A Step Closer to Death Panels

[Gadawg73]

No, state insurance commissioners set rates in most states.

And that is a good thing?

 

[xotoxi]

Efficacy was established long ago. This is not Mexican laetrile.

It's rationing. Even a fanatic like lose stools is arguing its about money.

Efficacy was established by the company to get it fast tracked by the FDA.

Further studies were unable to prove efficacy.

The FDA ruling was made on lack of efficacy, not on cost/benefit.

If you can show proof otherwise (excluding your own opinions, the opinions of other posters, or the opinions expressed in various articles or blogs) that the FDA took into consideration the cost of the medication, then I would be interested in seeing it.

The FDA made a purely political decision, which was delayed after the election.

Again...PROOF.

 

[loosecannon]

Regulated monopolies are government.

There are about 3000 insurance carrriers. Heavily government regulated, but hardly a monopoly, yet.

There are a handful of insurance companies that dominate every state regulated market. Get a clue.

 

[loosecannon]

No, state insurance commissioners set rates in most states.

are you daft?

 

[Revere]

You can't raise premiums without the state insurance commissioner signing off on it.

 

[Revere]

Regulated monopolies are government.

There are about 3000 insurance carrriers. Heavily government regulated, but hardly a monopoly, yet.

There are a handful of insurance companies that dominate every state regulated market. Get a clue.

Because the other 2,997 can't remain solvent given the rates and coverage mandates.

 

[Gadawg73]

You can't raise premiums without the state insurance commissioner signing off on it.

Very good point but let me tell you how it works in Georgia.
And everywhere else in the good old US of A.
BC/BS is the largest, by far, health insurer in the state.
They have contracts with ALL of the hospitals, doctors,everyone they deal with that they and they alone get the lowest prices on everything.
Sounds like a good deal for an insured doesn't it?
The fact is very few other insurance carriers do business in Georgia because of that and that gives BC/BS a tremendous advantage in market share in Georgia. That drives the price up with no competition.
And the lame duck insurance commissioner hates it but can do NOTHING about it.
The Legislature my good man, NOT the insurance commisioner, writes the LAWS in the state and in your state.
Not the insurance commisioner. Good man, all they do is ENFORCE the law.
And every other state in America.
Please join us long time conservatives friend. The insurance companies ARE FUCKING US.
We hate Obama care but good buddy, the current system is fucked, rigged and horrible.

 

[Revere]

That's a government problem.

 

[The T]

You can't raise premiums without the state insurance commissioner signing off on it.

Do you think the FED cares? How many unfunded federal mandates are out there that belie the 9th and 10th Amendments?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So let's hear your viewpoint. Let's say that Avastin DOES help cancer patients but is VERY expensive. Do you think the drug should still be permitted to be used regardless of what it costs?

So you want to put a price on life? What happen to the Constitutioin? If the government can get this approved it will in fact be going against the Constitution
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The government will not be promoting the general welfare the portion liberals love to use in their argument for obamacare.

 

[Gadawg73]

You folks are so naive.
The insurance companies LOBBY the state Legislatures and get whatever laws they want.
ALL an insurance commisioner can do is enforce the law.
I favor the free market but look what has happened. 1/2 of all premiums do not go for health care.
They go for lobbying, commisions and administration.
Government health care is terrible. Group health care managed by insurance companies is just as bad.
When ANY 3rd party is paying the bill be it government or an insurance company the consumer is not the customer.
Wake up. Until we go back to where YOU PAY THE DAMN BILL, and settle up later with YOUR insurance company or whatever we are fucked.

 

[Revere]

It's a government problem.

Same thing will happen when big food producers lobby government in the name of "food safety."

 

[Samson]

Federal Health Authorities are expected to prevail in getting the FDA to unapprove Avastan (an $80K per year drug) for breast cancer patients.

And recall the position on reducing the use of mammograms some months ago. It's quite clear that the Feds are intent on reducing access to "expensive" procedures and drugs. In this case, the FDA is the means to reduce treatment.



The Fatal Move From The FDA - Forbes.com

Interesting revelation on the conflict of interest angle of Federally Funded Healthcare.

However, I wonder: Given the strength of the Pharma-Lobby (no wet noodle), how do you explain this "Fatal Move From the FDA."

That's how corporate cronyism works.

Let me see if I can follow WTF that means:

Pharma Corporation makes Avastan

FDA unapproves Avastan.

Pharma Corporation Avastan Profits = 0

Insurance Corp pays for MORE EXPENSIVE Avastan alternatives?

Insurance Corp profits decline.

Why exactly would "corporate cronyism" support this scenario?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You folks are so naive.
The insurance companies LOBBY the state Legislatures and get whatever laws they want.
ALL an insurance commisioner can do is enforce the law.
I favor the free market but look what has happened. 1/2 of all premiums do not go for health care.
They go for lobbying, commisions and administration.
Government health care is terrible. Group health care managed by insurance companies is just as bad.
When ANY 3rd party is paying the bill be it government or an insurance company the consumer is not the customer.
Wake up. Until we go back to where YOU PAY THE DAMN BILL, and settle up later with YOUR insurance company or whatever we are fucked.

Lobbying can be stop if the government is forced to stop dealing with lobbist then liberals will not be able to use lobbist as their argument.

 

[Revere]

Yes, phRMA throws them a public relations bone for government negotiated profits to be named later.

They paid for Obamacare advertising in exchange for being let out of price controls.

 

[Gadawg73]

You folks are so naive.
The insurance companies LOBBY the state Legislatures and get whatever laws they want.
ALL an insurance commisioner can do is enforce the law.
I favor the free market but look what has happened. 1/2 of all premiums do not go for health care.
They go for lobbying, commisions and administration.
Government health care is terrible. Group health care managed by insurance companies is just as bad.
When ANY 3rd party is paying the bill be it government or an insurance company the consumer is not the customer.
Wake up. Until we go back to where YOU PAY THE DAMN BILL, and settle up later with YOUR insurance company or whatever we are fucked.

Lobbying can be stop if the government is forced to stop dealing with lobbist then liberals will not be able to use lobbist as their argument.

Lobbyists are not liberal or conservative or anything.
Lobbyists lobby for MONEY.
For MONEY they lobby your case.
YOU pay them $$ to represent YOU and they lobby for YOU.
Nothing to do with ideology.
A lobbyists' ideology is $$$.
Comprende?

 

[Ava]

The government needs for seniors especially, to die off, sooner than later. We will be hearing about new ways to accomplish that, in the future. My 69 year old aunt, is not looking forward to them. I think the drug you are talking about here is the one Canadians come to our country for treatment? Canada won't pay for it? Correct me if I am wrong, please.

 

[GWV5903]

Federal Health Authorities are expected to prevail in getting the FDA to unapprove Avastan (an $80K per year drug) for breast cancer patients.

And recall the position on reducing the use of mammograms some months ago. It's quite clear that the Feds are intent on reducing access to "expensive" procedures and drugs. In this case, the FDA is the means to reduce treatment.

Despite all evidence to the contrary, the advisory committee claims its recommendation had nothing to do with Avastin's cost. The FDA's top brass will doubtlessly take the same line and claim that its decision to ratify that recommendation was based solely on the drug's medical efficiency.

The truth is that Avastin is expensive. A year-long supply for breast cancer treatment costs upwards of $80,000.

However, many American women are getting something priceless in return for those dollars: life and vitality. In one clinical trial, nearly 50% of patients receiving Avastin witnessed their tumors shrink. Another study found that patients receiving the drug in conjunction with chemotherapy lived "progression-free" twice as long as patients without it.

What's more, for a select group of "super responders," Avastin can improve life span by years. That can mean years of extra time for, say, a mother to attend her son's soccer games, for a daughter to vacation with her husband, or for a grandmother to watch her grandchildren grow up. ...

The Fatal Move From The FDA - Forbes.com

My assistant of 17+ years is battling her second round of breast cancer, stage 4, she is 73, she is one of the finest and most genuine human beings I have ever known.....

She has been on Avastin since March 2nd to control the tumors, her Oncologist is very upset they want to remove this option from her regiment, she takes it every three weeks and a chemo pill everyday, some of her tumors are gone and the few that remain are less than 5% of their original size, if you walked into our offices you would never know she was under treatment.....

We truly believe if Obamacare was fully implemented, they would be counseling her now, this is a perfect example of how cost out weighs care.....

Obamacare is flawed, this is a genuine example of it's faults, they better turn this around and turn it around quick, his bad intentions will leave too many without the very best care available today.....

 

[loosecannon]

You folks are so naive.
The insurance companies LOBBY the state Legislatures and get whatever laws they want.
ALL an insurance commisioner can do is enforce the law.
I favor the free market but look what has happened. 1/2 of all premiums do not go for health care.
They go for lobbying, commisions and administration.
Government health care is terrible. Group health care managed by insurance companies is just as bad.
When ANY 3rd party is paying the bill be it government or an insurance company the consumer is not the customer.
Wake up. Until we go back to where YOU PAY THE DAMN BILL, and settle up later with YOUR insurance company or whatever we are fucked.

Lobbying can be stop if the government is forced to stop dealing with lobbist then liberals will not be able to use lobbist as their argument.

Libruls? You think that the health insurance companies are libruls?

 

[loosecannon]

Federal Health Authorities are expected to prevail in getting the FDA to unapprove Avastan (an $80K per year drug) for breast cancer patients.

And recall the position on reducing the use of mammograms some months ago. It's quite clear that the Feds are intent on reducing access to "expensive" procedures and drugs. In this case, the FDA is the means to reduce treatment.

Despite all evidence to the contrary, the advisory committee claims its recommendation had nothing to do with Avastin's cost. The FDA's top brass will doubtlessly take the same line and claim that its decision to ratify that recommendation was based solely on the drug's medical efficiency.

The truth is that Avastin is expensive. A year-long supply for breast cancer treatment costs upwards of $80,000.

However, many American women are getting something priceless in return for those dollars: life and vitality. In one clinical trial, nearly 50% of patients receiving Avastin witnessed their tumors shrink. Another study found that patients receiving the drug in conjunction with chemotherapy lived "progression-free" twice as long as patients without it.

What's more, for a select group of "super responders," Avastin can improve life span by years. That can mean years of extra time for, say, a mother to attend her son's soccer games, for a daughter to vacation with her husband, or for a grandmother to watch her grandchildren grow up. ...

The Fatal Move From The FDA - Forbes.com

My assistant of 17+ years is battling her second round of breast cancer, stage 4, she is 73, she is one of the finest and most genuine human beings I have ever known.....

She has been on Avastin since March 2nd to control the tumors, her Oncologist is very upset they want to remove this option from her regiment, she takes it every three weeks and a chemo pill everyday, some of her tumors are gone and the few that remain are less than 5% of their original size, if you walked into our offices you would never know she was under treatment.....

We truly believe if Obamacare was fully implemented, they would be counseling her now, this is a perfect example of how cost out weighs care.....

Obamacare is flawed, this is a genuine example of it's faults, they better turn this around and turn it around quick, his bad intentions will leave too many without the very best care available today.....

This has nothing to do with Obama care.

This has to do with the fact that any medicine that can help prolong life in some circumstances only and that costs $80/K/year is prohibitively expensive unless you can pay for it yourself.

We do not need to spend $100k/year to keep old, unproductive people alive long past their expiration date. We need to spend that money to keep younger healthier people from getting sick in the first place.

But please, feel free to use your own money any way you wish.

Death panels are necessary regardless just to manage costs. But they are esp necessary to set limits beyond which Big Pharma can not extort us gratuitously.

Unless you have unlimited resources to pay for end of life care your life is not worth the unlimited price Big Pharma can place upon treatments.

Sorry, but that is reality.

And anybody who thinks otherwise is fully subscribing to the nanny state, socialist agenda of Obama.