CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 28487
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:41 am
 


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


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20864
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:41 am
 


DISGUSTING.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63486
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:25 am
 


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.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15055
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:37 am
 


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.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20758
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:14 am
 


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?


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63486
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:18 am
 


bootlegga wrote:
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.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 2681
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:19 am
 


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. :).


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Calgary Flames


GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 1659
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:26 am
 


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.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63486
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:29 am
 


stokes wrote:
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. :idea:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33600
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:38 am
 


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.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 28740
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:07 am
 


At 65 years old, everybody should have the obligation to go jump in the volcano. 8)


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
Profile
Posts: 3456
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:08 am
 


How many packs of smokes is that?


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 63486
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:47 am
 


raydan wrote:
At 65 years old, everybody should have the obligation to go jump in the volcano. 8)


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.


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
Profile
Posts: 769
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 12:45 pm
 


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
Quote:
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.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20991
PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 12:54 pm
 


stokes wrote:
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.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  1  2  3  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.