Frequently Asked Questions
If you don’t use animals, what do use to do your research?
We use human tissue obtained during a biopsy, surgery or autopsy.
With clinical matter obtained from the first two methods, primary cell cultures will be generated. Immortalised cell lines known as secondary cell cultures are widely available and accessible.
Why did you choose the name Lighthouse Laboratories? It gives the impression of a commercial entity.
The name was chosen for several relevant reasons:
- Life is like a journey and some find themselves drifting onto the rocks of cancer. A guiding light of prevention fits with our object and aims.
- A lighthouse stands alone and exposed to harsh elements. It is steadfast and enduring. This is very reflective of the position that Graeme put himself in and his resolve.
- Additionally, the name is not obscure; it is easily recognizable and remembered. People identify with a lighthouse as something that is upstanding and tall. They also identify with it as a beacon of integrity and safety.
- Lastly, the image of lighthouses on many shores correlates with our aspiration for many small Lighthouse Laboratories at numerous universities and hospitals on many shores.
Why are there so many different cancer charities and not just one?
Firstly, we are the first medical research charity with a policy of not using animals in research.
Some believe that all support and research activities associated with cancer should exist under one national governing body. We disagree with this thought for several reasons.
From an administrative perspective the costs are relative to activity. Equally, the participation of personnel is relative to the amount of tasks needed to be performed.
With regard to fundraising, in the scenario that the public want to support a specific program, e.g. neuroblastoma, they would be denied that ability if the overseeing body decided that such a program should not be supported.
Irrespective of any justification, the liberty of the public (whom is the ultimate supporter) should not be shackled with bureaucracy, rationale, industry needs, or what a single governing body perceives as a priority.
As for science, a scientist should be at liberty to pursue science in a direction that it needs to go in; a scientist should not be planning and pursuing a research direction that is preoccupied with fashionable topics, that are determined by a single governing body, in order to get funding.
Why is the government not doing more?
In defence of the government, they are the first to show confidence, such as through our endorsements and licences to exist and function as a charity. They have also been the first in many cases to provide seed funds that enable us to help ourselves.
As for the laboratories and the large expensive communal equipment we use, this infrastructure and platform has been funded by the government.
It is fair that entities such as ours have autonomy to shape and determine our own policies and strategies of sustainability. Thus if we grow and maintain our presence, it is indicative of public confidence and their wanting our entity to exist and operate; that’s democracy.