Walk for a Cure

Way back in another life (at least it seems that way), I was working on a book about pets with cancer in conjunction with the University of Pennsylvania vet school, specifically the oncology department of their small animal hospital. To be sure, the subject was hardly "sunshine and lollipops" but it was, I felt, extremely relevant since more dogs than people get cancer every year.

Apparently the topic was too depressing because the proposal did not sell--dare I say the story of my life?--but I still believe in the essential idea because once you have dealt with a dog with cancer, your life is forever changed.

Anyway, the following story about Luke Robinson renewed my belief in the essential integrity of the project. Robinson has a Great Pyrenees named Malcolm who was diagnosed with cancer. Like most owners who receive that diagnosis, Robinson was devastated by the news. He decided to start a one-person campaign, named 2 Dogs, 2,000 Miles, to bring awareness to canine and feline cancer so he is walking from Austin, Texas to Boston, Mass. with his two other dogs, Murphy and Hudson. Murphy has recently been sidelined with a stress fracture but Robinson and Hudson are plodding on. They are currently in Arkansas and you can follow their progress and read about the cause here.

One of the things that Robinson said truly hit home with me and that is the need for more research into treatment for canine and feline cancer. Once again he notes that drug companies induce cancer in lab animals rather than test new drugs on cats and dogs that already have the disease. This all but eliminates the possibility of cats and dogs having access to cutting edge treatments--unless of course your pet meets the requirements for a clinical trial that is being conducted in your neck of the woods.

To be clear, Wayne Ledbetter in the Nevada County Picayune, emphasizes Robinson's stance: "Robinson said he's not promoting treatment of animals above humans or even that human cancer treatment options should be pushed aside in favor of animal options. Instead he proposes a marriage of the two, giving pet owners hope of finding something that works when their companion falls ill while providing a way for drug companies to continue human treatment development."

Seems to make infinite sense to me. What do you think?