Category Archives: News

SOFII – HAPPY TO SHARE THE LIES

The Showcase of Fundraising Innovation and Inspiration (or SOFII for short) make the claim, “We are here to help you be the best fundrais­er you can be, by shar­ing the inno­va­tion and inspi­ra­tion that dri­ves and invig­o­rates our sector.”

It’s a laudable aim. Unfortunately, they do not let the truth get in the way of a good story.

In August 2023 Jim Cowan, the man who actually created the Race for Life, was made aware of an article on the SOFII website which featured Paul de Gregorio (the founder of Rally) giving a talk at SOFII’s ‘I Wish I’d Thought of That’ conference.

The idea de Gregorio wished he had thought of was the Race for Life. However, the background and history of the event he then presented was completely wrong. Given Cancer Research UK’s lies and various different tales they have told about the Race for Life’s history, not knowing the truth was not de Gregorio’s fault. How was he to know that he was simply relaying one version of the numerous fictions CRUK have shared over the years? And we should make clear, de Gregorio is not the one in the wrong here. Like many others, he simply believed a lie also believed by many others, one which CRUK’s leadership know not to be true but refuse to correct.

The version de Gregorio (and SOFII) shared was the one where the Race for Life was a copy of an American event brought to the UK by Imperial Cancer Research UK (CRUK’s previous name) employee Lisa Holland. Along with Jill MacRae and Jane Arnell, Holland is one of a trio of former ICRF employees whose names keep cropping up from that time when the original theft of the idea took place, claiming to have either created it or to have been the inspiration behind it. None have chosen to correct the record, instead happy to accept credit undeserved.

Having been made aware of what he thought was an honest error on SOFII’s part, Jim contacted them on 7th August 2023, making the reasonable request that the page be corrected. On 10th August he also posted a comment on the article expressing his disappointment and providing links to both the Wikipedia page on the event and to our own Race 4 Truth website.

On 14th August SOFII’s Tony Banks promised to look into the matter. Having not heard further, on 31st August Jim emailed a copy of Runner’s World’s ‘top 30 game changers’ article in which he was rightly credited with the Race for Life’s creation. 

By 14th September Jim had yet to receive the courtesy of a reply so he followed up seeking both a response and querying why his comment on the article on SOFII’s website had been blocked from display? This email invoked a reply from Banks in which he repeated the usual lines CRUK cite when denying Jim’s involvement, as per usual without offering any evidence to counter Jim’s claim.

On 18th September Jim replied, this time providing the full and true background and history of the Race for Life including links to evidence supporting his claim, evidence CRUK has never been able to counter. Jim again requested that the page be amended to reflect the facts, the truth.

By 3rd October Jim had not received a reply so again he emailed Banks only to receive an auto-reply that Banks had now left SOFII and giving Carolina Herrera as the person to contact in his place. Jim therefore emailed Herrera in order to chase the matter up and to seek a response.

On 18th October Jim was still awaiting the courtesy of a reply and so emailed Herrera again, also copying in her SOFII colleague Joanna Culling.

No reply was received and the incorrect story and video remain on SOFII’s website.

A screen grab of the comment Jim Cowan posted on the SOFII article on 10th August. At the time of publishing this article, SOFII had still not approved it for sharing.

Jim has not chased SOFII again. Having given them more than ample time and opportunity to respond he has now shared the information with Race 4 Truth.

It has become abundantly clear that SOFII have no interest in reporting facts and no interest in the truth or the accuracy of articles shared on their pages. Indeed, by leaving de Gregorio’s misinformed talk (along with supporting but incorrect details of the Race for Life) SOFII are effectively endorsing the stealing of ideas on their website.

How much credibility does this give to this ‘showcase’ of fundraising and ‘innovation’? What does it say of SOFII’s raison d’être, “we are here to help you be the best fundrais­er you can be, by shar­ing the inno­va­tion and inspi­ra­tion that dri­ves and invig­o­rates our sector” when they know that at least some of what they share is fiction?

How much credibility does this mean SOFII have? They are not interested in facts, in truth. They block comments on their site which seek to correct falsehoods, they don’t reply to emails raising legitimate questions, and they ignore evidence instead believing unsubstantiated CRUK lies.

The concept behind SOFII is a good one, it should be a driver for the sharing of best practice and for genuine innovation. Unfortunately, by sharing one of CRUK’s numerous fake versions of the Race for Life story the motivation behind the organisation and even the truth in their other content must be questioned where no supporting evidence is also presented. Especially when they have been presented with the truth along with supporting evidence of that truth by the man who actually did create the Race for Life, Jim Cowan.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK is lagging behind.

RACE 4 TRUTH VISIT CANCER RESEARCH UK HQ

On Friday (22nd September), a small group of Race 4 Truth supporters visited Cancer Research UK’s HQ (CRUK) and spent a couple of hours giving flyers to anyone going into or coming out of the building.

Plenty of flyers were handed out, the police passed by and wished the team well, and even an early Autumn shower could not damp spirits.

It is time for CRUK to tell the truth about the creation of the Race for Life and finally recognise Jim Cowan for his incredible creation.

Look out for more flying visits from Race 4 Truth next year when we will target CRUK offices, shops and events.

CRUK by name, crooks by nature.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK are lagging behind.

WILL NEW CANCER RESEARCH UK CHAIRMAN USHER IN A NEW ERA OF HONESTY?

At the end of this month, Sir Leszek Borysiewicz’s seven year tenure as Chairman of Cancer Research UK (CRUK) will come to an end. The new Chairman, Lord Simon Stevens, will assume the role in October.

Under Leszek Borysiewicz’s stewardship Cancer Research UK maintained a policy of relating fictional accounts of who created the Race for Life before changing to one of acknowledging no one, likely in an attempt to avoid admitting the long history of lies in place of recognising the man who actually did create the event.

That history has been well documented on these pages, a history of lies that has offered zero evidence to support it and is countered by both documentary evidence and witness accounts supporting the fact that Jim Cowan created the Race for Life inspired by his father’s cancer diagnosis.

Also under Borysiewicz’s chairmanship, hypocrisy has been rife. Despite refusing to recognise Jim Cowan’s amazing and ground breaking creation (which has raised over £1 billion for CRUK), he was happy to accept a knighthood in recognition of his own achievements. Also during his time as Chairman the former Chief Executive (Harpal Kumar) displayed similar hypocrisy when accepting a knighthood while current CEO (Michelle Mitchell), already an OBE when assuming the role, continued the hypocrisy by refusing to recognise Jim.

We can only hope that a new Chairman will usher in a new era of honesty, one where integrity matters.

Simon Stevens has already accepted a Peerage in recognition of his numerous achievements. Will he choose to recognise Jim Cowan, or continue the hypocrisy and dishonesty apparently institutionalised at CRUK?

Only time will tell.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK are lagging behind.

RUNNER’S WORLD MAGAZINE RECOGNISE JIM COWAN AS THE CREATOR OF THE RACE FOR LIFE

Runner’s World magazine recently celebrated it’s 30th anniversary in the UK and in its 30th Anniversary issue ran a feature on ‘Running Game Changers 1993-2023.’

The article was introduced with the words; “Our running community has gone through some pretty seismic changes in the three decades since Runner’s World arrived in it. Here, we salute 30 key figures who have been instrumental in changing the game.”

And, at number 2 on the list, in amongst famous names such as Jessica Ennis-Hill, Paula Radcliffe, and Usain Bolt, Runner’s World listed ‘Jim Cowan, Creator of Race for Life.’

The piece described how, inspired by his own father’s battle with cancer, Jim’s vision changed the running landscape in the UK by opening up the way for the many running charity fundraising events now a feature on the calendar. Along the way it also became Cancer Research UK’s biggest fundraiser securing over £1Billion for the organisation over the thirty years.

While Cancer Research UK continue to deny the fact that Jim created the event, Runner’s World knows the facts. Indeed, before Jim even launched the event, he was talking to Runner’s World about it and, through their then Women’s Running Editor Alison Fletcher, they came onboard as one of the Race for Life’s very first official partners.

While Cancer Research UK clearly lack the moral compass to correct the record and to recognise Jim Cowan as the creator of the Race for Life and that the event is his father’s legacy, the truth is gradually being recognised by more and more people and organisations.

Ask Google, “who created the Race for Life?” The search engine will tell you it was Jim Cowan.

Wikipedia corrected their entry when provided with evidence as to who created the event and now recognise Jim Cowan as that person, inconveniently for Cancer Research UK, also providing a link to a letter from Jill MacRae on Imperial Cancer Research Fund letterhead (CRUK’s former name) clearly stating the fact. MacRae was later exposed as someone who had laid false claim to being the event’s creator after cutting all ties to Jim Cowan.

And now, one of the world’s most prestigious running publications has recognised Jim for his amazing creation, a magazine that would know because they supported Jim when launching the event in 1994.

Cancer Research UK continue to back themselves into a corner and deny what the evidence supports and what is patently clear to a growing number of others; Jim Cowan created the Race for Life.

When will CRUK and its leadership under CEO Michelle Mitchell, rediscover some integrity, some honesty, and admit they got it wrong. By now, they must know the truth making their continued denial little short of a lie. A lie they happily spin to any and all who will listen.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK is lagging behind.

CANCER RESEARCH UK’S BROKEN ‘FUNDRAISING PROMISE’

On page 62 of Cancer Research UK’s most recent Annual Report is their ‘fundraising promise’. One part of that ‘promise’ is, “to be transparent about where your money goes.”

Except, they aren’t. Worse, they know they aren’t. Which means, they know they had no intention of keeping that promise when they made it. And there is a word for that, it is called a lie.

As an example, on Cancer Research UK’s own website, there is no reference as to where the entry fee for the Race for Life goes. We know already that it does not go to research but CRUK won’t tell you that.

On the Race for Life’s ‘About Our Events’ page, at the bottom there is a link to ‘Where Your Money Goes.’ Only, the page does not tell you where your money goes. It tells you what various amounts of money can buy or support but not where your entry fee goes.

Is that being ‘transparent about where your money goes?’

Rather than be honest and state what percentage of your entry fee funds any research (i.e. be transparent about it), they choose not to mention it at all.

Rather than be honest and state what percentage of any money you spend on merchandise funds any research (i.e. be transparent about it), they choose not to mention it at all.

And, rather than be honest and tell you what percentage of money raised through sponsorship funds any research (i.e. be transparent about it), they choose not to mention it at all.

Is that being ‘transparent about where your money goes?’

The truth is that not a penny from your entry fee funds any research, not a penny from merchandise sales funds any research and, despite being pushed, they won’t say what percentage of money raised through sponsorship funds research.

And what of their Race for Life television commercial? Is that ‘transparent about where your money goes?’

Of course not.

There is no mention of where it goes, only the lie by omission and the oft used (but deliberately misleading) claim; ‘sign up today for your local Race for Life event and together we will beat cancer.’ 

It is a topic we have visited, and revisited, over the years and yet Cancer Research UK show no signs of being honest about where this money does (or, more accurately, does not) go. To use their own term, they show no signs of being ‘transparent’ about where your money goes, despite brazenly promising to do so in their Annual Report.

The only possible conclusion to be drawn is that they are being deliberately dishonest, promising to do something with absolutely no intention of doing it. That fundraising promise is nothing other than a broken promise, a promise the knew they would break as they were making it.

It is just another Cancer Research UK lie in a long history of lies, deceptions, hypocrisy, fraud, and generally poor ethics. And, of course, of broken promises.

See also:
Race For Life Tweet Confirms That None Of The Entry Fee Goes To Funding Research Into Cancer
Race For Life’s Triple Deception Misleading Supporters

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK are lagging behind.

RUNNERS NEED – JUST ANOTHER BIG BUSINESS WITH NO INTEGRITY

Imagine you are a specialist running company and you get the opportunity to become a corporate partner with one of the largest running events in the country.

You’d be a fool to turn that opportunity down, wouldn’t you?

Then, imagine that after signing up you are warned that your new partner is not who they appear to be, not what they claim. You are warned of serious ethical and honesty issues, that the organisation behind the event lacks integrity.

What would you do then?

Runners Need wrote back to the person who had warned them stating that they carefully consider who they associate their brand with, especially when it comes to partnerships. They undertook to review the information they had been given and take any action they felt appropriate to ensure their business, “remains aligned to its core values.”

Only they didn’t. It was lip service. No meaningful review took place. 

How do we know this? Because the individual writing to them was Race for Life creator Jim Cowan, and he had advised them that he had evidence to support everything he said about Cancer Research UK should they wish to see it.

But they didn’t ask to see any of it. Their ‘review’ did not include looking at evidence. Seriously?

What does that tell you about those ‘core values’ they claimed to be so keen to remain aligned with?

And, next time you want fair, impartial advice on a pair of running shoes or other kit, what does it tell you about any advice you might receive from Runners Need?

Are they selling you the right pair of shoes for you and your particular running style? Or are they only claiming to do that, while actually selling you the pair which serves their own self-interest most?

Based on their opting to continue their partnership with the Race for Life, based on their deliberately ignoring evidence offered as part of their ‘review’, which do you believe?

Runners Need’s deliberate ignoring of evidence in pursuit of corporate greed tells everything about the ‘core values’ to which they referred. Core values devoid of morals, of honesty, of integrity. Core vales based only in serving self.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK and Runners Need are lagging behind.

CANCER RESEARCH UK CEO CELEBRATES ‘STORY TELLING’

No, it is probably not what she meant, but when Cancer Research UK CEO Michelle Mitchell excitedly tweeted on 19th April (see below) that she was on her way to a day of story telling, we couldn’t help thinking how apt it was.

Cancer Research UK and Michelle Mitchell are not shy when it comes to story telling, making claims and other reports across their numerous social media profiles. But, why isn’t anyone questioning how much of what they say is true? After all, an organisation which is quite happy to consistently lie about one thing is highly unlikely to be honest with you about everything else. 

And this shouldn’t be news to anyone. They have been telling stories (i.e. lying) to you for over a quarter of a century, both in their current format and in their previous incarnation as the Imperial Cancer Research Fund. 

Cancer Research UK, its CEO Michelle Mitchell, and many others within the organisation (including its Trustees), are fully aware of that lie, fully aware of the stories they have made up to cover for the lie. They are fully aware that at least one key part of the charity’s history is, literally, made up. And they have told many a story over the last 28 years in order to cover up what they know to be a lie. And that must cast doubt on any other claims they make, tales they tell. For where there is one big lie, there are likely to be others.

Cancer Research UK, and its predecessor the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, have rewritten the history, in other words retold the story, of the Race For Life to exclude Jim Cowan, the person who actually created it, and then spent the next 28 years spreading different fictional versions, story telling about the event’s creation. To be blunt, they have lied. Not once, but repeatedly.

We must therefore pose the question; how can anyone know for sure that they haven’t rewritten other parts of their story, made up other tales they tell? After all, they do like telling stories, Mitchell’s tweet confirms this.

Mitchell might claim that she knows nothing of this rewriting of history, although as CEO she should avail herself of the facts. And, of course, she has had that opportunity but declined it. 

In the past the very weak defence was that they had no documentation from the event’s creation. 

But that doesn’t hold water. Firstly, without documentation, without evidence, what are the numerous fictional versions they have relayed over the years based on? Secondly, because we have offered (on more than one occasion) to sit down and share documents and witness contacts with Mitchell. Unfortunately, she was not interested. She prefers telling stories to seeing and hearing evidence that clearly proves Jim Cowan created the Race For Life and that Cancer Research UK have peddled nothing more than a series of lies (sorry, stories) over the intervening years.

In short, they know they are not telling the truth but prefer not to correct the lies; they prefer fiction to truth, they prefer story telling. Otherwise, why not sue us? Why not sue Jim Cowan? The answer is simple; you cannot sue someone for telling the truth. And they know that truth would be crystal clear in a court. The evidence supports it.

How can they then talk about Cancer Research UK’s history when, clearly, they don’t even care whether parts of it are even accurate? Worse, they know it is a lie but look the other way, pretend not to know, tell stories. And if one part of the story is told while known to be false, what else among their posts, press releases, claims, and other tales require (politely) closer examination?

Cancer Research UK and its CEO Michelle Mitchell have declined the opportunity to see documentation and to speak to witnesses who can confirm the correct story of the creation of the Race for Life.

They prefer knowingly to tell stories, a series of made up tales which ignore any facts which do not fit their near three decade history of lying. They even claim to have held an inquiry into the origins of the Race for Life but, for some strange reason, don’t want to make it public, to open it to scrutiny. It’s just another story they tell.

Surely, therefore, as well as the truth of any story CRUK tell us, another big question that has implications for the organisation’s future, is that of whether it can be trusted? 

With a track record of rewriting history, lies, hypocrisy, turning a blind eye to fraud, low integrity, poor ethics, and absent morals (all evidenced), we certainly would not trust them. But they could very quickly make a start on repairing the damage by recognising Jim Cowan, putting the record straight on their employee fraud, and acknowledging the many wrongs done in the last quarter of a century. It would be a vast improvement on the many stories they have told.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK are lagging behind.

NOTE: We should add that we also know that the Race for Life’s creator, Jim Cowan, has offered to sit down with Mitchell and her predecessor as CEO (Harpal Kumar) to share documents, correspondence and witness contacts on more than one occasion. Both Mitchell and Kumar declined or ignored those numerous offers. It appears that accuracy, honesty, and truth; and with them trust, are not high up Cancer Research UK’s list of priorities. They prefer to stick to story telling.

Mitchell’s 19th April Tweet

SLIMMING WORLD’S INTEGRITY BROUGHT INTO QUESTION

Slimming World claim their business is founded upon principles of trust, honesty and integrity. However, their sponsorship of the Race for Life and reaction after being advised of Cancer Research UK’s treatment of that event’s creator, must bring their claim into doubt.

Cancer Research UK have announced that Slimming World are to join the sponsors of the Race for Life. 

On 1st February, upon hearing this news, Jim Cowan (the Race for Life’s creator) wrote to the Board and the Majority Shareholder* of Slimming World in order to raise their awareness of Cancer Research UK’s history of lack of honesty, poor integrity, low morals and complete hypocrisy in the way they have presented the event’s history and in how they have refused to even discuss the matter.

On 8th February, John Pusey, Slimming World’s Head of Corporate Responsibility replied. In that reply Mr Pusey recognised that Jim has “strong opinions” but felt it would be “inappropriate for us to make any comment… relating to those allegations.”

He went on to state that Slimming World “is founded upon principles of trust, honesty and integrity” before adding, “we take care to ensure that all our business relationships are with responsible and reputable organisations.”

We would hope that someone tasked with the role of “Head of Corporate Responsibility” would understand that there is a difference between an opinion and a fact. The difference is, of course, that a fact can be supported by evidence. Given that Slimming World were offered evidence by Jim in his letter, evidence including witnesses and documentation, we have to assume that the ignoring of the evidence, and with it the facts, was a deliberate choice by Slimming World, and the use of the word ‘opinion’ one aimed at falsely creating deniability.

Deliberate ignorance of evidence, of facts, to suit its own ends and cover for a flawed position is something no organisation with honesty and integrity would choose to do. Indeed, once aware of these issues, turning a blind eye and ignoring evidence, in this instance in order to protect personal gain, inarguably displays a lack of honesty, a lack of integrity. 

Whether you should trust the integrity of such an organisation is a personal choice. We know that we wouldn’t.

This is the path Slimming World has chosen. Ignore the evidence, pretend facts are just personal opinion, and continue a partnership with an organisation who have repeatedly demonstrated an absence of both honesty and integrity as well as covering up employee fraud and numerous counts of hypocrisy.

Slimming World might claim to have been founded upon principles of trust, honesty and integrity, however the evidence from this exchange of correspondence would suggest that those founding principles no longer apply.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK and Slimming World are lagging behind.

EVENT SPONSORSHIP CASTS DOUBT ON STANDARD LIFE’S ETHICS

Standard Life’s support for the Race for Life bring the company’s ethics and morals into doubt while bringing into question their stance on fraud. 

In October last year, Cancer Research UK announced that financial services giant Standard Life would be joining the Race for Life as the events new headline partner.

Given the importance of trust and integrity in financial services, and the need to be vigilant to fraud, in December Race for Life creator Jim Cowan wrote to Andy Curran, Standard Life’s Chief Executive Officer, in order to make him aware of the many issues Cancer Research UK has with trust and integrity, and highlighting the blind eye to employee fraud they continue to show.

Over six weeks later, Jim is still awaiting a reply.

Standard Life claim to be serious about fraud. In 2022 they won they were the ‘Fight Against Fraud’ winner in the UK Customer Service Excellence Awards (aka the Insurance CX Awards). And yet, less than a year later, they are partnering with Cancer Research UK, turning a blind eye to that organisation’s history.

Some might suggest this demonstrates double standards. Others that it displays a lack of integrity. It definitely displays gross hypocrisy.

For over a quarter of a century, Cancer Research UK has been trying to write Jim Cowan from the event’s history. They have told numerous lies in an attempt to rewrite that history and have consistently ignored opportunities to look at evidence and talk to witnesses who support Jim’s truth while offering absolutely no evidence to the contrary. On top of that, they have turned a blind eye to the fraud of former employee Jill MacRae who stole the idea from Jim before later claiming the idea to be her own, building a successful career in the charity sector on the back of that fraud.

We don’t doubt that, at the time of agreeing to support the Race for Life, Standard Life were unaware of any of the above. Cancer Research UK will certainly not have been honest with them.

However, now that they have been made aware, now that they have been offered the opportunity to see the evidence and talk to witnesses, they can no longer claim to be unaware.

Their silence in response to Jim’s letter does not paint them in a very good light. We can only hope that  a reply will, eventually, be forthcoming and that Standard Life will do the right thing by either using their position as an event sponsor to put pressure on Cancer Research UK to put right their 29 years of lies, or to withdraw their support for the event on ethical and moral grounds.

For, if a financial services company is happy to look the other way on such matters, what does that say about how much they should be trusted with your savings and investments?

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK and Standard Life are lagging behind.

IF CANCER RESEARCH UK ARE HAPPY TO TELL YOU ONE LIE, WHAT ELSE ARE THEY LYING TO YOU ABOUT?

Cancer Research UK are not shy when it comes to posting lots of stories, claims and other reports across their numerous social media profiles. But, why isn’t anyone questioning how much of what they say is true? After all, an organisation which is quite happy to consistently lie about one thing is highly unlikely to be honest with you about everything else.

And this shouldn’t be news to anyone. They have been lying to you for over a quarter of a century, both in their current format and in their previous incarnation as the Imperial Cancer Research Fund. 

Cancer Research UK, its CEO Michelle Mitchell, and many others within the organisation (including its Trustees), are fully aware of that lie. Thy are fully aware that at least one key part of the charity’s history is, literally, made up. And that must cast doubt on any other claims they make, tales they tell. For where there is one big lie, there are likely to be others.

Cancer Research UK, and its predecessor the Imperial Cancer Research Fund, have rewritten the history of the Race For Life to exclude Jim Cowan, the person who actually created it, and then spent the next 27 years spreading different fictional versions (i.e. lies). 

We must therefore pose the question; how can anyone know for sure that they haven’t rewritten other parts of their story, made up other tales they tell?

Mitchell might claim that she knows nothing of this rewriting of history, although as CEO she should avail herself of the facts. And, of course, she has had that opportunity but declined it. 

In the past the very weak defence was that they had no documentation from the event’s creation. 

But that doesn’t hold water. Firstly because of the numerous fictional versions they have relayed over the years. On what were they based if CRUK has no documentation on which to base them? Secondly, because we have offered (on more than one occasion) to sit down and share documents and witness contacts with Mitchell but she was not interested. Evidence that clearly proves Jim Cowan created the Race For Life and that Cancer Research UK have peddled nothing more than a series of lies over the intervening years.

In short, they know they are not telling the truth but prefer not to correct the lies; they prefer fiction to truth. 

How can they then talk about Cancer Research UK’s history when, clearly, they don’t even care whether parts of it are even accurate? Worse, they know it is a lie but look the other way, pretend not to know. And if one part of the story is told while known to be false, what else among their posts, press releases, claims, and other tales require (politely) closer examination?

Cancer Research UK and its CEO Michelle Mitchell have declined the opportunity to see documentation and to speak to witnesses who can confirm the correct story of the creation of the Race for Life.

They prefer a heads in the sand approach, an ignore any facts we don’t like mentality.  

Surely, therefore, as well as the truth of anything CRUK tell us, another big question that has implications for the organisation’s future, is that of whether it can be trusted? 

With a track record of rewriting history, lies, hypocrisy, turning a blind eye to fraud, low integrity, poor ethics, and absent morals (all evidenced), we certainly would not trust them. But they could very quickly make a start on repairing the damage by recognising Jim Cowan, putting the record straight on their employee fraud, and acknowledging the many wrongs done in the last quarter of a century.

In the Race 4 Truth, Cancer Research UK are lagging behind.

NOTE: We should add that we also know that the Race for Life’s creator, Jim Cowan, has offered to sit down with Mitchell, her predecessor (Harpal Kumar) and CRUK’s Chairman (Leszek Borysiewicz) to share documents, correspondence and witness contacts on more than one occasion. All three declined those offers too. It appears that accuracy, honesty, and truth; and with them trust, are not high up Cancer Research UK’s list of priorities.