Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 107

Thread: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

  1. #61
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    So your way abolishes the FDA and creates another one. Fine. I'm not arguing whether or not the FDA is beaurcratic. One way or another, drugs need to be safety tested. If you want to "start over," fine. But it won't take long for pharma to have the new guys in their pockets either. Right now, the FDA's the best we've got. They are not death panels. Insurance companies are not death panels. UHC doesn't create them. Get real.

    Tested or not, the drugs should be available for people to use at their discretion. It's no one's business but MINE if I take a drug that might kill me. The difference between a govt entity and a private entity is that the govt entity can forbid access, and the private entity merely informs the consumer. That's a HUGE difference.

    When the FDA refuses to approve, or even bans medication that can save lives, then yes.. they are operating like a death panel. Especially when they do it because the drug is expensive. (and it's expense is in large part due to the FDA themselves)

    From John Stossel's blog:

    Who gets to control what you put into your body? In what sense are you free if you can’t decide what medicines you will take?

    Bruce Tower has prostate cancer. He wanted to take a drug that showed promise against his cancer, but the FDA would not allow it. One bureaucrat told him the government was protecting him from dangerous side effects. Tower’s outraged response was: “Side effects, who cares? Every treatment I’ve had I’ve suffered from side-effects. If I’m terminal it should be my option to endure any side-effects.”

    Of course it should be his option. Why, in our “free” country, do Americans meekly stand aside and let the state limit our choices, even when we are dying ?

  2. #62
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    Tested or not, the drugs should be available for people to use at their discretion. It's no one's business but MINE if I take a drug that might kill me. The difference between a govt entity and a private entity is that the govt entity can forbid access, and the private entity merely informs the consumer. That's a HUGE difference.

    When the FDA refuses to approve, or even bans medication that can save lives, then yes.. they are operating like a death panel. Especially when they do it because the drug is expensive. (and it's expense is in large part due to the FDA themselves)

    From John Stossel's blog:

    Who gets to control what you put into your body? In what sense are you free if you can’t decide what medicines you will take?

    Bruce Tower has prostate cancer. He wanted to take a drug that showed promise against his cancer, but the FDA would not allow it. One bureaucrat told him the government was protecting him from dangerous side effects. Tower’s outraged response was: “Side effects, who cares? Every treatment I’ve had I’ve suffered from side-effects. If I’m terminal it should be my option to endure any side-effects.”

    Of course it should be his option. Why, in our “free” country, do Americans meekly stand aside and let the state limit our choices, even when we are dying ?
    This thread is not about that. This thread is about the FDA saying that a particular drug doesn't provide sufficient benefit for it to be considered standard treatment for breast cancer. You wanna' take it? You can. It's not prohibited. If your doctor wants you to have it, you can have it. Soooo??? If you want to debate the FDA itself, start a new thread. I'd probably be on your side of the argument.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    It's my understanding that the drug's approval was lifted because it didn't live up to the claims of the manufacturers. It increases toxicity in the body, it doesn't extend life all that much, and the opportunity cost of creating it is high. Removing the approval just creates more incentive to create a better version that actually works. If a drug isn't effective then it shouldn't receive public endorsement. I'm not sure why that is so hard to understand.

    Even though the FDA has become corrupt in recent times, I don't think it is totally useless. In fact, I think it's not doing enough. The number of FDA inspections of products per year has dropped sharply in the past decade. It's becoming more slack, which is creating more health risks. Some studies put the annual death rate from prescription drugs at over 100,000, and that's just concerning people who actually follow the directions.

  4. #64
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    It's my understanding that the drug's approval was lifted because it didn't live up to the claims of the manufacturers. It increases toxicity in the body, it doesn't extend life all that much, and the opportunity cost of creating it is high. Removing the approval just creates more incentive to create a better version that actually works. If a drug isn't effective then it shouldn't receive public endorsement. I'm not sure why that is so hard to understand.

    Even though the FDA has become corrupt in recent times, I don't think it is totally useless. In fact, I think it's not doing enough. The number of FDA inspections of products per year has dropped sharply in the past decade. It's becoming more slack, which is creating more health risks. Some studies put the annual death rate from prescription drugs at over 100,000, and that's just concerning people who actually follow the directions.
    I agree with you. They don't do enough. Vitamin supplements are a multi-billion-dollar industry in the U.S. Outrageous claims abound. Supposed diet products -- another scam. While there's a sucker born every minute, making false health claims keeps people from seeking real treatment, making real lifestyle changes and, in worst cases, some of these products can be very harmful.. Or do I really HAVE a ten-year-old cornflake in my colon?????
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    I agree with you. They don't do enough. Vitamin supplements are a multi-billion-dollar industry in the U.S. Outrageous claims abound. Supposed diet products -- another scam. While there's a sucker born every minute, making false health claims keeps people from seeking real treatment, making real lifestyle changes and, in worst cases, some of these products can be very harmful.. Or do I really HAVE a ten-year-old cornflake in my colon?????
    We actually don't agree. People can make false health claims all they want, as long as the product is not harming anyone. And people can use the tort system to take companies to the task for making big claims. What I expect the FDA to do is actually remove drugs from the shelves that are proven to be actively harmful. But "harmful" aspects are often couched in the "side effect" terminology. It's not a side effect, it's an effect. Subtle, but big difference.

  6. #66
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by Orion View Post
    We actually don't agree. People can make false health claims all they want, as long as the product is not harming anyone. And people can use the tort system to take companies to the task for making big claims. What I expect the FDA to do is actually remove drugs from the shelves that are proven to be actively harmful. But "harmful" aspects are often couched in the "side effect" terminology. It's not a side effect, it's an effect. Subtle, but big difference.
    Yeah, then we don't agree. I think the Food & Drug Administration should tackle these products. They do when they step over invisible lines making too outrageous a claim. I'd just like them to move the lines. ;-)
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  7. #67
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    This thread is not about that. This thread is about the FDA saying that a particular drug doesn't provide sufficient benefit for it to be considered standard treatment for breast cancer. You wanna' take it? You can. It's not prohibited. If your doctor wants you to have it, you can have it. Soooo??? If you want to debate the FDA itself, start a new thread. I'd probably be on your side of the argument.
    Sometimes thread topics grow as the thread goes on. This may have started specifically about a particular drug, but IMO, what it's really about is the FDA's long standing history of delaying and/or banning drugs for illegitimate reasons.

  8. #68
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by donc View Post
    "they are, uhhhh, errr, hmmmmmm",.....Insurance companies.
    Uhhhhhh Don, did you see this or jump in without looking?

    He adds: "The FDA is not supposed to consider costs in its decisions, but if the agency rescinds approval, insurers are likely to stop paying for treatment." Doctors are allowed to prescribe treatment for off-label uses, so they may continue to use Avastin to treat breast cancer, even if the FDA revokes the approval. Whether or not insurers would approve payment is a different story, considering that Avastin is a $50,000 plus a year drug.

    FDA Reviews Roche's Drug Avastin for Use Against Breast Cancer - DailyFinance
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  9. #69
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Such an emotional argument, playing to people's fears. They do not decide if your life is worth saving. They decide whether the side effects, dangers, and YES, costs are of real benefit both to a patient and to society.

    Answer me this: We can put someone on full comprehensive life support and keep them "alive" until they dry up and blow away. Does that mean we should do it?
    That would depend on the persons wishes don't you think? Or would you rather some faceless bureaucrat bean counter have control over those types of decisions in your life?
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

  10. #70
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: US breast cancer drug decision 'marks start of death panels'

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    That would depend on the persons wishes don't you think? Or would you rather some faceless bureaucrat bean counter have control over those types of decisions in your life?
    Faceless beaurocrats already have control over those types of decisions. They work for insurance companies.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •