Re: Told ya so.



JC wrote:
Cancer Patients Lose Shot at Longer Life in U.K. Cuts (Update1)
By David Altaner and Bruce Rule

from Bloomberg.com


Nov. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Jack Rosser's doctor says taking Pfizer Inc.'s
Sutent cancer drug may keep him alive long enough to see his 1-year-
old daughter, Emma, enter primary school. The U.K.'s National Health
Service says that's not worth the expense.

Rosser, 57, was told the cost of Sutent, 3,140 pounds ($4,650) per
treatment for his advanced kidney cancer, was too high for the NHS --
the government agency that funds the nation's health care. The
resident of the town of Kingswood, in southwest England, has appealed
the decision twice, and next month may find out if his second plea is
successful.

``It's immoral,'' Rosser's wife, Jenny, said. ``They are sentencing
him to die.''

The NHS, which provides health care to all Britons and is funded by
tax revenue, is spending about 100 billion pounds this fiscal year, or
more than double what it spent a decade ago, as the cost of treatments
increase and the population ages. The higher costs are forcing the NHS
to choose between buying expensive drugs for terminal patients and
providing more services for a wider number of people.

About 800 of 3,000 cancer patients lose their appeals for regulator-
approved drugs each year because of cost, Canterbury- based charity
Rarer Cancers Forum said. The U.K. is considering whether to make
permanent a preliminary ruling that four medicines, including Sutent,
are too expensive to be part of the government-funded treatment of
advanced kidney cancer.

Same thing happens over here. The only difference is that it is
a private insurance company who decides that they won't pay for
the treatment. And here the insurance company just says "that
isn't covered" instead of "it costs too much".

In both places you have the option to pay for it yourself. In the UK
you can go outside of the National Health Service -- they just won't
pay for it. Here you can have whatever treatment you want -- but
the insurance company doesn't have to pay for it. A woman who ran
for state leg last month paid for her own bone marrow transplant after
her insurance company said it wasn't covered.


--
Optimism, cheerfulness, an embrace of magical thinking
and the avoidance of the painful truth is the formula
for victory at the polls.
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Chiropractor tells a woman with malignant cancer that it can be treated with diet
    ... It's simply a known factor in diseases. ... And how much does conventional cancer treatment cost? ... It would not cost me a single penny were I ... NHS cancer costs are more than 5 billion pounds per year. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: On gaslighting, dogpiling, and name calling
    ... Brett Paul Dunbar wrote: ... That may result in you having testing or treatment which is unnecessary and even counterproductive. ... There are a few specific conditions where routine screening makes sense, breast cancer and cervical cancer for example for most it is not cost effective. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: Prices soar for cancer drugs
    ... Though it is hard to imagine it would cost that much, ... single drug - are causing alarm among patients and insurance companies. ... Breast Cancer Coalition, which is planning a conference focused on drug ... The report does not include drugs given ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Prices soar for cancer drugs
    ... Prices soar for cancer drugs ... The cost of a cancer drug prescription rose nearly 16% last year, ... cancer drugs is now nearly $1,600. ... That price could jump to $100,000 if Avastin ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Gimee,Gimee,Gimee, the continual whine of women!
    ... Cancer: There are life-saving drugs. ... cancer, and Cetuximab, a treatment for head and neck cancers, are being blocked ... quango set up to decide which drugs should be routinely prescribed on the NHS. ...
    (soc.men)