS DID NOT deny animal testing…

    • Avery

      Nothing gets past you. Do you have a point to make?

  • Bree

    “Well, it turns out that the ALS Association denies funding testing that tortures animals and injects Monkeys through their skulls.”

    Err, really? Well, it’s gotta be true, because no one has ever lied about having been involved in anything unethical…… …..

    • Avery

      Err, really?
      So, it MUST be false because other people have been caught lying about being involved in unethical activities in the past?

      • Bree

        That’s not what I wrote, Avery. I think a healthy amount of scepticism can serve humanity well but perhaps I should have reigned in my facetiousness and been a little more concise with my viewpoint, so…

        The chief scientist for the ALS Association stated “we are currently not funding primate studies…”, and perhaps that’s entirely correct, however the comments do not clear the ALS Association from having been connected to such experiments in the past, but that’s the past so let’s leave that alone for now.
        Anderson went down the shock value road and her information seems askew, and that’s a shame because she brought the issue of animal experimentation in scientific research to the table and it’s an important issue for a few reasons. Aside from the animal rights advocation, the ethical and moral conundrums, there lies this argument from board-certified neurologist Aysha Akhtar:

        “ALS is a uniquely human disease. Researchers have artificially created animals who show some symptoms that resemble ALS. But as in so many disease areas, the animal “models” only mimic some of the symptoms of ALS and they differ in what symptoms they produce and the causes behind those symptoms. Thus these animal models are extremely poor substitutes for studying uniquely human diseases.”

        ALS Association do, in fact, use lab models of fish and mice and other animals in their testing, and there is significant evidence that these tests are not as successful as some would like to believe, and that leaves a lot of people wondering why any animal testing continues when there are many researchers who conduct studies without.

        This article was poorly constructed. The author’s treatment of the issue was sloppy and unrefined. There’s no critical thought present. Sure, print the comments elicited from the ALS Association but keep some small fragment of objectivity, because without it we’re left with a puff opinion piece that has no gumption outside of a pathetic ‘run off your mouth without thinking’ rant.

        *this is not a personal attack on anyone who has completed the ALS ice bucket challenge, nor an attack on anyone who has donated money to the association.

        Cheers.

  • Ronnie

    first, you used an unattractive picture of Pamela, second, you spend to much energy putting her down rather then supporting your claim. I can’t even consider what you are saying – can’t get past your nasty comments…

    • Avery

      “…you used an unattractive picture of Pamela”

      Just be happy that he didn’t use a recent photo of her.

  • Laura Leone

    So it’s fine that HER meds she takes to control her Hep B were tested on animals? Give me a flipping break!

    • Leon J

      So are you saying you would support animal testing?

      • Laura Leone

        Some testing on animals (say, lab rats) is necessary in today’s world, unfortunately & I hate that it’s done…wonder why Obama just doesn’t give the okay to test medicines on death row inmates or child molesters or animal abusers?
        For now, I won’t wear any cosmetics that were tested on animals, and I am sorry for this also, but I have to wear good supportive shoes, and plastics & synthetics just don’t cut it for me…

  • Bryan Westbrook

    Those morons at ALS just spoke using both sides of their mouth – classic double-speak. People that don’t condone or support animal testing will not give money to any entity that is in any manner associated with animal testing. What planet are you on Ben?

    • Robert Scalzi

      Go kill yourself puss bag

      • Michael Stones

        I’d much prefer if YOU went and let them run tests on you you gobshite

  • Lia

    http://www.alsa.org/research/about-als-research/laboratory-models-of-als.html. They even supply photos of some of the dead animals! Fun! Sadly, they only mention in passing the fact that these models can never replicate the human progression of the disease. They don’t mention the insane salary the guy in charge makes at all.

    • Bryan Westbrook

      In order to make money you must keep the charade going. Look at the cancer organizations – they ever going to cure cancer? No.

  • Lia

    I love how you rip on someone because she doesn’t believe as you do because she spoke out against something contrary to her own beliefs. Do you know what the word “hypocritical” means? Your language was also much more damning than hers, and more personal. Also love the misogynistic takedowns of the commenters who wax poetic about her breasts and sex life. Keep on keeping it classy, people! Am I right? If we don’t agree with someone, just attack her physical traits. Makes perfect sense. If you’re completely ignorant and butthurt, that is. And if your education was less than stellar.

    • Avery

      “Do you know what the word “hypocritical” means?”

      I think I do. Would this be a good example?

      A person self-righteously attacks the practice of using animal research to understand a terrible brain disease, but has no problem getting breast implants which were developed with the aid of animal research.

      Am I close? Would that be considered hypocritical?

      • Joey

        Animal testing does nothing to aid medical science. This has proven time and time again. We are now able to clone exact replicas of HUMAN organs that could be tested on. Why don’t they do this? One word. MONEY.

        • Kim Williams

          I think that word might be religion.

        • Avery

          1) What does any of this have to do with my comment that you are replying to? It was a response to Lia’s comment regarding hypocrisy and her perception of how people are mistreating Pamela Anderson.

          2) “We are now able to clone exact replicas of HUMAN organs that could be tested on. Why don’t they do this? One word. MONEY.”

          You don’t have even a basic understanding of medical research, if you think that testing on an individual isolated cloned organ could replace in vivo testing. That suggestion is ludicrous. You really don’t know what you are talking about.

          3) “Animal testing does nothing to aid medical science. This has proven time and time again.”

          Wrong again. Why don’t you cite a few of the studies that have proven “time and time again” that “animal testing does nothing to aid medical science”?

        • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

          No, it’s been proven time and time again that it does aid medical science. No, they are not able to clone exact replicas of human organs, and by the way, one organ does not make an organism. Lots of things happen in a whole body that are multi-organ functions.

          There are also diseases which can’t be “cultured” in a test tube. I used to work with one, which infects millions of poor people in various tropical countries every year.

  • cloud

    I saw the pope told Catholics to not give to ALS because of brain stems used from newly farmed human embryos. That’s okay too. ALS surpassed their target. Hug each other. There’s enough room for us to all be different.

  • cloud

    It’s all doubletalk here and smear. Not everyone is going to give to the same places – for a whole list of reasons. People and animals are suffering and dieing from so many different things, not just ALS. There are millions of conditions and dire situations. Pam has done more for others than most so just move along and be happy in your als success. If your not thrilled enough about raising millions more than anticipated you’ll whine and blame others all your life. You should be way too busy celebrating to dig up the worst picture ever and throw darts. Breathe. Keep doing good for others. Inspire togetherness instead of what you did here.

    • Lia

      Amen. Very well said.

  • Kim Williams

    This is a copy of part of a FB discussion I had earlier about the ALS challenge:

    Other guy: This fund drive for ALS goes to research orgs that do stem cell research on fetuses aborted or lab created..if they get a break thru you will see a more fervent call for abortions…but there are other research facilities that don’t do embryonic stem cell research for ALS and this funding does not go to them…this ice bucket challenge is just another left fund raising technique that has every one in a herd mentality..do the research befor you knee jerk react.

    Me: This challenge has raised 13 million dollars more than in the same three month period last year with 260,000 new donors. That is something.

    OG: Where all that money goes is something too

    Me: David, the ALS is an excellently rated Charityhttp://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm…

    OG Research using adult stem cells has been quite successful in developing numerous medical treatments. There is absolutely no reason to use embryonic stem cells derived from an aborted fetus since there is no proven advantage over adult stem cells. So why do researchers persist in using embryonic cells? FACT: Adult stem cells CANNOT BE PATENTED, while embryonic and reprogrammed pluripotent stem cells can be patented and hold the potential for added millions of dollars in profits.

  • Elizabeth Costello

    This is a horrible article and a cheap attack on Pamela Anderson. The picture you chose already hinted on that. You are an ass. Really.

    And yes they have and Do test on animals. Anderson has every right to refuse this and so has every one else. That doesn’t stop other people from donating, so what’s your problem. That she has her own opinion….

    Here is an excerpt from their own webiste :

    “Several ALSA-funded investigators notably reported on tests with a variety of compounds in animals, emphasizing ALSA’s efforts in translational research.”
    find it here:
    http://web.alsa.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ResearchArchive_1004

    • Navybrat

      STFU, you idiot! You’re as stupid, or more so, as Anderson. Your reading comprehension sucks, also.

      • Bryan Westbrook

        No brat – your post just wreaks of intelligence.

      • Jesus Christ!

        Bro, you don’t use also there.

        • matt mosby

          omg trolls !!! get a club!

  • Ansel Akula

    She has some animal testing experience. I once saw her have sex with a horse’s penis.

  • Sandy4323

    The Ice Bucket Challenge is a great way to create awareness and would still like to contribute to fighting these diseases. However I do not agree with the animal testing portion.

    “The Association is committed to honoring donor intent. If a donor is not comfortable with a specific type of research, he or she can stipulate that their dollars not be invested in that particular area.”

    Can someone tell me where I can do this? I’ve searched the website and do not see that option when attempting to donate.

    • Michael Stones

      You mean you ACTUALLY BELIEVED that shite???? you should be looking for a brain because you obviously donated yours to science fiction

  • Jesus Christ!

    uh, excuse me but a quick study shows she is right on many fronts. The biggest issue is over half go towards payroll. So about $5 of your $10 is to pay the CEO the fat check. The rest is also wasted. Only a little over 25 % goes towards research. They are a scam.

    • Bryan Westbrook

      They may or may not be a scam, but this whole ice bucket BS is a simple way for people to pat themselves on the back and feel good about themselves. Simple as that. It’s absurd.

      • Avery

        Except that it is an awareness campaign that has raised over $40 million. Simple as that.

        • Jesus Christ!

          Avery, you are an idiot. 40 million dollars that has been wasted. They have found nothing and of the 40 million donated, means only 10.8 million actually went towards research. The rest of that money? Oh, to pay large salaries.

          • matt mosby

            how do you know what % goes to research ? what “quick study” are you talking about?

          • Sam Yunker
          • Bryce

            Even if you’re right (which is a whole other can of worms) how can you possibly argue that $10.8 million going to research toward curing a debilitating disease “money wasted?” What other means do people have to giving money to medical research other than funding those organizations? Sure, those labs don’t get 100% of the donations, but ANY money whatsoever is a good thing.

          • Alexandra Strain

            Because a cure won’t be found. That’s the point. They pay large salaries and ALS is a human disease. No amount of animal testing will find a cure. If it did then you’d have one.

          • Bryce

            “No amount of animal testing will find a cure. If it did then you’s have one.”

            If you’re making the argument that animal testing innately cannot lead to curing human diseases then you will be hard pressed to back that up. Animal models–unpalatable as you may find them–do provide insight into MANY diseases. Regardless, it’s an entirely separate issue from the mismanagement of funds you were previously talking about.

          • Alexandra Strain

            You misunderstand and I assume make assumptions seeing as I’m a vegan. Forget ethics. It does not work. Countless scientists and doctors have said as much. In the case of ALS it’s a uniquely human disease. No amount of torturing mice, cats and chimps will advance human knowledge. Plenty of orgs use alternative methods btw. If the argument is humans come first then you wouldn’t support it either.

          • http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0301.marshall.html ave ngangel

            Not countless scientists. Some scientists you want to use for your own agenda.

          • Alexandra Strain

            Do you also realize how many people die when things tested on animals are approved to humans? Look it up.

          • Martin Kunert

            The Nazi experiments on prison camp inmates–unpalatable as you may find them–also provided medical insights.

          • Autumn

            BOOM!

          • Gilli Sleigh

            Yeah well unpalatable as it was they were human, there’s the difference right there.

          • Autumn

            Actually as someone who is actually educated in research (2 masters degrees) and works in the field daily, animal experimentation has brought NO significant progress to curing any disease in which it has been used. You know as someone who can actually read scientific reports and who works in the field of research.

          • Karin Wolff

            The CEO’s salary is only 281,000 a year. Much lower than a lot of other CEOs!! Besides research they also provide medical help and support to ALS patients and their families. It’s not all about research!

          • GaryDiNardo

            If you’re against vivisection and you want to donate to a group that actually helps people, please help the Panzi Foundation.

          • Question Dodgers

            If they cared that much about treatment why on earth does he need a six figure salary!

          • Kevin Christie

            Considering your name just gonna ignore all your comments.

          • http://horriblesubs.info/ DaN^

            How about instead of wasting your money on ALSA bosses payrises why don’t you donate to ALS TDI, the charity that actually uses the money for research. https://www.als.net/Donate/

          • JLT

            The most important thing to question is not how much they spend on salaries but what their goals and results are.
            Please watch this and hopefully you will have gain a new perspective as I did. http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong

          • http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0301.marshall.html ave ngangel

            Jesus Christ, are you uninformed or just a damn liar? Research is only part of what the ALS Association does. They provide patient and family support services and patient advocacy, and they help the local chapters operate. But if you are so focused solely on research I’m surprised you didn’t tell everyone that the additional funds earned this past month will mean a study scheduled for two years from now will be pushed up.

        • The Advocate

          You need to end your life and quit waisting good air. You dsereve to be left paralyzed hoping that someone somewhere will come up with a way to help you. 100 million has been raised,. What have you done to better humanity? You are a freaking moron. Check the charity fundraising sites and see that ALS org gets nothing but high marks for what they do with donations.

          • Avery

            Read my posts again, moron. I have nothing but good things to say about the ALS Association.

            Also, saying things like “You need to end your life and quit waisting good air” in the same comment that you talk about bettering humanity, says a lot about your sincerity.

          • Question Dodgers

            “You need to end your life and quit waisting good air. You dsereve to be left paralyzed” You are one twisted individual!

      • The Advocate

        raised over 100 million dollars for a disease that leaves people with only eye movement by the time its finished.
        The man that created the ICE BUCKET CHALLENGE Pat Quinn has ALS. Educate yourself or kill yourself.

      • Gilli Sleigh

        yeah and it is probably rather good for social media bosses too…….but I still love social media, I just don’t like these viral trends.

    • http://www.osborneink.com/ OsborneInk

      CEO? ALS has a CEO?

      • Michael Stones

        You really ARE a brain donor

        • http://www.osborneink.com/ OsborneInk

          And you’re a turtle rapist.

          • Michael Stones

            lol

    • Avery

      Please cite your sources for these figures on the distribution of funds from ALS Association donations, or are we supposed to just believe you because you are the Prince of Peace?

      • Jesus Christ!

        Hi Avery, clearly, you do not do research. But to help you out a little, here you go. http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/als-ice-bucket-challenge-do-you-know-what-you-are-supporting/

        The Prince of Peace

        • Rachel Roberts

          It says in the link you provided @disqus_8U3yzjEd5i:disqus that 7% goes to administration. The rest is used for research, patient and community services (such as helping those suffering with ALS), and public and professional education (which is vital to ANY research or cause). Yes, they are such demons! How dare they fight a horrible crippling disease that causes so much pain and suffering to those with it and those around them, but also help them in easing that pain and educating others about the disease. Despicable I tell you. Go kick a puppy or something, because that’s about the equivalent of the bullshit you are trying to fight about on here.

        • Avery

          Hi Lord,

          Clearly you do not understand the concept of burden of proof.
          You made the claims, so it was up to you to back them up, not my job to go track them down. This link you posted was what I was asking you for, because you didn’t include it in along with your assertions. Thanks for doing what you should have done to begin with.

          So, to be clear, my request does not reflect negatively on my research skills, but positively on my ability to evaluate claims and evidence. I hope this helps you a little in developing stronger critical thinking skills.

    • Logan McIntosh

      Except that you’ve gone and confused “Expenses” with “Where your donations are going”
      The thing to keep in mind when looking at cash-flow data is where the money is coming in, not just where it’s being spent. You’ve assumed that all the money they make is from the Ice Bucket Challenge donations, but I’m sure an organisation like that receives grants and other sources of income.

      As to “only” spending 27% of their total expenditure on Research, I’m sure Education (32%) and Community Services (19%) are worthwhile, too.

      Besides the fact that “Site Admin” for HealthImpactNews.com is hardly a credible source…

      • Jesus Christ!

        You can see many verifiable sources that this is accurate and healthimpact is pretty credible. In addition, for a non-profit, there should be a legal ceiling on salary. Nearly 400,000 for the CEO? No. Clearly, the money is being distributed incorrectly. Much of the other segments you see the money going towards, do you really know what this is for? Financial Security in pension and other investments, not for research. For an organization to state they are researching for a cure or cause, it is a joke that only 27% of your dollar is actually being invested for what the organization is set up to do. I have had a friend whose mother died from this disease. They hated the ALS foundation. Testing on animals too, never translates over to humans. For the love of God, please justify your moral and educational experience here. Morally, nearly all of the money should go towards research and based on education and having a degree in education, we waste so much money on stupid shit and not towards the investment of bettering our society.

        • Daktarii

          Is there some reason that scientific researchers should be expected to work at jobs that lack salary or retirement benefits just because they are working for a charity? Would you? I have worked for non-profit organizations for most of my life. In doing so, I have ALREADY taken a salary far below market value for my skills. 501(c)3 organizations tend to have extraordinarily modest retirement benefits compared to for-profits. JC acts like ANY salary is “wasted”. if you think that highly skilled scientific researchers are going to live in poverty and have nothing in their old age, you really are an idiot. Retirement funds are NOT a perk. They are the LEAST that these organizations can do since they don’t reward people with, you know, a generally livable salary. As for the CEO, I would imagine that this person is working 90+ hours a week to run that organization. Seriously. These people bust it to try to make a difference. When JC agrees to work for about 60% of what other people with his/her skills make, takes about a 50% cut in retirement benefits, and pays through the nose for substandard health insurance, then s/he can complain about the salary line item for this ALS foundation. You may be able to read a balance sheet, but you understand NOTHING about the work that goes on at these health organizations.

          • Michael Stones

            A generally livable salary????? are you for real?? if you can’t live on $65000.00 per week ($339,475.00 per annum) there’s something seriously wrong with you
            I think you have been in the lap of luxury so long you have forgotten what the real world is like

        • Logan McIntosh

          Sure, there should be a salary cap. That’s not on topic though.

          You keep saying that only 27% of your dollar goes to research, but you have no evidence to support that. The ONLY thing you can say is that 27% of ALL money spent by the ALSA is spent on research, regardless of where that may come from. The money spent on salaries may come government grants with all the donations going to research, for all you know.

          Oh, and if you want to bring personal matters into it… Your friend’s Mum might’ve died from ALS and hated the Association, but my own grandfather died from it and I would STRONGLY support anyone who tries to stop others from dying the same way he did.

          I’ve had plenty of moral and educational experience, more than enough to know that your statement that animal testing NEVER translates is a complete lie. If you’d rather spend your money helping animals instead of your fellow humans, however, that’s YOUR call.

          Oh, for future reference, “credible source” usually means “peer-reviewed journal article” or “government/organisational webpage” (noted by .gov or .org, by the way), not “shitty opinion-piece by anonymous blogger”.

          If anyone is going to target anyone in all of this, it should be the people who do the challenge to “promote awareness” without knowing anything about the disease.

          • Jesus Christ!

            THe date sourced from it, was from a tax return. Consider the IRS peer reviewed, arguable, but numbers don’t lie. Also, you clearly do not understand that animal testing does not work over 90 percent of the time.

            https://www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-animal-testing

          • Zenious

            JC you’re truly the biggest idiot i have seen posting in a long time. while i don’t wholeheartedly agree with animal testing to say that 90% of it is a waste of time is purely stupid. if it was so bad at producing results then why would people still use animals for testing ?
            these are not your run of the mill redneck fucktards they are highly intelligent people who create cures and medicines for our benefit. if the method of animal testing did not work they would use/develop a better method would they not ?
            spewing some percentages from a pie chart you clearly have no understanding of clearly shows how much you don’t know about the situation. you speak as if these researchers and scientists are not allowed to feed their family’s because this organization is a charitable one. Why are these scientists and researchers not allowed a pension for dedicating their life to saving other peoples. in my honest opinion these people should get a lot more than they do for the work they do. how is it right that a scientist can get paid half as much for saving hundreds of lives than for helping develop the new range of shampoo. your here going on about these people animal testing and wasting money what about the cosmetic company’s that pay people to squirt shampoo in animals eyes to see if it burns at least these animals are dieing for a cause ( dont get me wrong any animals death is bad ) and not just so some bimbo can have nice looking hair or not smell like shit for five minutes.
            then we get assholes like you come on to your soapbox about how bad it is that these people are being paid so much when they are being underpaid as it is and quite obviously under appreciated by people like you who have not got a clue

          • Michael Stones

            “”how is it right that a scientist can get paid half as much for saving hundreds of lives than for helping develop the new range of shampoo”” just where did you get this information?? and I certainly wouldn’t call six and a half grand($6500.00) per WEEK underpaid, if you think thats underpaid will you get me a job in your place :)

          • Kevin Osborne
        • rebeccagavin

          Health Impact is not in the least bit credible. Did you look at some of the other articles on that site…stories about how vaccines cause Autism? Are you kidding? And you are on here blasting everyone else and calling them stupid, but you think Health Impact is a credible source? Try Charity Navigator. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=3296

          • Kathy Williams

            Charity Navigator doesn’t base their ratings on efficiency, or fiscally responsible spending; only the total amount of dollars raised. Guess that just makes them good ‘spin doctors,’ and most of you posters naive.

          • rebeccagavin

            I think you are mistaken on that point, Ms. Williams, and I would refer you to their own website, or to the Wikipedia article about them. They might not be perfect but the do much ore that just report on the total number of dollars raised.

          • Autumn

            wikipedia, you mean the one that ANYONE can edit?

          • Autumn

            Charity Navigator has been shown to be able to be “bought” as well. They have also produced false numbers for Susan G Komen giving them the highest rating the year before it all came out their board were making over $1 each yearly salaries and private plane rides.

        • Avery

          “… it is a joke that only 27% of your dollar is actually being invested for what the organization is set up to do.”

          This is one of the bigger flaws in your argument. Research is only part of what they are “set up to do”. Even if you are ignorant of their mission statement, the pie chart you linked to should make that pretty clear. You are suffering from a clear case of confirmation bias. I think maybe the blood from your thorny crown is getting in your eyes.

        • longa

          No matter how hard you try to turn everyone into poor miserable turds like yourself most of us will continue to donate our time and money to our preferred charities as most people with half a brain prefer to donate to charities with strong well paid leadership with proven history of success running large organizations. People like you will never understand what that is like because you’re so blinded by ideological hatred towards people who are more talented, more ambitious and much harder working than you could ever dream of being.

          • Autumn

            what proven success does ALS have? What scientific advances have they made in the last 10 years? Prove what you’re saying since you are obviously so educated you can talk without using slang.

          • Avery

            Here are a few of them:

            “The groundbreaking discovery of a genetic abnormality that is, to date, the most common cause known of ALS and FTD.

            The recent exciting finding involved in familial ALS shows how two proteins work together to buttress the survival of motor neurons.

            Discovery of the ALS gene, SOD1, responsible for 20 percent of all inherited ALS cases.

            Discovery of ALS6 in 2009, a new gene responsible for about 5% of all inherited ALS cases.

            The first clinical trial of ISIS-SOD1, a new drug that specifically targets the SOD1 gene.”

            Source: http://www.alsa.org/research/

          • Michael Stones

            And these were all discovered through animal testing??

          • Michael Stones

            “”prefer to donate to charities with strong well paid leadership with proven history of success”” SO they found a cure?? thats brilliant how come we haven’t heard about it??

        • Avery

          1) “Nearly 400,000 for the CEO” is an outright lie.
          2) The CEO’s salary is not at all unusual for a corporation of that size.

          Here are CEO Salaries for some popular non-profits:

          (the figure quoted in the article included Column F, ‘Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations'; the following figures do not)

          ALS Association $297,288
          Wounded Warrior Project $311,538
          Save the Children $403,857
          World Vision $405,975
          United States Fund for UNICEF $476,001
          American Red Cross $564,864
          American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals $591,723
          American Cancer Society $788,416
          St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital $904,243

          • Michael Stones

            Bullshite the actual figure is $339,475.00($6500.00 per week) so nearly $400,000 is NOT an outright lie

      • xnerd

        You are exactly right. the ALS foundation has a better overall record than most non profit charities. This all started when one assclown blogger decided for whatever reason he was going to pretend that it was a scam. His numbers don’t even show it to be a scam, he simply pretends as if they bad numbers…. Its mind blowing how bloggers that are so desperate for blog content will propagate this bullshit faster than goose shit through a tin horn.

        It boggles the mind.

        • Jesus Christ!

          nerd, again, I will ask you to look at the data provided from the website which is also, ironically, in their tax return from last year!

          Total administration costs, as seen in the pie chart above(in the link I supplied earlier), were just under $2 million. “Other salaries and wages” (Part IX line 7) were $3.6 million, with another half million dollars in “pension plans” and “employee benefits.” Expenses for non-employee labor were about $4 million, and “travel expenses” exceeded $1.3 million.

          So total costs for labor to run the association was around $12.5 million, from revenues received totaling $24 million.

          Over 50% of what the ALS Association receives appears to support salaries of people working for the Association, based on these tax returns.

          So what about the rest of the revenue?

    • General Axe

      you are soo wrong. ALS association prides itself for being one of the only organizations where .99 of every dollar donated goes to patients and research. Only .01 goes to admin purposes (salaries, etc).

      • Jesus Christ!

        Look, no. No, no, no. Read where their money goes

        • xnerd

          7% derp wtf is wrong with you?

          • Jesus Christ!

            Total administration costs, as seen in the pie chart above(in the link I supplied earlier), were just under $2 million. “Other salaries and wages” (Part IX line 7) were $3.6 million, with another half million dollars in “pension plans” and “employee benefits.” Expenses for non-employee labor were about $4 million, and “travel expenses” exceeded $1.3 million.

            So total costs for labor to run the association was around $12.5 million, from revenues received totaling $24 million.

            Over 50% of what the ALS Association receives appears to support salaries of people working for the Association, based on these tax returns.

            So what about the rest of the revenue?

      • Avery

        @general_axe:disqus please don’t further muddle an already muddled discussion with obvious misinformation. There is not a single non-profit in the country that has administrative expenses of 1%, nor does ALSA claim ANYWHERE that 99% of donations go directly to patients and research. Whoever told you that is full of shit.

      • Autumn

        that is not even possible, not even for a nonprofit, try to do some research before you lie. No nonprofit would be able to operate like that.

    • xnerd

      Half does not go to payroll stop now. I saw the breakdown and it was 14%. That is below the international average for payroll expenses for a charity.

      DO you simply pull figures out of your ass?

      • Jesus Christ!

        yes it does. Again, learn to read. Here is the statement from the source which I provided in this thread.

        Total administration costs, as seen in the pie chart above(in the link I supplied earlier), were just under $2 million. “Other salaries and wages” (Part IX line 7) were $3.6 million, with another half million dollars in “pension plans” and “employee benefits.” Expenses for non-employee labor were about $4 million, and “travel expenses” exceeded $1.3 million.

        So total costs for labor to run the association was around $12.5 million, from revenues received totaling $24 million.

        Over 50% of what the ALS Association receives appears to support salaries of people working for the Association, based on these tax returns.

        So what about the rest of the revenue?

    • Ross FÆdback Dutton

      PETA pretty much pull the same thing.

    • JLT
    • Spargy

      not true, and not legal, they would lose their non-profit title if that article were true…and and also, it isn’t true: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/als.asp

    • Spargy
    • http://safermidwiferyutah.wordpress.com/ safer midwifery utah

      payroll for who though? Do you think that researchers and laboratory technicians can afford to work for free?

    • The Advocate

      You are SO ignorant. One for believing anything this fake plastic whore says and another for not doing your own research to find that ALS gets high marks across the board for their charity donations going to the cause. You know nothing. You are a moron get help…. Try a bullet to your skull.

  • Mario

    Actually, I do care about animal testing. I have been against that for quite awhile but not at the expense of human life. It is unfortunate that animals are used but sometimes research needs to be tested before being introduced to us. I am strongly opposed to primate testing but the U.S. has moved away from that already. I am very much aware that most if not all ALS research facilities do not test on primates. Rodent testing is what is mostly done and it is necessary. I am not a fan of it but unless we start testing convicted death row prisoners then testing on rodents is the best alternative.

    I am fully aware of the arguments that rodents have no say in being tested but the truth is computer models do not account for a lot of biological discrepancies. I mean we just recently, I believe this year actually, learned that doses of medication and anesthesia are different for men than women. The norm was the dosage should be the same for both genders depending on height and weight but it was learned that almost all animals that were tested in the past were males. When testing is done on female animals, they react differently to higher dosages. Yes, it’s pretty sad that something so minor had been overlooked for years but that’s something that can be corrected. If we don’t test on rodents and just introduce medications to humans, then the resulting deaths cannot be corrected.

    • http://www.osborneink.com/ OsborneInk

      I’m totally in favor of testing on animals before humans. I’m also against cruelty, and I don’t see the two as incompatible.

      • Aaron M. Litz

        Bingo

  • woodrowfan

    to be fair to Pam, she had to pick something to be embarrassingly wrong about. The “Appeared nude in Playboy and is an anti-vax nut” niche was already filled by Jenny McC.

    • Michael Stones

      Please explain “embarrassingly wrong”

  • formerlywhatithink

    Whenever some celebrity posts something like this, especially if their star has faded, all I read is LOOK AT ME!!!!!! I’M STILL RELEVANT, REALLY I AM!!!!! LOOK AT ME, DAMMIT!!!!!!

  • http://www.osborneink.com/ OsborneInk

    Ben, I’m stunned at how dismissive you are of the actress who gave us the unforgettable cleavage of Baywatch and Barb Wire as well as the original “leaked” sex tape/Hepatitis transmission recording. Surely this person is highly-qualified to tell us all just how much she LOOOOOOOOVES the animals?

    • http://dancefloordale.com HOTDOGTSUNAMI

      I know! I mean, come on, someone who’s released not one, but TWO sex tapes should be more than qualified to discuss a myriad of issues.

      • http://www.osborneink.com/ OsborneInk

        “No second acts? Ha!”

  • Robert Scalzi

    My grandfather died 9 years before I was born from ALS in less than 2 years, my mom was 17. I am so sick of the anti IBC douchebags I could puke. Why do People like this plastic surgery disaster even open their yaps…. argh

    • Leon J

      Why do disasters like you even open your mouth? Torturing animals isn’t going to make your grandfathers death right, and they aren’t getting any closer to finding a cure. YOU are a douchebag, about time you go see your grandfather.

      • Robert Scalzi

        Go kill your puss bag self gas bag

    • Joey

      You could just have easily been born one of the dogs/cats/apes they test on and spend your life in a cage being tortured to death. Just chance you were born human. Perhaps you should stop being a selfish little cnt and start appreciating life as life… not just human life.

      • Robert Scalzi

        Fuck you you puss bag PETA numbskull

  • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

    Hmm.. Let’s see: She’s had breast augmentation (several times) with animal tested implants, using animal tested anesthesia, and probably uses animal-tested botox. That’s not to mention the fact that most cosmetics may no longer be tested in animals, but their ingredients were at some point. But, hypocrisy and stupidity aren’t germane to her.

    • scuzzmonster

      How dare you diss Pammie’s bangers?

    • Question Dodgers

      So they put fake boobs in animals??? Facts please

      • http://cendax.wordpress.com/ Norbrook

        The materials they use for them are tested in animals, including the fillings. Why do you think there’s toxicity notes and reaction warnings on various products used?

  • D_C_Wilson

    The rest of Anderson’s Facebook post is a collection of cherry picked facts about the inefficiency of animal testing (a subject she is completely unqualified to talk about),

    The only subjects she’s qualified to talk about are how to apply lip gloss and how to avoid getting hepatitis from a rock star.

    • http://www.facebook.com/felonious.grammar Felonious Grammar

      And extreme breast augmentation. She knows that like few can.

    • Meh

      Can’t even give her the lip gloss application…she clearly puts far too much on.

  • That River Gal

    A friend of mine lost a friend to ALS less than 48 hours ago…this after a long, horrific battle. Thanks for this takedown.