A Cancer Drug Shows Promise, at a Price That Many Can't Pay

And that is a reality. Just because a manufacturer has something that someone wants, it is not incumbent to hand it over to the person.

People are balking at a $10,000 copayment for something that might save their life. Interesting. I am sure that many of those people would go into debt to make their daughter a wedding, buy a fancy car, or blow it on an expensive vacation. But they get upset when a drug manufacturer asks his price.

I think that in our society people think that just by "being", they are entitled to any and all kinds of medical service. Hey, it is a business like anything else.

Phoenix32890
$10,000 copay. Most people do not have prescription coverage. And most that do have plans that have ceilings.
In addition I am sure that the only people who will have to pay $100,000/ yr are those living in the US. Do you think for a moment that foreign nations such as Canada and Mexico will allow the pharmaceutical manufactures to soak their citizens as does the US government?

au1929- First of all, I don't think that the government has any business being involved in medicine........period. Second, it may sound great about the wonderful benefits that people get in Canada. So I wonder why so many Canadians go to the US for their operations?

I could not agree with you more Phoenix. We were talking about peoples priorities just last night.

Yes, the drug companies do make a lot of money....but so do wedding planners and luxury cruise ships.

My husband almost died a few years back, and now he's on various meds and is closely monitored. We gladly pay our share of the co-payment. We are talking about someones LIFE, and paying for something that will keep him alive and well for another 20, 30 or more years.

Could the drug companies make less money? Sure.

Whose salaries will they cut? The researchers? Sales? Executives? Administrative?

Cut any one of them and they will go across the street and continue their good work there.

I don't notice anyone complaining about sports or movie stars making millions for essentially doing something that is a moment of useless entertainment for us.

$40,000 for a farging wedding. One stupid party. I have NEVER understood that. What? does that guarantee the marriage will be good?

You're right Phoenix - many people's priorites are all screwed up.

In England a woman has just lost her battle to get a certain type of cancer treatment on the NHS because of where she lives!!It would cost her thousands to buy it.

Yet yesterday the government passed a bill to ban all smoking in public buildings.

Irony?I think so.

Yes, people's priorities are screwed up. But not everyone is in the position to choose between a lavish wedding and an absurdly expensive drug.

A lot of people can't afford either option. Let's include them in the discussion, too, shall we?

Chai Tea- A couple of years ago, I was pissin' and moanin' to my mom's doctor about how much her prescriptions cost. I even made a crack that she would be better off spending the money on filet mignon. He looked me straight in the eye and said, "But those drugs are keeping her alive". That pulled me up short, and completely changed my attitude.

OK anyone who had a $ 40,000 wedding must pay full price for the drug.
What an absurd analogy.

au- I don't quite get your drift. I was referring to priorities.

Phoenix32890 wrote



What does that have to do with the fact that life sustaining medications are far less expensive in Canada?
How many US citizens get their o would like to obtain their prescription drugs from Canada?

Can't see what someone spending $40,000 or more on a wedding has to do with the sick being able to obtain life sustaining medications at an affordable price.

Yes, and it was just an analogy......$40,000 wedding, $40,000 SUV, $1500 a year on smokes, $500 - $1000 birthday parties for a 6 year old. It's all the same.

I'm saying that many people make stupid choices of what they do with their money, regardless of how much they have.

Most people also do not have a type of cancer which involves them needing $100,000 worth of treatment a year.

People who need medication/treatments that cost literaly only 100's or maybe a couple thousand a year instead stupidly choose to not get their blood pressure medication, insulin, etc. but they will stand in line to buy crap with money that would enhance their quality of life.

A couple of years ago, this person in my office, who is severly diabetic, chose not to get her insulin and used this money to buy a co-worker birthday baloons and flowers, which the person did not even want.

She ended up going (yet again) into the hospital.

Her take on this whole thing was "I'm so unlucky I have such bad health, but there's nothing I can do about it"

You're right, very few can afford $100,000 a year, but more than you think can afford $10,000. Some will never be able to afford it, but others could get it together if everyone in the family stopped feeling so entitled to their expensive fast food and worthless junk.

Phoenix, what you said about the filet mignon made me laugh.....

As far as food, especially meat, I buy the best I can. Leanest, freshest. On more than one occassion I've had someone tell me they couldn't afford to eat like that.

My reply is..."It's a lot cheaper than angioplasty, and I never felt the same stress eating a good steak as I did sitting in the ICU waiting room"

I have no problem with the cost of medicines being higher in the US than in other countries. Pharma companies get approval to market their drugs years earlier in other countries and recover their costs over a longer market time. The FDA requirements for market approval are much more strenuous than most other countries and the cost of getting a product to market here is significantly higher.

Also, choosing to pay to co-pay for a drug that extends someone's life at the end stages of a terminal disease must certainly fall under personal choice. Chai's husband is taking drugs that extend his life, and presumably the quality of his life, by years. This drugs extends someone's lingering for a few months. Personally, I would keep the $100,000 and skip the treatment. Particularly if I was at the end stages of a terminal illness.

Chai wrote


Let me remind you the thread is not about cancer per se but this particular cancer drug and the projected cost.

J-B wrote


Says he when not faced with the choice.
That aside where did you get the understanding that the drugs in question would only be used at end stage of terminal illness

Well, and I am discussing the projected cost of this particular cancer drug,....... and stating that is their copay is $10,000, many more people than you might expect would be able to come up with that kind of money every year if they tightened their belts and worked together as a team.

Will everyone be able to afford it? No.

Will some people who say they can't afford it actually wrong about that? Yes.

Will people die because they say they can't afford it, but can afford spending their money on non-priority items? Yes.

Could some people who get the particular type of cancer that is treated by this particular type of drug have avoided this particular cancer by making better choices of what they do with their money? Yes.

What's your point? Are you saying everyone who needs this particular type of drug should be able to afford it?

If every person who supposedly can't afford the co-pay was given a $10,000 check at the beginning of each year for their care....I'd say a significant amount of them would run short well before the year was half over. It was just spent on other things?

Are you proposing babysitting these people and doling out a drug allowance each week/month so they don't go out and waste it on pixie sticks and candy cigarettes?

Yeah, it's a tough world we live in. Constantly having to make choices, and living with the results.

From the article,

You're right, au. One never knows what decisions one would make until faced with the dilemma, but I highly doubt I would want to spend $10,000/month for a year in order to live an extra five months. Given the choice I would probably check out sooner and use the $60,000 I didn't spend in other ways.

Veddy interesting J_B....

So, looking at it that way.....if the average person lives an extra 5 months....$100,000 divided by 12 months.....times 5 months....is a little less than $42,000.

If you and your family decided to go this route, perhaps they could pay that off by the end of a few years. Just like a (ahem) SUV.