SCRAP HEALTH CARE REFORM IF IT ADDS TO DEFICIT,

[GaryC 7]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

By Jeremy Laurance, Health Editor

Wednesday, 10 September 2008

A cancer patient with only months to live will learn today whether he can have the costly drug that specialists say could extend his life by up to three years.

Colin Ross, 55, has challenged his local primary care trust's refusal to fund his treatment with up to four courses of Revlimid, which costs £5,000 per course but has yet to be assessed by the medicines watchdog, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

Mr Ross, of Horsham, West Sussex, was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a cancer of the blood cells, in May 2004. Doctors at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London say Revlimid is his last chance after side-effects forced him to give up other life-prolonging drugs.

Today, the High Court will announce the findings of its judicial review of the refusal of funding by West Sussex Primary Care Trust. Mr Ross's case against the trust, which twice rejected his request for Revlimid, is backed by Professor Karol Sikora, a cancer specialist who was an expert witness.

Professor Sikora said: "To me this is an ideal case. If you don't say Mr Ross's case is exceptional, then nothing would be." Patients in neighbouring East Sussex had been prescribed the drug on the NHS, he added.

Mr Ross's action is the latest to highlight pressures on the NHS cancer drugs budget. Professor Sikora claimed the 10 treatments already licensed and 40 in the pipeline could see the cost of cancer care soar to £50bn by 2012, consuming half the NHS budget and causing "meltdown".

However, senior figures in the NHS dismissed his estimates as "nonsense" and "hyperbole", pointing out that the drugs extended patients' lives by months, not years, so the extra costs did not last long.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/he...rug-924511.html

[ready4ONE 5,400]

I think we have been treated to these 'horror stories' for years:

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Reagan was defending twenty to thirty years ago the problems with our current system which was a gift to us all from this great Former President:

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Bush's spending was extreme..... Obama's spending is even worse. How are we going to pay for this?

[luckytxn 2,265]

Bush's spending was extreme..... Obama's spending is even worse. How are we going to pay for this?

Taxes and a lot of them.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

[rebeccajo 14]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

Psssst.........the dude got his Revlamid.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

Psssst.........the dude got his Revlamid.

No facts, please. They are devastating to the argument of those defending the unbearable status quo.

[GaryC 7]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

Psssst.........the dude got his Revlamid.

After being put through the ringer and at the last minute. If you think dealing with the insurance company is bad just think trying to deal with the government. A little hint, think USCIS. Can you imagine the same run around and inefficiency for your health care?

[GaryC 7]

I honestly did some research on the NHS over the last few days. A lot of interesting news articles out there. I know it has been debunked over there but I was amused by the term "third largest employer in the world" accusation. It seems that the NHS has over 1.8 million employees to run it. That system has become huge and monolithic. That would be the future of any system we come up with. How could they be efficient with that kind of juggernaut running it?

[rebeccajo 14]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

Psssst.........the dude got his Revlamid.

After being put through the ringer and at the last minute. If you think dealing with the insurance company is bad just think trying to deal with the government. A little hint, think USCIS. Can you imagine the same run around and inefficiency for your health care?

He was after an unapproved drug. And he wanted them to pay for it. Do you know an insurance company that would do that?

[GaryC 7]

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

Psssst.........the dude got his Revlamid.

After being put through the ringer and at the last minute. If you think dealing with the insurance company is bad just think trying to deal with the government. A little hint, think USCIS. Can you imagine the same run around and inefficiency for your health care?

He was after an unapproved drug. And he wanted them to pay for it. Do you know an insurance company that would do that?

That is the point, that drug is approved here. The NHS decided that the cost wasn't worth his life. I don't want the government making that decision for my care.

[rebeccajo 14]

I honestly did some research on the NHS over the last few days. A lot of interesting news articles out there. I know it has been debunked over there but I was amused by the term "third largest employer in the world" accusation. It seems that the NHS has over 1.8 million employees to run it. That system has become huge and monolithic. That would be the future of any system we come up with. How could they be efficient with that kind of juggernaut running it?

Your best source for 'research' on the NHS are persons who have lived with it.

I've got one in my household.

It would be interesting to know the total number of persons employed in healthcare in the US. I'm sure the figure would be staggering.

Isn't this the sort of thing the other side complains about insurance companies about? It looks like we would be trading dealing with insurance companies for government bureaucrats.

Judgement day for cancer patient denied costly drug

Well, if NHS would pull the same ####### on the British population that the private insurance industry pulls on Americans - more than doubling contributions every decade or so - this debate wouldn't be had. The NHS would have superior funding. The private insurance industry rips Americans off year after year and still denies drugs (I've been denied drugs in the past right here in the US by my private insurance company), treatments and is on record of rescinding coverage whenever possible when the insured actually need the insurance they paid tons of money for. So, despite paying double or more what any other person in the developed world pays for health care, we still get shafted all the same. I'd rather pay less for getting shafted or pay the same and not get shafted anymore. The private insurance industry isn't the answer. They proved themselves incapable of offering a good value.

Psssst.........the dude got his Revlamid.

After being put through the ringer and at the last minute. If you think dealing with the insurance company is bad just think trying to deal with the government. A little hint, think USCIS. Can you imagine the same run around and inefficiency for your health care?

He was after an unapproved drug. And he wanted them to pay for it. Do you know an insurance company that would do that?

That is the point, that drug is approved here. The NHS decided that the cost wasn't worth his life. I don't want the government making that decision for my care.

He got the medicine, Gary.

The same kind of stories exist in legion about patients in the US system. Don't jump on just one story as a resounding example of care in the UK.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I honestly did some research on the NHS over the last few days. A lot of interesting news articles out there. I know it has been debunked over there but I was amused by the term "third largest employer in the world" accusation. It seems that the NHS has over 1.8 million employees to run it. That system has become huge and monolithic. That would be the future of any system we come up with. How could they be efficient with that kind of juggernaut running it?

The most interesting thing is that the status quo defenders latch onto the shortfalls of the one health care system that a) nobody here actually advocates and that b ) still serves the population in the UK overall better than the overly expense sad excuse for a health care system we continue to let wreck not only the nation's but also our economic health.

[GaryC 7]

I honestly did some research on the NHS over the last few days. A lot of interesting news articles out there. I know it has been debunked over there but I was amused by the term "third largest employer in the world" accusation. It seems that the NHS has over 1.8 million employees to run it. That system has become huge and monolithic. That would be the future of any system we come up with. How could they be efficient with that kind of juggernaut running it?

Your best source for 'research' on the NHS are persons who have lived with it.

I've got one in my household.

It would be interesting to know the total number of persons employed in healthcare in the US. I'm sure the figure would be staggering.

The stories are about people who have NHS. Sure they are extreme horror stories that have analogies here. I think the point I am trying to make is not much will change if it is the government rather than insurance companies. We would just have a new master and I don't trust the government. Once started there is no turning back.