There is a degree of spin involved in the suggestion that 185,000 women could die by 2030 unless gaps in breast cancer research are addressed.
The claim seems to be based on the total estimate of likely deaths from the disease in the UK, and the number who could be saved if the disease were cured tomorrow.
The disease will not be cured tomorrow and, even if it were, treatment would not necessarily reach all those who could benefit from it. The description of "gaps" is also misleading - many of those identified are already the subject of intense research and spending.
In some cases, notably the need to carry out biopsies of cancers after they have begun to spread, the Breast Cancer Campaign appears to be pushing for genuine gaps to be addressed. However, there is huge duplication of effort in other areas as scientific teams around the world focus on similar research goals.
Breast cancer is a well-funded and competitive research field, and rightly so for a disease which is still deadly within five years for 15% of those diagnosed, and which remains the second biggest cause of cancer deaths among women.
But in areas such as the call for more funding to educate the public on how to avoid cancer through lifestyle changes, today's report is suggesting more money be poured into an existing area of activity, and one where evidence of the likely impact is limited.
Some will argue that any money spent to tackle this potentially fatal illness is justified, and the popular appeal of fundraising for breast cancer research is self-evident. But the law of diminishing returns affects such decisions and it is worth asking whether there is a case for prioritising other medical research.
The allocation of research funding at times appears far from logical. The five-year survival rates for bladder, liver and stomach cancer are all now much poorer than that for breast cancer. Other "unfashionable" conditions such as epilepsy, cause significant numbers of deaths a year, but receive far less research attention.
Issues unconnected with the objective significance of a condition can also influence funding - such as when Kate Middleton sufferred from sever morning sickness during pregnancy.
An influx of cash into the closer study of relatively neglected conditions can offer the hope of bigger, faster improvements than ever more money being channelled into a few high profile causes.
One of the report's authors Professor Alastair Thompson, from the University of Dundee, claims the UK lags behind other Western counties in terms of treatment, but this seems to be a separate issue.
Until there is a cure or something like one for breast cancer, it is of course vital that the best scientific minds are well-funded to research prevention, treatment and cure.
With limited research money available, it is not unreasonable to ask whether there are better and more effective ways of spending it, and for detailed explanations of how many people might benefit, and how soon.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article