Pratchett's shock at dementia funding

Why does the government spend more on cancers than dementia when the numbers suffering are similar?

The author of fantasies, Terry Pratchett - newly diagnosed with early onset dementia - thinks the facts suggest it does.

Alzheimer's charities show that right now there are 450,000 sufferers in the UK and this number is expected to double. Of those over 65, one in 14 will get dementia. One third of all people who live past 65 will die of dementia.

Since learning of his own illness, Pratchett said today the he had found it a further "shock and a shame" that less money was spent on Alzheimer's research than cancer. Just 2% of government funding through the Medical Research Council (MRC) was spent on dementia research in the last year for which data was available, 2003-2004.

Within that, of the £32m earmarked specifically by the MRC for mental health research, just £7.2m funded dementia research. That turns into £11 of dementia research per sufferer in this country. This is compared with £289 for each cancer patient. And there is a disparity in public sympathy too.

The Alzheimer's Society estimates that cancer charities receive in excess of £500 million a year in donations while dementia charities receive under £50m - as little as a tenth.

So, why?

One Alzheimer's charity spokesman said today it was because people with dementia did not have the wherewithal to make a fuss about their condition. Really?

Two thirds of people with late onset dementia live at home, meaning families bear the biggest burden. Charities estimate there are around 565,000 dementia carers in the UK. Don't they lobby effectively?

Is it due to the comparative youth of the cancer lobby? Supermodels readily wear a T-shirt publicising breast cancer funding and research, but Naomi Campbell has not yet been seen in a T-shirt with the word 'dementia' emblazoned on it.

Is it the psephology of the illness (health warning: this is very cynical to consider)? Since there is no cure for the disease which affects the very old, is the group not considered electorally important?

Recent comments by former minister Stephen Byers concerning the huge proportion of the electorate that will be over the age at 58 at the next election, should knock that argument on the head.

Dementia funding is surprisingly low. Is Pratchett right that it is a "shock"?