You may recall hearing about the SETI@Home volunteer computing project back in 1999.

The idea was to collect a metric fuckton of data from the Arecibo radio telescope, split the raw data into digestible chunks, then farm the chunks out to thousands of volunteers, letting their home computers sift through the data looking for potential signals from extraterrestrial sources.

WCG screen saver

WCG screen saver

The sifting software ran in a low-priority background task as a screen saver. When you weren’t using your computer, its spare cycles could be used to perform useful scientific research. And *your* laptop might detect the first signal from intelligent life outside our solar system!

As an engineer, I’ve always had both work and home machines, plus older computers lying around gathering dust, so I installed the software and started processing chunks of data (“work units” in their lingo).

After running that for several years, in 2004 I switched to a different volunteer computing project: United Devices’ grid.org Cancer Research Project, which tried to find useful matches between ligands and key proteins. By that time I was a committed Pan-Mass Challenge rider, and contributing to cancer research was more important to me than looking for aliens.

I ran the grid.org software for another three years before they shut it down. During that time I processed 4,500 work units, volunteering 5.25 years of CPU time. When it finished, I wrote up a blogpost about my experience.

Then I migrated over to IBM’s new World Community Grid, which hosted numerous volunteer computing projects. Eleven years later, it’s still running… and so are my laptop, our printer server, and even my Android tablet!

For WCG, I’ve volunteered 34 years worth of CPU time from 12 different computers. I’m in their top one percent of users, having processed 70,000 work units for 19 different research projects that focus on topics as diverse as AIDS, Zika, Ebola, Malaria, clean energy, clean water, and more productive rice crops.

But as you might expect, my most sizable and rewarding contribution has been toward defeating cancer. Between the grid.org and WCG platforms, I’ve contributed 34 CPU years to a half dozen cancer research projects.

With the recent rise in cloud computing, the idea of farming large computing tasks out to home computers seems antiquated. But as long as the work units keep coming, I’ll keep crunching them, doing whatever I can to further the cause of eradicating cancer… while I sleep!

How does one find the words to eulogize a true hero: a dear friend, a tireless mentor, a great benefactor, and a true inspiration?

When I did my first Pan-Mass Challenge charity ride back in 2001, my coworker Jeremy—who was doing the AIDS Ride—told me about a group training ride starting at Quad Cycles in Arlington. “It’s run by this guy named Bobby Mac… You have to meet him!”

So one weekend I went out and rode with them. Bobby was a charismatic older guy who was the obvious center of the group. He’d bark out endless advice about how to ride, always interjecting a characteristic bit of self-deprecating humor or belting out snippets of songs from the 60s and 70s. He’d shamelessly (but harmlessly) flirt with the ladies, who all adored him. On the road, he always stayed with the slower riders, mentoring them and offering helpful advice for how to both survive and enjoy whatever charity rides they were training for.

Bobby Mac made riding fun.

Bobby Mac
Bobby Mac with Johnny H
Bobby Mac at Ferns during the Tour de Mac
Bobby Mac
Ornoth with Bobby Mac
Bobby Mac

Like so many other neophyte riders, I started out wearing canvas cargo shorts and a tee shirt, riding a heavy, flat-handlebar “hybrid” bike. Over the course of thirteen years with him, Bobby sculpted me into a spandex-clad veteran roadie who rides 10,000 kilometers a year on his carbon-fiber road bike and has raised over $100,000 for cancer research.

But I am just one person out of hundreds and hundreds of riders whom Bobby has encouraged over the years. Himself an inveterate charity rider, he and his team of “Quaddies” were often top fundraisers and volunteer crewmembers for several of the largest charity rides in the area. If you added up all the good works performed by Bobby Mac and the legions of riders he has encouraged, the sum total would be staggering.

As you can imagine, Bobby Mac was a huge part of the local community. He recorded several PSAs on behalf of charity rides and local cycling advocacy. No matter where we went, we’d always run into people who knew him. Whether you were a cyclist or not, it seemed everyone was friends with Bobby Mac. No matter who you were, he made it very easy to feel like you were his best friend.

We also loved Bobby for his idiosyncrasies. It was a mark of seniority if you could say that you’d seen him ingest anything other than Cytomax sports drink. Back when the ride stopped at Kimball Farm, Bobby proved that his popularity extended even to barnyard animals, as “Buff the Powerbar-Eating Goat” would run up to the fence to greet him and receive a treat.

As he aged, Bobby suffered from macular degeneration which gradually eroded his eyesight. I once watched him nearly ride straight into a sawhorse barrier that a road crew had put up when one of our regular roads was temporarily closed. It was a mark of real trust if Bobby let you lead him through a charity ride on unfamiliar roads he hadn’t already memorized.

Due to his worsening eyesight, we all feared that Bobby would eventually be unable to ride. Knowing that his time was limited, in 2006 we organized the first Tour de Mac, a special ride in his honor, complete with tee shirts, rubber wristbands, and an award presentation for the guest of honor. In 2009 we held another ride to celebrate his 60th birthday, which I recorded with an emotional writeup and video. Everyone loved Bobby, but despite repeated operations to maintain his vision, we all harbored silent fears about how much longer he would be able to ride.

However, Bobby wasn’t destined to live long enough for his eyesight to fail him. Three weeks ago, Bobby went into the hospital, suffering from pancreatic cancer that had metastasized. It was terminal, and last night he passed away in his sleep at home.

When his diagnosis first became public knowledge, the hospital’s staff very quickly learned how special Bobby Mac was. They weren't prepared for the hundreds of his friends who came to visit his bedside. The nurses put up signs, limited the duration of visits, and still more people kept coming, sometimes queueing up in shifts of ten at a time outside his hospital room.

The first time I visited him in the hospital, I had something special I wanted to share with him. When a rider surpasses $100,000 in fundraising, the Pan-Mass Challenge gives them a silver pin with the PMC logo as a lifetime achievement award. I had received mine six weeks before Bobby went into the hospital, after 13 years of riding and raising money for the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.

I wanted Bobby to know about that accomplishment, and how it was due in large part to his inspiration. And that if I was only one of hundreds of riders he’d encouraged, then he’d achieved a whole lot of good in this world. His characteristically self-effacing response was to shrug off his role and emphasize mine, saying that I had long been the most dedicated of his charity riders.

It’s bitter irony to me that the man who was my hero and inspired me to ride the Pan-Mass Challenge was taken from us by the very disease I’ve raised so much money to combat. It goes without saying that this year—my final PMC ride—will be dedicated to the memory of my hero: Bobby Mac. It will be a very emotional ending when I reach the Provincetown finish line for the final time and lift my bike over my head, consciously copying Bobby’s signature victory salute.

With his innate charisma and his natural role as the center of a circle of people, Bobby reminded me a lot of my father, or what he might have been, if my father had been motivated by kindness and generosity. In that way, Bobby has been a role model for me, an inspiring example of what a fatherly male figure could be—and could accomplish—in this jaded, selfish world.

There’s one particular exercise in Buddhist meditation called “Brahmavihara practice”, wherein we use visualization to cultivate our capacity for friendliness, compassion, and joy in others’ happiness. Typically, we start by directing compassion toward someone whom it’s easy to feel affection for, then slowly work our way to people we feel ambivalent about, and then challenge ourselves to work with people we find difficult or hateful. But we start with someone who is often referred to as our “benefactor”.

Years ago, when I started that practice and was asked to identify someone whom I felt unalloyed affection for—someone whom I considered my benefactor—one person’s name immediately jumped to mind: Bobby Mac. Bobby was my exemplar of friendliness, affection, compassion, and generosity. In my opinion, Bobby was the absolute embodiment of the concept of a “benefactor”.

Bobby’s presence and personality made everyone’s world feel much more friendly, much more optimistic. He put a whole lot of love and goodness into the world.

And he took a whole lot of love and goodness with him when he left: both the love of his many friends which was directed toward him in his final years, and also the love and goodness that have gone out of this world with his passing. For everyone who knew Bobby Mac, the world feels a little colder and more lonely without his energetic encouragement and his incorrigible smile.

Here’s to you, my friend, my mentor, my benefactor, my inspiration, and my hero. As you enjoined us at the start of every ride, we will do our best to “ride with love in our hearts and smiles on our faces”, thanks to you, Bobby Mac.

I won’t belabor the ask, but if you wish to make a donation to fight cancer in Bobby’s memory and sponsor my PMC ride, you can do so here.

So someone finally wrote a book about the Pan-Mass Challenge.

If you are one of my friends who care about (or are just curious about) the event, you might be interested in picking it up. It’s short—just 150 pages—with a handful of greyscale photos. It’s inexpensive too—just $9 at Amazon!—and the author is giving 75 percent of the profits back to the PMC.

Front cover

The writing is first-person and informal. While that makes it readable, the author rambles around each chapter, covering diverse topics with no real focal point, yielding a book that also has no coherent theme other than the experience.

But to be fair, the PMC—the event—is all about that experience. The entire weekend is intensely emotionally charged, and that’s something that is nearly impossible to convey in words. This is astutely summarized in a quote from one teen rider, “When you explain it to a friend they sort of know what it is, but until they’re there, they don’t really know.”

Sure, there’s the obligatory nod to the event’s long history, including how the idea came to the founder during a ride in Boston’s Arnold Arboretum, how he ran the event for fifteen years from his father’s dining room, how everyone reacted to the first rider fatality, finally getting permission to use the campus of the Massachusetts Maritime Academy as an overnight stop, and the event’s phenomenal growth.

And there’s plenty of interesting factoids. On PMC weekend, riders will pedal a collective three-quarters of a million miles. 70 percent of riders return to the event each year, and scores of PMC kids rides serve as a farm club for the main event, iculcating future generations into a culture of philanthropy and caring about others.

Combine all the other single-event athletic fundraisers in the nation, then multiply that by 3.5—that’s what the PMC raises every year. Having passed 100 percent of rider-raised money through to the charity, the PMC constitutes 60 percent of the Jimmy Fund’s revenue and—at 20 percent of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute’s entire budget—is DFCI’s largest single source of funding.

All this enables Dana-Farber to conduct over 700 clinical trials and 350,000 outpatient visits per year. But more importantly, the PMC gives Dana-Farber the power and security to do the impossible. The PMC has directly underwritten research that led to treatments and cures for rare pediatric cancers that threaten the lives of a thousand kids per year, a hundred kids per year, even just 32 kids per year.

The book tells the stories of a number of these kids, including the PMC’s poster boy: Jack O’Riordan, who at one year of age was cured of Wilms Tumor, which only six children had at that time. And how, after cheering on PMC riders for 14 years, he finally was old enough to do the ride himself (despite a broken leg).

The book also includes stories from the more than a hundred Dana-Farber staffmembers who ride, and gives a pointedly realistic assessment of Lance Armstrong’s single visit to the event in 2011, shortly before his confession as a doper and resignation from his own cancer-related charity.

Many of the people in the book provide quotes that further illustrate the attitude and atmosphere the event creates.

“There are widows and there are orphans, but no word exists for a parent who loses a child.” -One 17-year rider’s fundaising email

“At first when I get the call my heart goes out for the family; it’s so hard. But then my heart soars because they’ve found the right place, the right team.” -A pediatric oncologist who rides

“To the world you may be just one person, but to one person you just may be the world.” -One of hundreds of signs lining the route

“You’re never done, you’re never done with the event.” -A 25-year volunteer

For me as a 13-year rider, the book left me with mixed feelings. I so want to be able to share with others what the PMC experience is like. Although the book relates a handful of very emotional narratives, it’s simply impossible to capture all the amazing and heart-wrenching and grace-laden stories in an event that spans hundreds of miles with 5,500 participants, 3,000 volunteers, countless roadside spectators, and a quarter million sponsors over 33 years.

Back cover

One of the difficult things to capture about the PMC is the emotional impact. All weekend long, you’re primed, because you never know when you’ll see something that instantly moves you to tears, whether it be to the heights of inspiration or the depths of despair. Will it be the kid holding an “I’m alive thanks to you!” sign? Riding next to a Red Sox or Patriots player? Or exchanging greetings with an 80 year-old rider, or an amputee riding with only one leg?

Will it be hearing the story of someone who has raised a quarter million dollars, or a rider with a loved one’s photo or dozens of ribbons with names pinned to their jersey? The tandem bike with an empty seat, representing a lost loved one?

Will it be the sincerity and passion with which hundreds of people lining the route thank you for riding? Or watching the tens of thousands of people—riders, volunteers, sponsors, supporters, patients and their families, doctors, and nurses—who have come together to make a real, meaningful difference in each others’ lives this often impersonal and uncaring world?

As a longtime writer myself, I don’t envy anyone who tries to capture and communicate the PMC experience, in whatever medium. So I won’t criticize the author for falling short of 100 percent success. But I’m very glad he did it, and I think it’s well worth the $9 for anyone who has ever felt attachment to this singular and irreproduceable event.

And, of course, if you have yet to sponsor my upcoming 13th PMC ride, now’s the time!

The following is a letter from the President of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to the PMC organization.

I have chosen to share it with you and my sponsors to give you a better idea exactly how the money we raise is spent, and how vitally important it is to their lifesaving mission. And, of course, so you too can receive the thanks you deserve for your support of my ride.


Dear Fellow PMC Members:

First, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Thank you on behalf of so many who work so hard to conquer cancer, and even more people who count on us to do just that, and on behalf of everyone at Dana-Farber and all of the people who depend on us. You, individually and collectively, have been absolutely phenomenal. The financial support that you have provided has enabled groundbreaking research that has saved lives and will ensure that we will be able to save more lives in the future. Of equal importance, is the extraordinary spirit and positivity that you bring to your effort. This is enormously uplifting, motivating, and sustaining to all of us who work on the frontline of trying to conquer cancer.  You are right there with us, and that is enormously heartening. I thought it would be a good time to update you about what is going on in the world of cancer research and what your incredible support is doing to allow cancer research to move forward at Dana-Farber despite one of the worst external environments in the history of medical research.

Among the most important things unrestricted funds supports is our ability to recruit and retain the world's most incredible faculty of cancer care givers and researchers. You have met many of them; Nadler, Demetri, Winer, Partridge and more. Nearly all of them are here because we were able to use the unrestricted support that you provided to invest in their recruitment and to support their early work, work at the cutting edge, before it was a "sure enough bet" to be funded by the National Institutes of Health or other agencies. Indeed, these faculty members have become so important and prominent that they are the target of enormously attractive recruitment packages from many other institutes. Because of the PMC's record breaking support last year, I was able to use these funds to support retention programs that kept them here to continue their work. PMC support helps convince them that we can commit the resources they need to make the maximum impact on cancer outcomes on now and in the future at Dana-Farber.

PMC funds support work for ground-breaking, out of the box projects by our investigators in their own research programs; other funds allowed us to invest in key equipment such as state of the art sequencing and imaging facilities. One of the world's first small imager Cyclotrons, a multimillion dollar piece of equipment needed for the imaging capabilities at the frontiers in research, is being used on more mouse models in cancer. It was partly funded by the PMC. To get the remaining funding, we were able to leverage your support to obtain matching funds from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We now have the finest animal imaging facility in the country used to study mouse models of cancer, and we will make it available to collaborators within Harvard, and outside to the biotech and pharmaceutical world.

This past Friday, I had the honor of presenting the Osler Young Investigator Award to Dr. Kimberly Stegmaier, one of our rising faculty stars who was supported in her early work by the funds that you raised. She is now a world class developer of novel agents for the treatment of childhood leukemias and neuroblastoma using innovative genomic technologies that we used PMC funds to support. PMC funds allowed us to purchase equipment and collaborative services both at Dana-Farber and the Broad Institute. This has sustained a unique collaboration between two world-class institutions in the conquest of cancer.

This past spring, Drs. Ken Anderson and Paul Richardson and their collaborators from the Medical School and the pharmaceutical industry received the highly prestigious Warren Alpert Award from Harvard for their work in developing novel therapies at record speed. These have been the driving advances resulting in the tripling of survival time for patients with multiple myeloma. A significant amount of the funds that made this work possible came from PMC teams that have ridden in support of Drs. Anderson and Richardson. Perhaps even more importantly, some of the very earliest work of this group, working before its value was apparent, was supported by unrestricted funds that were generated by the PMC.

These are just a few of many examples that provide tangible proof that you are allowing us to forge ahead in very difficult times. In virtually every one of our disease centers and our departments, there are young investigators whose careers were launched by funds raised by the PMC. In every one of our cores and centers, equipment, expert scientists, computational capabilities, expensive supplies and expert personnel are there because we are able to support them with PMC funds. Every one of our clinics and clinical trials are supported by your funds.

You truly are marching with us on the front lines in the war to conquer cancer. It seems almost impossible to do even more than you are doing. However, if ever there was a time for even more effort and generosity, it is now. The federal government allowed "sequestration" to happen, this has resulted in a cataclysmic cut in the NIH budget. Cancer research is disproportionately affected. In addition, Massachusetts and federal healthcare and payment reform are reducing clinical reimbursements.  And, in this time of highly constrained resources, competition from many other worthy causes for traditional forms of philanthropy is more intense than ever.  It is only through the PMC that we can hope to remain aggressive and optimistic about making a difference in the lives of patients with cancer and saving even more lives in the future. Thank you as always for the incredible work that you do on our behalf.

Sincerely,

Edward J. Benz, Jr., M.D.

I recently read this article which cites a study by the Women’s Philanthropy Institute at Indiana University that reported finding a significant gender bias in philanthropic giving.

Actually, the article’s tone was a little more strident than that, loudly proclaiming that “Women are the conduit for change on the planet,” and backing that claim up with further observations that “Women across nearly every income level gave significantly more to charity than men, nearly twice as much in some cases,” and “Women gave more often than men and […] they also give more in total dollars.”

Now although I care about sexism, I’m also sensitive to reverse sexism, and this article raised my hackles from the start. Even if there is a statistically significant difference in philanthropy by gender, what is the value of reporting it in this manner, other than to reinforce tired stereotypes of women as nurturers and men as competitive and selfish? Gee, that’s progressive!

Of course, my indignation wouldn’t have justified a blog post were the issues of gender and philanthropy not personal, exacerbated by my predilection for numerical analysis. So…

As you well know, I’ve spent the last ten years fundraising for the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and off the top of my head I hadn’t noticed any gender bias (one way or the other) in the donations I’ve received.

But that got my curiosity up, so I went and ran the numbers. While I can’t speak for national trends, here’s my real-world results.

chart

First, I looked at the gender breakdown of the people who have sponsored my Pan-Mass Challenge ride since 2001, throwing out four donations that explicitly came from couples. I came up with 105 women and 134 men.

Contrary to the study’s findings, I have 30 percent more male sponsors than female. Huh. Interesting.

chart

Second, I looked not just at people, but at the total number of donations they made. Although I had fewer female sponsors, perhaps they actually donated more frequently.

No, that wasn’t the case either. I have received a total of 226 donations from women, and 339 from men.

Again bucking the study’s findings, the men who sponsor me have given 50 percent more donations than the women. Wow! I hadn’t noticed that.

chart

My third measurement was designed to account for any possible gender bias in the makeup of my donor list. After all, I am a guy, and I might have a proportionally larger number of guy friends, right?

So I divided the number of donations by the number of people making them, which told me the average number of donations made per person. If that article was right, surely the average lady would donate more frequently than the average man.

No. As a group, the women who have sponsored me have done so an average of 2.15 times, while the guys have averaged 2.53 donations per person.

That did close the gap a bit, but the men have still made 20 percent more donations per person than the women.

Nothing I’ve described so far validates the article’s claims. In fact (and to my surprise), it’s actually the opposite; if we go by number of donations, the men have been 20 to 50 percent more forthcoming in support of my PMC ride than the ladies.

Surely that can’t be right, tho. Let’s look further…

So far I’ve only focused on how many donations people made. Remember that the article also claimed that women give significantly more (dollar-wise) to charity than men, sometimes twice as much. Okay, let’s start looking at my numbers in terms of dollars and (perhaps) sense.

chart

Chart number four shows how much money I have received from each group. Note that I have explicitly excluded all funds received from anyone’s employer matching gift programs; this is purely individual donations.

Again, the boys have the edge, contributing nearly $32,000, while the women account for only $16,000.

Yes, those numbers are correct. While the study claims that women often donate twice as much to charity as men, over the past decade they’ve only given half as much as the men gave to my Pan-Mass Challenge ride.

In this case, the article’s assessment that “women are the conduit for change on the planet” must be reversed, because my male friends have given twice as much as women in the effort to stop cancer.

chart

Again, since there are more men in my sample than women, we have to correct for that. This chart shows what happens when we look at those numbers on a per capita basis.

As you can see, each woman who has sponsored me has given, on average, $155. That’s not per donation; that’s each person’s sum total of all their donations since 2001. At the same time, each man has given, on average, $237.

So extrapolating all that out, over ten years the average male sponsor has given me $80 more than the average female sponsor. It’s not twice as much as his female counterpart gave, but it’s still over 50 percent more.

chart

Finally, let’s forget the ten-year tally and boil it down to one final number. Just how big is the average donation? Girls versus boys!

Sorry, girls. The trend still holds true.

The average donation I receive from a woman is $72.25, while the average donation from a man… $93.65.

On average, every donation I get from a man is 20 dollars more than what I would get from a woman. In the final tally, men have given me 30 percent larger donations than women.

Of course, those are just averages, and there are tons of people of both genders who give much more or much less. The point isn’t to make anyone feel self-conscious about how much they give. I’m not challenging anyone or any group of people to increase their giving. I’m just describing how things have gone down, because I was curious and maybe you are, too.

I’d actually also be interested to hear what others’ fundraising stats are like. More is always better when it comes to data!

To summarize all that: the analysis of my Pan-Mass Challenge fundraising shows that I have 30 percent more male sponsors. As a group they have made 50 percent more donations, and they average 20 percent more donations per person than women. Men have given twice as much total money as women, 50 percent more money per person, and their average donation size is 30 percent larger than those given by women. It’s a surprising result, made doubly so by how consistently the results reinforce one another.

All this is starkly contradicts the conclusions in the news article I first mentioned.

Even if it doesn’t jibe with my firsthand experience, it’s still possible that the study behind that article was done with scientific rigor and its claims are valid.

On the other hand, the news article was written by a woman reporter, quoting the woman director of a woman’s philanthropy institute that, together with a women’s advocacy organization (Fenton), conducted a gender-based study whose conclusion (unsurprisingly) made women look better than men and depicted women as “the conduit of change on the planet”. Doesn’t sound like a recipe for objectivity to me.

That degree of built-in gender bias in the underlying study’s genesis, sponsorship, execution, conclusions, and reporting really bring its validity and its conclusions into question.

But who knows? Maybe women do give more money to charity more often than men. But it won’t be proven by this study conducted by the Women’s Philanthropy Institute.

a ligand

After seven years, Grid.org has shut down.

So, what’s that? Grid.org is like SETI@home, one of those “grid computing” projects that uses the spare cycles when your computer is idle to perform massive research projects. If you’ve seen any of my machines lately, it’s the screen saver that looks like it’s doing some sort of chemistry with molecules and stuff.

Unlike SETI, which grinds through telescope data, most of Grid.org’s projects have focused on human health, including an Oxford-based study of how various sets of molecules called ligands interact with key protein molecules in the development of cancer.

I’ve run data for the cancer research project on multiple machines for the past two and a half years, analyzing 4500 proteins and around a million ligands since 2004. In that time, I’ve donated five and a quarter years worth of CPU-hours and accumulated over a million “points”. I climbed to third on the “Where’s George” team of users in terms of CPU time, points, and results returned.

I’ve returned 1500 results from my ThinkPad at home, 1150 from my machine at my former job, 875 from my old personal Vaio, 550 more from my current work machine, 300 from a loaner machine from a former client’s client, and a few hundred from various other machines.

The good news is that grid computing is more widespread than ever before, and there’s no lack of meaningful philanthropic projects an individual can contribute to. Since cancer remains my biggest cause, I will probably move on to IBM’s World Community Grid’s Help Defeat Cancer project. One of several places to look for information about grid computing in general is EnterTheGrid.

Frequent topics