[Newsbot]

Title: $93,000 cancer drug: How much is a life worth?
Category: Health
Posted By: wildrosegirl
Date: 2010-09-27 07:34:48

[Public_Domain]

[BartSimpson]

No, it's the economy at work. The cost to bring a drug to market is some $1.5 billion over seven to ten years and those costs have to be recovered. If you don't want to pay for the costs of drug development then pharmaceutical companies will stop developing new drugs.

[Scape]

Total agreement with bart on that. A lot of these drugs are shots in the dark and costly at that. It just doesn't make sense to put them out there and not expect the consumer to not only understand the risks (there is only so much we can test for) but also expect them to pay for the costs of development if they absolutly must have the very latest in drugs.

[bootlegga]

If it was $93,000 to put cancer into remission, or extend life by even a full year (better yet, several years), I'd agree that it should be paid for.

But four months? I have to say that I'm not sure. The humanitarian in me says price is no object when it comes to saving lives, but when the return is so small, I'm not certain. After all, if insurance starts paying $93,000 to extend someone's life by four months, who else will lose services that that $93,000 could have covered?

[BartSimpson]

bootlegga bootlegga:

If it was $93,000 to put cancer into remission, or extend life by even a full year (better yet, several years), I'd agree that it should be paid for.

But four months? I have to say that I'm not sure. The humanitarian in me says price is no object when it comes to saving lives, but when the return is so small, I'm not certain. After all, if insurance starts paying $93,000 to extend someone's life by four months, who else will lose services that that $93,000 could have covered?

And it's that argument that is used to argue against national health care because, inevitably, expensive medications will be rationed or prohibited. If a private insurance company can cover it, then why not?

But when you're saying that 4 months of life for an 80 year old guy has to be balanced against 930 vaccinations for impoverished kids (something that has to be done in a national plan) then that 80 year old guy can kiss off those four months.

Myself, I am not sure I would want such a treatment even if my insurer paid for it. But that's me.

[CommanderSock]

Will be probably covered by Medicare or Medicaid in the USA. Will be covered by price caps in Canada.

And this is why I support universal healthcare. .

[stokes]

When did quantity of life become more important than quality of life???

I would rather die now than live another few months in pain or drugged up.

I also believe in Darwinism (right or wrong) that we shouldnt be out there trying to cure everything as we are throwing the natural order of life out of balance, humans were never meant to live as long as we do and it is causing more problems than it is solving as we no longer accept the loss of life as part of the cycle of nature.

When my time comes I hope those who make decisions that I can not make the proper choice and let me pass in peace.

[BartSimpson]

stokes stokes:

When did quantity of life become more important than quality of life???

I would rather die now than live another few months in pain or drugged up.

I also believe in Darwinism (right or wrong) that we shouldnt be out there trying to cure everything as we are throwing the natural order of life out of balance, humans were never meant to live as long as we do and it is causing more problems than it is solving as we no longer accept the loss of life as part of the cycle of nature.

When my time comes I hope those who make decisions that I can not make the proper choice and let me pass in peace.

I recall a recent article where the author proposed that you should go to a playground and take a good look because at least some of those kids were going to live 200 to 500 years with new genetic coding drugs that are coming.

[andyt]

As far as I know there is nothing prohibiting private insurance to cover drugs in Canada, since most people don't have drug coverage under medicare anyway. We should have that coverage under medicare, but there should be limits on it. Then let people who really want to, buy the extra coverage. Realize that insurance companies make money because the pay out less than they take in in premiums. And no whining because your taxes are funding the government plan.

[raydan]

At 65 years old, everybody should have the obligation to go jump in the volcano.

[Chumley]

How many packs of smokes is that?

[BartSimpson]

raydan raydan:

At 65 years old, everybody should have the obligation to go jump in the volcano.

One of Obama's apparatchiks in his health care committee said something about an "obligation to die" for older people. Maybe you need to apply for a job with Obama.

[Prof_Chomsky]

Sorry but that 1.5B and 7-10 years figure was pulled straight out of the same place most stats are - thin air.

Same goes for this completely made up rubbish

$1:

One of Obama's apparatchiks in his health care committee said something about an "obligation to die" for older people. Maybe you need to apply for a job with Obama.

With that cleared up, I don't claim to be an ethicist and therefore won't speak on this topic too much. Money and human lives shouldn't be compared.

[Zipperfish]

stokes stokes:

When did quantity of life become more important than quality of life???

Egg-zack-ly. This is what is wrong with the medical professions and the health care debate today. It's all just about keeping you alive for another heartbeat. Things deemed risky to perfect health (these are things we used to call "fun") are now considered highly irresponsible and, once the mommy state comes to full fruition, illegal.