« Poetry Time | Home | Grilled Ham »

Jul 19, 2008

Let's check in on the cancer charity auction

Not bad, so far, the CuteOverload Auction post is going for $610.



In case you're just joining us, here is what's up for bids:

- Your pet photo and wish (such as "Happy Birthday, Sarah!) featured as a blog post on CuteOverload.com
- Posted on the day and time of your choice.
- Perfect for a pet-lover's birthday present, for your own pet, a marriage proposal, announcing to the world you're gay, WHATEVER YOU LIKE!
- All proceeds go to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society!



Email to a Friend | Add to del.icio.us |


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Let's check in on the cancer charity auction:


Bid, bid, bid like a baby squid squid squid!

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:02 AM

Does that say 'I'm gay!' in the middle of the pic?

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 03:48 AM

Yes it does Jess!! Perhaps this is an example of what the winner can use the bid for? Like 'Here's a picture of my kitten, isn't he cute? BTW, I'm Gay.' :D

I wish I had more money so I could bid. GO PEOPLE GO!!!

Beth (in NC)
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 04:55 AM

I'm all out of bidding! good luck everyone :)

Ps it does say im gay, if you read the writing it gives that as a suggestion beneath!

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 05:48 AM

lol!! that picture is *amazing*, Meg ^_^

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 06:52 AM

OMG, I didn't even notice that he was holding up a framed screenshot of CO, let alone that it said that... lol

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 06:58 AM

I seriously think a CO-coming out would be the Best Thing Ever.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 07:06 AM

omg a CO coming out! That would be so awesome. Now I hope someone does it! XD

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 07:25 AM

I wish one of my wishes was for money to bid on this!!! lol Good luck! :)

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 07:35 AM

cute overload is doing something (other than giving us immense pleasure with those pictures) for the world!
oh, and btw, their motto should be:

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 08:24 AM

oh, u know what i mean.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 08:24 AM

omg i just bid $1000, but somebody's already out-bid me!!!

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 09:55 AM

hmmm I don't really find stuffy acutioneers to be "cute"...to each his own I suppose

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:35 AM

...and yes I was kidding

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:36 AM

I think Martha Stewart should bid and put up a picture of her new chow chow...and then write something like Suck it haters! I'm kidding, but only sort of.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Yay, it's up to $1000 now! (13:40 EST)

Elle Double U
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:41 AM

@ashagato: It looks like another bidder had placed a maximum bid of $1,000 before yours. This means that if you bid as little as $1,025, you'll be the high bidder (until someone else bids more).

Not That Mike The Other Mike
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:41 AM

A cute animal site is raising money for animal testing? That just makes me sad.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 10:56 AM

JN, your ignorance is astounding. Animal testing is not necessary in all cancer research, and the leukemia and lymphoma society's research has saved lives.

elle double u
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:08 AM

A lame Internet troll is discouraging charitable contributions with vague implications s/he makes no effort to prove? That just makes me smirk.

Not That Mike The Other Mike
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:12 AM

Aside from research, btw, they also help cover the costs of leukemia, lymphoma and myeloma patients who cannot afford their treatments with financial support. They also have outreach programs and support groups. This is one of the best groups out there. I fully expect that if you get cancer one day, JN, you'll say "no thanks, no treatment for me, I'd rather die than take the treatment that an animal might have helped create."
All right, that is all :)Back to snorgles and nehns!

elle double u
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:12 AM

Umm, just wondering, though -- do these charities conduct or are they associated in any way with biomedical research? Any charity or entity which causes suffering and death to members of any species will never get my support! and shouldn't get anyone else's, either.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:19 AM

You guys ever heard of "the Google"? It is no secret that the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society does vivisection.

Here are some cancer charities that do not:


P.S. Just because you don't like what I have to say, that does not make me a "troll". I just believe lives can be saved without testing on animals.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:25 AM

You guys ever heard of "the Google"? It is no secret that the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society does vivisection.

Here are some cancer charities that do not:


P.S. Just because you don't like what I have to say, that does not make me a "troll". I just believe lives can be saved without testing on animals.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:26 AM

Taking jn's advice, I used "the Google" and searched on the phrase "Leukemia and Lymphoma Society" and found no pages critical of the organization within the first 100 results.

Based upon this result, and because jn is either unable or unwilling to offer specific information to the contrary, I am convinced that this is an ethical organization worthy of our respect and support.

Accordingly, I have just placed a bid in the auction, raising the total to $1,025. I encourage you to keep participating in this thread, jn, in the hopes that it will inspire others to outbid me and get me off the hook. :-)

Not That Mike The Other Mike
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:59 AM

jn/jmuhj, how about you sit back, shut up and let people support the charities THEY want to support, in the manner THEY want to support it? Why try to ruin something good like this by nuffing all over the damned place?

You can't please all of the people all of the time, so stuff it already. Meg & Co are doing something good in this world with this auction. If the chosen charity offends your precious PETA sensibilities so much, fine and dandy, go pick the charity of your choice and match the winning bid.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:06 PM

"Ethical" is in the eye of the beholder. I don't think vivisection is ethical.

And I don't think it's ethical for a site based on showcasing cute animals to raise funds to test on those exact types of animals.

Here are a couple quotes you may enjoy:

"Giving cancer to laboratory animals has not and will not help us to understand the disease or to treat those persons suffering from it."
-- Albert Sabin, MD (1986), developer of the live-virus polio vaccine. Sabin (1906 — 1993) was a physician and microbiologist who developed a live-virus polio vaccine that helped curb the spread of the then deadly disease.

"What good does it do you to test something [a vaccine] in a monkey? You find five or six years from now that it works in the monkey, and then you test it in humans and you realize that humans behave totally differently from monkeys, so you’ve wasted five years."
-- Dr. Mark Feinberg, a leading AIDS researcher.

"I abhor vivisection…. I know of no achievement through vivisection, no scientific discovery that could not have been obtained without such barbarism and cruelty."
-- Charles W. Mayo, MD (1961), son of the co-founder of the Mayo Clinic. Dr. Charles W. Mayo (1898 — 1968) was a skilled surgeon and a member of the Mayo Clinic’s Board of Governors. The Mayo Clinic is consistently ranked among the top three U.S. hospitals.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:17 PM


Sorry my messages have upset you to the point where you need to be nasty to someone you have never met.

I am obviously not TELLING anyone what to do. There are undoubtedly people who read the site and agree with me and do not want to support animal testing.

Telling me to shut up will not change the facts. Some people care, some do not. I am writing for the people who care.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Your point being?

Other than trying to spit on what is in essence, a good thing here?

Do you like shoving your moral compass down other people's throats?

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:19 PM

NTMTOM's and my own google efforts have shown no evidence of your claims.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:20 PM

I was curious about the L&LS and animal testing after what was said, so I went over to their official page and in less than five minutes found a link to a description of the cancer testing they do on mice. (Link is under my name.) How you feel about that is your business, but they do test on animals.

Sunday Bunday
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:21 PM

Jn, your quotes did not implicate L&LS in any way, so I must conclude that you have no substantial information about that organization to bring to the discussion.

Therefore, as a tribute to your sustained ineptitude, I have decided to increase my maximum bid to $1,050. Anyone wishing to outbid me must now bid $1,075.

By the way, jn, I had not even considered participating in this auction until your posts inspired me to do so. Thanks to you, this organization that you despise (for reasons you can't seem to demonstrate) will get more money than if you had kept quiet. Keep up the good work.

Not That Mike The Other Mike
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:36 PM

The school I work at is one of the leading fundraising schools for this organization. We have had patients who have come to support our efforts, telling us that our fundraising has DIRECTLY contributed to the treatments that have saved their lives. One girl was given something like six months to live - it's now been 8 years; she has come every year to thank us for her life.

That's enough for me to believe in them. but yes, it is up to us to support those charities we believe in. Just don't cast judgment on Meg, who is a person and not a "site", for doing the same. :)

Peace, love, and Corgi kisses!

Elle Double U
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:40 PM

If the LLS didn't exist, I would have died about 2.5 years ago from Leukemia. They funded research that led to the development of Gleevec (www.gleevec.com and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imatinib), which is now the most effective cancer treatment in the history of medicine. It only treats a rare-ish form of leukemia (CML), but it will likely lead to developments in a much broader range.

I don't support animal testing for consumer products, but I have a hard time saying that the LLS is evil for animal testing when they have managed to save so many lives (my own, included).

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:55 PM

I find it amusing that NTMTOM - who could easily sneak a pet picture of his own onto CO - is willing to pay lots of money for the privilege! (Yes, I know that it's for a good cause, but it's still amusing.)

Good for you, Mike! I'd try to top you, but that's beyond my budget. I had bid on one of the other items and was outbid. I'm still debating whether I can afford to up my bid.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 12:56 PM

To those concerned about vivisection, here are a few points to consider:

Animals will benefit from a cure for cancer too. Saying this is a negative for animals is inaccurate because many pets' lives will be saved as well as human lives (as if that weren't enough!).

A lot more animals die as a result of meat eating than medical research. If 100 lab mice have to die to save the lives of 1000 pet mice (or cats or dogs or humans) then that is sad, but surely it is still better overall to save the 1000 creatures, whereas if 100 chickens die just because a bunch of people fancy a chicken sandwich rather than a cheese or hummus sandwich that day, that's 100 pointless deaths that will be repeated day after day. Yet we don't protest against sandwich shops or chicken farms, not even the really nasty battery farms that keep animals in far worse conditions than any lab. I don't suggest we do btw, I've not seen any example of someone eating less meat as a result of others moaning about cruelty, but don't you think it's a little incongrous to complain about vital medical advances and not about people elevating a sandwich preference over an animal's life?

Re. animal experiments being unneccessary/unhelpful. Do you think the scientists concerned are clueless? Getting permission to do an animal experiment is not an easy process, and if there was any safe way of testing their new procedure without animals they would surely do it. Indeed one of the things they must do to get permission is to demonstrate that there is no non-animal means to the same end. I'm sure certain kinds of cancer research can be performed without animals but that doesn't mean that restricting research to only those avenues of enquiry wouldn't be extremely limiting.

So well done to all at Cute Overload for running such a successful auction. I'm amazed it went this high! And thanks for all the cute animal pics :)

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 02:18 PM

Thank you ever so much, CO, for this fundraising. I am now 29 months in remission from leukemia and a stem cell transplant and now my 8 year old and I raise money for the LLS. It truly is a great organization and when I needed some financial aid, they helped me pay the cost for parking at my hospital ($15 a day). They also fund great research and help patients pay their co-pays.

I hope the winner might take a minute to go look at our site to see my 8 year old daughter and her own cute overload.

From someone who lives because of medical research, I truly thank you.

PS. Give blood if you can (I've had 38 life-saving transfusions) and sign up for the national bone marrow donor program registration list. Save someone's life! Be the one!

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 02:20 PM

EWRobinson and Debutaunt, so glad to hear your success stories as survivors. :)

Elle Double U
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 02:48 PM

I never expected to open up CO and find a pic of Tobias Meyer! It's like worlds colliding. But I guess he's cute though...

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 02:50 PM

I'm not gay yet, but I'd like to hear more about baby squid.

Patito Gigante
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 04:04 PM

If you really want to understand the role animals have played in scientific research you should take a class on the history of physiology instead of googling around. Pulling out a few select quotes isn't really helpful in underlining the impact animals have had.

I think it's funny that Salk was used as an example of someone against animal testing, given that his vaccine was first tested on monkeys! And these weren't monkeys who conveniently happened to have polio.

The likes of physiologists Claude Bernard and William Harvey have done extensive vivisection on cows, dogs -- actually dogs seemed to be a really popular subject for some reason, maybe because they were large and cheap/easy to come by at the time -- and through that were able to describe the circulatory and nervous system. Can you imagine at one point people didn't know that injecting something into a blood vessel meant it would travel all throughout the body? This was demonstrated by an extremely cruel experiment. The impact it had on medicine and physiology was enormous.

I'm surprised that Dr. Mayo was not aware of this, but then again medical school doesn't offer courses on the history of medicine. And he didn't have google to fall back on ;)

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 05:22 PM

Gleevec is literally a miracle drug, it came out just in time to save the life of a friend of mine. I have NO spare moneys, but would bid like a baby squid if I could.

Huzzah for Meg, NTMTOM and LLS!

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 05:54 PM

Sometimes people make me feel incredibly sad. There are always going to be people that find the worst way to look at something wonderful. I can only say that this has to be not only the cutest but the sweetest way to raise money for something that is not only physically but emotionally crippling. I don't know how anyone could possibly say and imply these charitable efforts are anything more than a renewal of humanity.

"Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo."

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 08:18 PM

Who could possibly overlook animal testing??? that is REDONCULOUS. Shall I assume that many of you animal testing supporters have animals you call pets also eat and wear animals without thinking of that either?

its wrong to test on animals and its horrible to support any animal research. ITS NOT EVEN NECESSARY. Its just one more way we make money off of helpless animals. Be SAD if you want, who cares. A true animal lover knows that the quality of any animals life matters more than how bad you feel about the subject.

It would be amazing if cute overload stood up for animals and made a big stink about it! Then something good could come out of the embarrassment of not researching a charity first!

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 08:44 PM

I admit, I can see both sides of the testing debate. I am appalled at the thought, but yet the advances gained from it are undeniable.

Ultimately, though, it sounds like this charity does a lot of good for people, so I'm glad I bid!

Now, I'm worried about NTMTOM's bid!! Sorry, I wish I had the money to take you off the hook!!

Gail (the first one)
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 09:18 PM

I've told this story before, but I repeat it here:

The first vegan I met was my freshman year in college, a very sweet Hispanic kid named Anthony. He'd been vegan for a year and was excited about joining the campus animal rights group. He'd talk to us about how animals were treated in captivity, the horrors of testing, etc.

Within six weeks of coming to school, he was eating hamburgers. He told us that the animals rights group on our campus was seriously discussing sabotaging all university buildings because the university allowed animal medical testing (this was the University of California). When Anthony and two other new members suggested that sabotage might hurt people (or hurt the animals being kept in the sabotaged labs), they were mocked and told that a true animal activist knows that human life or well-being is inconsequential. Anthony quit and started eating meat again.

I certainly don't accuse anyone here of holding that view. But please, please, people: have some perspective on the value of life. The same kind of closed-mindedness that insists scientific research must conform to YOUR moral standard is the same thing that keeps stem-cell research in the dark ages because discarded human reproductive matter is apparently more important than saving the lives of those already living.

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 09:27 PM


(Yay for all sexual preferences!)

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 09:28 PM

@Vegan: And if we researched this charity, what specifically would we learn? Like another theatrically indignant participant earlier in this thread, you imply that you have damning knowledge, yet you don't share it.

You also claim that animal testing is not even necessary, yet you offer no evidence to support this view, either. You're beginning to sound like one of those typical Internet blowhards who claims to know things s/he doesn't, then falls back on the "Google it yourself" dodge when challenged.

So I'll make a deal with you, Vegan. I've recently been outbid in the auction, but I will jump back in with a higher bid -- UNLESS you can provide links to scientific evidence that Leukemia and Lymphoma can be successfully researched and treated WITHOUT the methods to which you object, or any medicines or procedures derived from those methods.

Only peer-reviewed scientific data will be considered; links to activism sites are not acceptable. You must post your links in this thread within NINE HOURS of the time shown in this post. (The auction ends less than 12 hours from now.)

So unless you want to be responsible for EVEN MORE MONEY going to this organization you dislike, you'd better step up and demonstrate that you actually know what you claim to know. Get cracking and post those links.

Not That Mike The Other Mike
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 09:29 PM

@Gail: I was already off the hook; someone else had outbid me. However, unless this Vegan person can provide a compelling, scientific reason why I shouldn't, I'm going to place a higher bid. We'll know in the morning. :-)

Not That Mike The Other Mike
 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 09:32 PM

Maybe goldenpalace.com will win. o.O

 |  Jul 20, 2008 at 11:10 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

« Poetry Time | Home | Grilled Ham »




  • Receive the daily content of CuteOverload in your email box. Free!

    Your email address will only be used for this purpose and not given out to any other third party.

    Enter your Email

    Powered by FeedBlitz

Cute Caps!

  • Did you know you can add CuteCaps to your own webpage? Try it!

Got Cute?

  • Think you have a cute photo, Punk? [Clint Eastwood voice] If you think it fits our seriously stringent requirements, send it to us. We just might post it! But if we don't, it's really for the best [patting your back.]

Choosey bloggers choose:

  • TypePad!

    If TypePad helps your blog survive a Slashdotting, you know it's strong.

    Set Up Your Blog For Free with TypePad! If I can do it, you tewtelly can.

Email Me

  • press-related: press [at] cutelabs.com
  • business-related: meg [at] cutelabs.com
  • submissions: cuteoverload [at] frostdesign.net

Press Coverageses

  • Don't miss our Press page for ALL pattings on the back!


Powered by TypePad