Money, the root of all evil.

Trubrit

My mum used that expression, and this article, from BBC.com just makes me think that she had it right. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-34153136

Sue - Trubrit

NewHere

Unreal

All the drugs on the Cancer Drugs Fund list have been rejected by the NHS as a whole because they do not provide enough benefit for the amount they cost.

Bet those making the decision do not have cancer.  Unreal.

sflgirl

So I guess they have decided

So I guess they have decided to play God and decide how much human life is worth.

i agree with New Here, those that are making this decision aren't suffering from cancer.  I wonder what will change if cancer appears in their wives, daughters, sons, mother or dad.  

 

John23

NewHere said:

Unreal

All the drugs on the Cancer Drugs Fund list have been rejected by the NHS as a whole because they do not provide enough benefit for the amount they cost.

Bet those making the decision do not have cancer.  Unreal.

Somehow…..

For some reason….

I linger on the words:  “they do not provide enough benefit for the amount they cost”.

Why is it always so difficult to acknowledge truth when one is faced with it, when it is regarding cancer?

There once was a quote on the front page of every edition of “Newsday” (the famous newspaper of Long Island, NY), that said:

“Where there is no vision, the people perish”

Spending a lot of money on what doesn’t work only perpetuates the greed of an industry promoting their fear based products.

Don’t be afraid of the truth.

John

 

tanstaafl

it is all about the (stacks of) benjamins

If we had a honest, rational system, they would treat most true stage IIs and IIIs with metronomic UFT-LV, celecoxib, vitamin D3, aspirin and/or targeted cimetidine if biomarked (~50-65%) for 1-2 years along with some nutrients, early on.  It would cost about $50-$60 a month at Walmart with the cheaper generics, and those people would do much better than they do right now.  Without the neuropathies, HFS, massive diarrhea and cytopenia they experience right now.      

Many people are unemployed or underemployed because of the costs of cancer and current chemotherapy.  These are unnecessary and are contrivances.

 

 

annalexandria

Although it's frustrating when you're the patient

I can also understand the other side of the debate.  When I see drugs that cost 20K per dose that improve one's prognosis by a month or two (and there are a shocking number of cancer drugs that fall into this category), I do feel that it's unfair to ask society to pay for that.  Esp when you consider what those last couple of months are like for most of us cancer patients.

If it was a drug that could add even a year of decent quality life, I would feel differently, but those seem to be relatively rare in the world of cancer.

NewHere

Another Article

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/nhs-cuts-to-drugs-fund-mean-thousands-of-cancer-patients-in-england-will-be-denied-lifeextending-treatments-10487245.html

A bit more detail on some aspects, such as Avistan being cut out in some instances.

As annalexandria mentioned there are various aspects to this, with some being particularly harsh if things if are really just a matter of time.  Though one just has to look at this board and the amazing people who fight with remarkable strength.  

Insurance companies do this all the time, I am still going through things why I actually needed to be put under general anesthesia for having a good chunck of my inside removed and they are balking on paying for my port without jumping through so many hoops it is crazy.  The most recent request just brings this response to mind "You have to be $&$*^@^$ kidding me that you need that."

 

 

BillO60

annalexandria said:

Although it's frustrating when you're the patient

I can also understand the other side of the debate.  When I see drugs that cost 20K per dose that improve one's prognosis by a month or two (and there are a shocking number of cancer drugs that fall into this category), I do feel that it's unfair to ask society to pay for that.  Esp when you consider what those last couple of months are like for most of us cancer patients.

If it was a drug that could add even a year of decent quality life, I would feel differently, but those seem to be relatively rare in the world of cancer.

Many valid arguments on both sides

I totally agree with your comment about quality of life.  The unforunate part of the story, and what causes anger and frustration, is that the choice is taken out of the physicians and patients control.

Some patients might choose to try to extend their lives by a month or two for many reasons, regardless of quality of life. Others might not because they are too tired or in too much pain to continue.  It's one of those arguments that the patient rarely wins but I still think it should be up to the patient to choose.

Bill