Can We Talk?
For a bunch of people who pride themselves in honesty and
the use of data to make valid arguments, the faculty of MD Anderson, the staff
of the Houston Chronicle, the UT System and most of Houston are acting like the
solution to the MD Anderson problem is too tough for them to solve. Nothing
could be further from the truth.
Let’s review what MD Anderson is and what it is not:
radiotherapy needed to appropriately treat cancer (and even kinds that are
systemic cancer therapy whether chemo-, immuno- or any other-mo safely and with
the highest likelihood of yielding a successful outcome, defined as altering
the cancer’s natural history and the patient’s quality and quantity of life.
science very interested in researching ways to better treat, detect and prevent
actual human cancer.
administration and finance that does not service the needs of the faculty.
moment, but capable of true greatness in the near future.
IT IS NOT:
of routine cancer because its cost structure is so high
Medical Center as it is a single disease entity care giver with the backing of
the UT System
if we can agree on those things, let’s decide how to maximize what MD Anderson
is and forget about what it is not.
view the institution as an extension of their egos.
effort of the institution. It is a worthy by-product but not part of the
overall strategy nor is it expected to generate tons of revenue.
getting rid of that silly logo of Making
History because it makes MD Anderson sound like it is ignorant of what cancer
biology is. The institution’s motto should return to Fighting Cancer, Now THAT’S
is that really all that hard?