The post you are reporting:
A modest proposal.
The charity commission lists 620 cancer charities alone (and more than 200 charities working with homeless people just in London, roughly one for every 15 rough sleepers!)
The problem is not the amount of effort put in to combatting cancer (or heart disease) but the incredible inefficiency of well meaning peoples efforts to 'do something'.
Each of these charities will have a CEO, board of trustees, advertising budget etc (CEO Cancer Research UK £240,000 pa, Macmillan Cancer Support £170,000 pa) using up between 30/40% of donations as well as wasting countless hours of nice people standing behind counters all afternoon when they could be out actually enjoying their short time on the planet.
There is only one RNLI tasked with 'saving lives at sea' which somehow manages to cover offshore, inshore, beaches and even the River Thames, and for all its faults seems to have almost universal support.
Why the Hell don't all the Cancer charities merge with one CEO, Board of Trustees, set of accounts, outlet in each High Street.
Let's call it THE BIG 'C'.
Money could be allocated to all the usual suspects Breast and Prostate, 'Kiddies', palliative care, research and so on and I would suggest there would actually be a lot more money then available for charitable purposes and we might actually get closer to a 'cure for cancer'.
As it is the main function of most of these charities seems to be giving middle class women something to do during the day as 1) they can feel suitably worthy and 2)they realised they were hitting the bottle a bit too much during the daytime.
Serious proposal.
