Re: [OT] It's a bit fucked up isn't it?

Champ wrote:

Krusty wrote:

simonk wrote:

Krusty wrote:

<Ann Marie Rogers> "Can I have some drugs to cure my breast cancer
please".

<Government> "No, *** off & die, bitch".

The stuff on the Herceptin campaign website is just laughable -
"well, there are no side effects - Marjorie's been using Herceptin
for 2 years and she feels great"

If it's not got a licence, and there haven't been any successful
clinical trials, then in a very real and scientifically binding
sense, it's not yet fit for purpose, surely?

There have been many successful clinical trials, & it's due to be
licensed in the next few months when the final trials are completed.

If the final trials aren't complete, it's not ready.

Even if it passes the trials stage. NICE still have to the approve the
use of the drug before the PCTs can prescribe.

NICE have the job of ensuring that the public's money is spent as
efficaciously as possible. I Saw a program the other day where leading
oncologists were saying that the treatment is only likely to have a
beneficial
effect on one in twenty patients. That the true cost per patient prevented
from progressing past the early onset stage of the disease by the drug, was
more likely to be in the £400,000 - £600,000 region. Which would seriously
hamper the funding that could be provided for other more effective
lifesaving
treatments for other cancers/illnesses. Apparently the 50% success rate
figure being bandied about at the moment, is a misleading one, being quoted
from
some very skewed research done by the drug companies.

I don't blame the women concerned for trying, but I don't think they should
be
allowed to ride rough shod over the existing processes. Putting other
equally
deserving patient's lives in danger, either.

--
Alex
BMW R1150GS
DIAABTCOD#3 MSWF#4 UKRMFBC#6 Ibw#35 BOB#8
Windy's "little soldier"


.