| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| People Surviving Disease Threatens NHS Survival |
| 2008-09-09 |
| One of the country's top doctors has warned the NHS faces meltdown because of the cost of treating cancer. Professor Karol Sikora, of CancerPartners UK, told Sky News the next generation of drugs will turn cancer into a chronic disease that patients live with, not die of. But the drugs are not just expensive - they will give way to a raft of new diseases people will suffer in old age. The total cost to the NHS will be £50bn in four years' time - half the current budget for the entire health service. "The £50bn is equivalent to raising tax by 15p for everybody. That's the bottom line," Prof Sikora said. The calculations I've done for Sky News show a pretty bleak picture unless we have drastic change. "The NHS is going to face meltdown just because of one disease, so we're going to have to re-structure things for the future, look at new ways of bringing money in to the health service and that is a huge political challenge." There could also be further rationing of cancer drugs. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence already blocks those that it does not deem to be cost effective. It can take two to three years to consider the evidence. And in the meantime it is up to local primary care trusts to decide whether or not they will find treatment. Stephen Allen twice moved house to win funding for a new kidney cancer drug called Sutent. The drug costs £3,000 and PCTs in Dudley and Worcestershire said it was too expensive to justify the extra months of life that he might get. Only when he moved to Birmingham did he finally get funding. Just 17 miles made all the difference in the postcode lottery. "They said they did good palliative treatment. It was just devastating," he said. The treatment has allowed him to see his granddaughter's first birthday. "At times I pinch myself when she's chatting to me. It's been well worth the fight." Stephen's consultant helps patients to work the system and get the drugs they need. Professor Nick James is based at Birmingham's Queen Elizabeth Hospital. He says he has to look up a patient's address to see which drugs they are automatically eligible for. He now helps patients who have been denied expensive new treatment to top up their NHS care with drugs paid for privately. Officially that is a breach of Department of Health rules. But he says they shouldn't have been turned down for treatment in the first place. "It feels unfair to me. It feels unfair to the patients. They feel it's a national health service so it should be nationally consistent," he said. "It's a very clever dodge by the politicians to say well actually this wasn't my decision this was a local decision made by local people, you have to blame them not me. "The root cause is that the local PCT doesn't have enough money and that's a central decision. "It's a clever bit of manoeuvring by Westminster politicians to keep their hands clean." But the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (Nice) says some cancer drugs only offer marginal benefits. Avastin, a drug for colon cancer, costs £17,000 and extends life by five months. It ruled the drug was not cost effective and said the NHS should not pay for it. Chairman Sir Michael Rawlins told Sky News that Nice is unfairly seen as nasty. But he apologised to patients who are denied treatment. "A drug may give you the opportunity to go to a wedding or a birthday party. I understand that. But the problem is that some of these drugs are very expensive. There is a finite pot of money and it is a matter of how we divide it up in the fairest possible way." Nice is to speed up its reviews of new cancer drugs, so decisions are made within three months. The Government's cancer 'Csar', Professor Mike Richards, is also considering whether private top-ups of NHS care should be allowed. He is expected to report back to ministers this October. But then again, it's far more important that socialized medicine survive, instead of the patients. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #8 BigJim, It's just clearing out the "usless eaters". What's wrong with that? /sarcasm |
| Posted by: DLR 2008-09-09 20:47 |
| #7 Heck, they should develop heroin wings of the hospitals and anyone who gets that sick should just live it up their last few months. With heroin they probably wont' even use up the year. I mean we are gonna have a bunch of baby boomer ex-hippies filling up the hospitals before long. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-09-09 17:12 |
| #6 I read someone where that something like 90% of healthcare costs are spent keeping people alive that last year. Now I don't support the government/doctors/insurance making the decision to pull the plug but I certainly think the patient should be able to order them to (assuming they are in their right mind). |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2008-09-09 17:11 |
| #5 I always have been that way in case you didn't noticed. Resources available mean what you can spend. That is wahy we live now to 80 age and not 40. The problem with NHS and others is the ineficciency of it all meaning les people able to live more. |
| Posted by: Thealing de Medici5654 2008-09-09 13:46 |
| #4 the comments were enlightening. |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2008-09-09 11:37 |
| #3 A long long time ago the Pharaoh spent the resources of all of, what was then, civilization trying to buy immortality. In today's communal entitlement world, everyone will expect everyone else to pay for their bid for immortality. No one dies of 'old age' anymore. It's always some bean counting descriptive which then is the basis for the demands of more money and resources for 'studies' and 'programs' and 'protocols'. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2008-09-09 11:09 |
| #2 So life and death are dealt out by one person in most cases. He or she chooses who lives and who dies because they are not economically viable. Sounds rather Orwellian, doesn't it. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-09-09 10:29 |
| #1 Time to Kill the NHS before it kills YOU! |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2008-09-09 10:16 |