When drug costs soar beyond reach - International Herald Tribune
Employers, including the federal government, also bear responsibility. They have been pressing to reduce their prescription drug expenditures by shifting more of the burden to patients. One patient who had been paying only $20 for a month's supply of a multiple sclerosis drug was shocked when the charge rose to $325 per month. (It has since been suspended.) Another patient found that his co-payment for a newly prescribed leukemia drug would exceed $4,000 for a 90-day supply, so he has deferred buying it.
I wonder if one day there will be jars on the counter of every store in the nation....with a picture of someone and the request "XXX needs money for meds - Please, give!"
Here's a sort of different story...kind of related....so I'll throw a link.
A RECENT ARTICLE in Britain’s Daily Mail ran with the title “I won’t let Daddy die: Girl of six raises £4,000 for life-saving drugs the NHS won’t provide.” When Britain’s National Health System said it would not pay for Tarceva, the drug her father needed to fight lung cancer, 6-year-old Chantelle Hill put up posters throughout her neighborhood asking for donations so she could buy the drug herself.
The Center for Medicine in the Public Interest | Fewer drugs, fewer seniors (http://www.cmpi.org/media-impact/2008-articles/fewer-drugs-fewer-seniors/ - broken link)
Socialized medicine? Didn't work in that case.
It is an issue that makes you think, though. Pass the majority of the costs onto those who have "specialty" diseases.
While the majority gain the benefits, the others can just....die or suffer?
Ouch.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
