How many readers know the right number?

Editors obviously pay me to pass along medical advice to you. But this week I can’t answer a fundamental health question. So let’s switch roles to see if any reader with the Wisdom of Solomon knows the right number to this dilemma. I’ll publish the results, as it’s vital that a figure be found. After all, it’s going to affect how long you live.

Stephen S. Hall writes a fascinating article in the magazine New York about the escalating cost of cancer drugs. New cancer medication now costs tens of thousands of dollars, but may extend lives of patients only a matter of days.

Dr. Leonard Saltz, a cancer specialist at Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, is an outspoken advocate for doing something to control escalating costs. For instance, he cites the case of a new drug that costs $300,000 to keep a patient alive an extra 42 days. But he says the cost is actually $600,000 when you add on the cost of doctors, nurses, pharmacists, drugs to counter side-effects and other hospital charges.

Critics invariably restate the unwritten rule that doctors should never consider the cost when treating patients. If they do, they say, they’re rationing care. Saltz counters by saying. “Everyone agrees the costs are unsustainable. But what happens when it becomes unsustainable?”

Cancer has become big business with billions spent on cancer drugs. Yet even cancer specialists say that these expensive therapies have relatively little effect on life outcome. In effect, they cost too much to do so little.

The good news is that some malignancies like testicular cancer, some types of leukemia and lymphoma are cured by these drugs. But for malignancies of the prostate, breast, lung and large bowel, the drugs buy little more time, only weeks or months at the most.

Moreover, the patient has to consider the often severe side effects. In fact, Saltz mentions one drug that causes a skin rash so devastating that patients are often asked not to come to work!

But can you blame the pharmaceutical companies for the high cost of cancer drugs? In a free enterprise system it’s their job to make a big profit for their shareholders. But in the U.S. they’re also bankrupting patients. Studies show that cancer patients are 2.5 times more likely to declare bankruptcy than someone in the general population.

For example, one drug to treat skin cancer costs $39,000 a month. Another drug to keep those alive who are suffering chronic myelogenous leukemia costs $92,000 a year. If you have cystic fibrosis, it’s a staggering $311,000. There’s also a new drug to treat a blood disorder called paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria that costs $525,000 a year.

It quickly becomes obvious that unless you’re a Rockefeller, society, namely taxpayer money, has to cover these costs. But there’s no way to escape the next problem. Society cannot live for health care alone as there’s only so much money in the kitty jar.

So, in the end, society will have to decide either to pay for these drugs (and many other medical expenses) or eliminate other services. And who wants to do away with police, the fireman, garbage collector or cut the social services that so many rely on?

Dr. Saltz says, “There is a number in people’s minds. If you say to people I have a drug that extends life for one day at a billion dollars, should society pay for it? Most people would say no. But if I say, ‘I have a drug that extends life for three years at a cost of $1.50’, I’m pretty confident everybody would say, of course.”

There is however, a number that Saltz calls a “tipping point” where the majority of people say ‘no’. The cost is simply too high for the benefits received.

So here is my question to readers. What is the acceptable number? Remember, we don’t have Solomon to help us. Maybe common sense can play a part. Or is it even possible to find a mathematical solution? But don’t forget this point. The word ‘unsustainable’ means there has to be a number over which we cannot go. I can hardly wait to hear what you think it is.

See the site www.docgiff.com. For comments info@docgiff.com.

Just Posted

Singer/songwriter John Wort Hannam heads to the Elks Lodge April 12th

Concert is being hosted by the Central Music Festival Society

Young athletes hope to achieve Olympics dreams through RBC Training Ground

Olympic sport talent scouting event took place in Red Deer Sunday morning

Sharon and Bram head to Red Deer on final tour

The duo is celebrating their 40th anniversary farewell tour

Supporters rally for Jason Kenney as UCP leader stops in Red Deer

Kenney promises equalization reform, stopping ‘Trudeau-Notley’ payroll hike, trade, economic mobility

Edmonton judge rules Omar Khadr’s sentence has expired

Eight-year sentence imposed in 2010 would have ended last October had Khadr remained in custody

Sources say Trudeau rejected Wilson-Raybould’s conservative pick for high court

Wilson-Raybould said Monday “there was no conflict between the PM and myself”

Apple announces its long-awaited streaming TV service

The iPhone has long been Apple’s marquee product and main money maker, but sales are starting to decline

Trudeau delivers campaign-style speech while introducing candidate Taggart

The Order of British Columbia recipient said she wants to be the people’s voice in Ottawa

15 Canadians on cruise ship that was stranded off Norway; one injured

The cruise ship was carrying 1,373 passengers and crew when it issued a mayday call on Saturday afternoon

1,300 cruise ship passengers rescued by helicopter amid storm off Norway’s coast

Rescue teams with helicopters and boats were sent to evacuate the cruise ship under extremely difficult circumstances

B.C. university to offer first graduate program on mindfulness in Canada

University of the Fraser Valley says the mostly-online program focuses on self-care and well being

Sentencing judge in Broncos crash calls for carnage on highways to end

Judge Inez Cardinal sentenced Jaskirat Singh Sidhu to eight years

Most Read