Prescription charges

qwert_yuiop

I don't think anyone said that. How do you manage spending when funding is finite and costs rise with technology, techniques and expectations? Arrange for everyone to drop dead after a life time of perfect health? Not easy, is it?

(Thought Godwin was something to do with hitler?)

emmett123

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

I don't think anyone said that. How do you manage spending when funding is finite and costs rise with technology, techniques and expectations? Arrange for everyone to drop dead after a life time of perfect health? Not easy, is it?

(Thought Godwin was something to do with hitler?)

post 39 was clear in questioning if extending the life of a person was worth the price of the drugs when it could be spent on other things. Amazing how quickly we descend to deciding who gets to live longer rather than questioning whether the organisation of our society needs changed. And when we start pontificating on whether some cancer victim is worth the cost, we are in the same ballpark as Hitler.

qwert_yuiop

Well all right, but presumably in the unfortunate absence of infinite funds, choices like this must be getting made every day? Even the very existence of a waiting list is effectively rationing of health care.

warmhands.coldheart

emmett123 wrote: »

And of course the thread like Godwins Law dictates, ends with reducing life down a cost benefit anaylsis. The drugs needed to extend your life are too expensive and frankly you just arent worth it. Obviously its the patients fault they got cancer..bum deal, you see thats the most profitable (sorry... costly to the public purse) diease. Now if you had of got the flu, 25p paracetamol from tesco would have sorted you right out. But dont be asking why one is 25p and the other is £10,000s a year...the private sector have thier profits to generate (300 billion $ a year) and we all have to pay them what ever they ask. They are wealth creators after all, just at the cost of reducing our standard of life.

Yes. Unfortunately it does come down to price... It is not the NHS that develops these drugs. It's private companies and so yes they do have the right to charge what they see fit. It can take 10-15 years to get a new drug from beginning to full certification for use... That's a big investment of time and money.....

A lot of modern day drug are, you could argue, keeping people alive who would have never survived before, so could it not be argued that that in itself is messing with nature??

The NHS is not a bottomless pit of money... If you have to choose between spending £200,000.00 a year on a drug for one person or using the same money to treat 10 people, I know which I would choose

emmett123

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

Yes. Unfortunately it does come down to price... It is not the NHS that develops these drugs. It's private companies and so yes they do have the right to charge what they see fit. It can take 10-15 years to get a new drug from beginning to full certification for use... That's a big investment of time and money.....

A lot of modern day drug are, you could argue, keeping people alive who would have never survived before, so could it not be argued that that in itself is messing with nature??

The NHS is not a bottomless pit of money... If you have to choose between spending £200,000.00 a year on a drug for one person or using the same money to treat 10 people, I know which I would choose

Yes it is quite clear which you would choose. When it comes to deciding between private companies profits and extending someones life you have little hesitation. You are not accurate either that private drug companies design the drugs, lots of the breakthrough drugs have been the result of the research and intellectual efforts to those at publicly funded universities. Essentially we are paying for these drugs twice. and even if we do accept the role played by big pharma in developing drugs, it has been well shown that the price of their R&D is no way comparable to the price they demand for selling it. In essence the companies dine out on the desperation of sick people to over pay the odds for drugs. I would bring these companies under state control to ensure that the state was not being ripped off by corporate psychos, but as things stand, the NHS pockets would be alot fuller should everyone but particularly those private companies who avoid or evade (or whatever legalese language they are using this week)paid their fair share of tax. But still, these are the gods of wealth creation and shouldn't be our primary focus, rather our targets should be the people with the least, they should pay more.

warmhands.coldheart

emmett123 wrote: »

....... You are not accurate either that private drug companies design the drugs, lots of the breakthrough drugs have been the result of the research and intellectual efforts to those at publicly funded universities....

You do realise where most University funding comes from don't you??? I believe less than 40% now comes from "PUBLIC" funding. the rest comes from Student fees, Private Sector funded research investment, sales of research findings and other forms of funding....

qwert_yuiop

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

A lot of modern day drug are, you could argue, keeping people alive who would have never survived before

I'm not sure - some people round here have died recently who'd never died before.

donnac2558

Have to say the Cancer Research and lets fight cancer charities are getting money for nothing. Anyway most of the money goes to admin anyway.
Well if a cure is found some private company will develop and market it. Normal people will never be able to afford it. In fact on some other forums many are convinced a cure has been found, but so expensive that only the multi millionaires can afford to buy it.

qwert_yuiop

Is there a grassy knoll theory on this one?

qwert_yuiop

We'll know the truth about this when people stop dying, won't we? Any chance of a bet on when we first see a 140 year old man, or someone celebrates the birth of their first great great great grandchild?

"I have 3000 descendants and how many of them ever visit?"