HERCEPTIN victory!

[reofix]

if you are happy to take others healthcare funding for your own selfish needs then you are just another greedy "me generation" idiot ... we need a proper plan here .... and pharmac though maybe flawed was at least an attempt to allow justice not self interest to rule... climbing over the dead bodies of others health needs while achieving your own is immoral!! and someone does suffer for the key interference here... i did vote national but this is unconscionable.

[ynot slow]

This and other pharmac,drug company decisions won't matter until it is your body,partners or kids needing treatment.Don't really think most women using herceptin want to be on it longer than they need to due to side effects etc.

Can tell you after 6 months of chemo the novelty wears off,depending on your regime,be it once a week each month or daily for a week each month,me it was daily for a week,but throw in a 150km round trip each day when at the hospital for a week is not fun,and seeing people having same treatments and not finishing them is bloddy tough,the humour in oncology leaves most stand up comedians for dead(pun).

[McDuck]

if you are happy to take others healthcare funding for your own selfish needs then you are just another greedy "me generation" idiot ... we need a proper plan here .... and pharmac though maybe flawed was at least an attempt to allow justice not self interest to rule... climbing over the dead bodies of others health needs while achieving your own is immoral!! and someone does suffer for the key interference here... i did vote national but this is unconscionable.

Yes we need to kick all the pen pushers out and use the money for crap that is actually needed. like flavored condoms.

[Forest]

Hmmm ... interesting point ... are you a clinician .. .as the clinicians at Pharmac twice recommended twelve months funding and got told no.

Do you know the background.

I work with a couple of epidemiologists, so I do know some of the background.

Increasing the treatment course to 12 months is not backed by clinical evidence and this is the reason why Pharmac wasn't prepared to support it. All this change in policy has achieved is the diversion of health-care dollars that would have been better spent elsewhere.

I realise that National did this to help them win the election. But it shits me a little that people think that this decision will save more lives. I can assure you that it will not.

[Lias]

One of the most obvious (to me at any rate) ways to save money in our overburned health system is to cut off all public medical support to non permanent residents (or possibly even non citizens). Any foreigner here should have private medical/travel insurance to pay the bills for private care, and if they don't well fuckem they can stay in jail after they are better until they pay the bill.

They also need to be lots more vigilant about letting in immigrants with health problems. Anyone remember whole zimbabwean aids debarcle? Or the tongan wife beater on dialysis, or any of the other high profile immigrant health debarlces of the last 10 years.

[RantyDave]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/0a17217.html

[Skyryder]

This is bollocks ... now we have politicians making clinical decisions for political reasons ... every extra dollar spent on Herceptin is a dollar that doesnt get spent on someone else's needed medication ... cheering is a selfish and stupid response to this decision...

Yes it is. This is being funded at the taxpayers expense and due to commercial sensitivity the taxpayer will never know what this is costing or if it is indeed value for money. It is interesting that much of the Nats campaign was based on the partnership of Government (that's our tax ) and the private sector, kiwis will see more of their dollar going to private enterprise and never be able to see what it costs due to 'commercial sensitivity.'


Skyryder

[MisterD]

I work with a couple of epidemiologists, so I do know some of the background.

Increasing the treatment course to 12 months is not backed by clinical evidence and this is the reason why Pharmac wasn't prepared to support it. All this change in policy has achieved is the diversion of health-care dollars that would have been better spent elsewhere.

I realise that National did this to help them win the election. But it shits me a little that people think that this decision will save more lives. I can assure you that it will not.

Know any oncologists? MacDoctor does and he disagrees with you...

I don’t know of a single oncologist (cancer specialist) who thinks Pharmac made a reasonable decision. Zip. Nada, Zero. Perhaps National should reply that Pharmac had set a “dangerous precedent by overruling medical experts”.

[Nasty]

I work with a couple of epidemiologists, so I do know some of the background.

Increasing the treatment course to 12 months is not backed by clinical evidence and this is the reason why Pharmac wasn't prepared to support it. All this change in policy has achieved is the diversion of health-care dollars that would have been better spent elsewhere.

I realise that National did this to help them win the election. But it shits me a little that people think that this decision will save more lives. I can assure you that it will not.

So you work with people who study health ... and are still not a clinician ... not surprised.

mind you spoken like a true labour supporter ... labour lost .. its not only that National won .. they don't tend to buy votes and reneg unlike the previous government of 9 years.