General Chat

medical research is at an exciting stage, but we are being told by the national institute for clinical excellence, that the drugs are too expensive. the latest is a breakthrough drug called velcade, which prolongs the life of those suffering from bone marrow cancer, and has been available in scotland for some time, with great success. would you be prepared to pay more income tax to subsidise these drugs..... or should we save billions of pounds a year, by refusing to fight wars, that are not our concern. bryan.

Hi Bryan, I would like to see more cuts In things we dont need,too many hospital admin people for a start:-(( But if it came down to it,I would pay more tax. Roxanne x

Maybe we should have a state run drug company. Some of these drug companies make huge profits. So are people dying for the sake of shareholders? I think most people would say no to more tax to fund the costs. However thats easy to say until you or your family are in that situation. Ang x

As I said on a thread recently MPs spend too much time blaming finance for the drop in education, health, crime etc., - yet they have the power to attract as much money as they need purely by raising taxes. Of course this is not a course of action that the majority of people would initially accept but if it going to stop the repeated daily reminders that we hear regarding money shortages and that people would see real progress being made in all walksm of life, then why the heck doesn't somebody have the guts to do it ? However you can be sure that if the Labour party (in any of its disguises) was to say that at the next General Election that taxes would NOT be increased - and no more stealth taxes AND The Tories where to say that they will put tax DOWN AND Leb Dems would raise tax to pay for obvious short-comings It doesn't take long to realise who would be running neck and neck for the next parliament.

In West Yorkshire there are 3 women that need to take Velcade and all 3 have been refused this drug because it hasn't been passed in England. Yet the people in Scotland and Wales are allowed this drug for cancer. What is the difference,I thought it was the British Isles.It just doesn't make sense to me why Velcade is allowed in Scotland and Wales but not England. And Yes I would pay more on my taxes just so these women could get the Treatment they so desperately need. Sue

I do recall that we had a 1% increase in NIC to improve the NHS, so where has this money gone?

I read a story the other week about the government spending millions to a research company for a robot for developing help for baldness. Now how about they give the money to drug companies or cancer research.

The NHS budget for 2007 - 2008 is predicted to be in the order of £90B which in real numbers is £90,000,000,000 Put another way this amounts to some £1, 400 for every single man, woman and child in the country. So, an average family of two adults and 2 children is already paying £5,600 per year in their taxes (direct and indirect,) for the health service. No don't forget that in this equation, those who don't pay tax, for whatever reason, good or bad, are subsidised by those who do. So, based on these facts, which is what they are, how much more are we, the general public prepared to contribute to the NHS?

As an aside, the cost of the Iraq war up to March, has cost the British taxpayer £3.1B Gordon Brown has already declared that this is a drop in the ocean. Whilst not agreeing with the war, at just 3% of the NHS budget, you can see where he may be coming from.

Why do we spend millions on research only to then be told that that our Hospitals and PCT's can't afford to provide the drugs. Surely we are putting the cart before the horse. We should first decide what we can afford to provide then do the research. Pointles spending millions on research if then there is not enough money to provide the drugs at reasonable cost.

to a degree, i can understand the economics of the drug companies... for instance it's cheaper to produce a pill for blood pressure, as there is a demand for over ten billion tablets a year, whereas the quantity required to treat alzheimers / cancer patients is much lower, therefor production costs are much higher. we must carry on with research, as we must find a cure for cancer, for anyone not willing to pay more taxes, would they feel the same if one of there own family were struck down with such a desease, only to be told ' we cannot give you the drugs ' bryan.

There are a number of problems with these new so called 'wonder drugs' 1. They are very expensive, when still produced in small quantities 2. There is no real guarantee that they are as effective as claimed as they have not been mass tested. 3. With the current spate of NHS overspends, they are at the margin and when looked at in terms of No of patients benefired versus cost, come low down the priority list. 4. Media coverage with individual cases tears at the heart strings Given that the average cost of NHS treatment is £1,400 per person, costs over and above this mean that someone else somewhe has to go without. I don't know what the answer is, other than rationing of scarce resources. Sadly there will always be those who feel they have got the bum steer, but what other option is there?

I can't imagine how I would feel if I was denied a drug that might help ease pain, or prolong my life, if suffering from Cancer, or Alzheimer's yet this is happening all the time and people are having to go to Court to fight for the right to help, when really they should be concentrating on enjoying life as best they can and staying as strong as possible to fight the illness and enjoy what time they have. Fighting a battle in the Courts is enough to make a well person ill, never mind someone who is already sick. What a strange world we live in, where life is valued so little by some, especially when it is someone else's life. Liz