I see Pharmac have made the brave decision to decline Roche's application to fund Women's Breast Cancer drug Herceptin for a full 12 months. They will continue to fund a 9 week treatment of the drug. They've relied on cold hard scientific evidence, and spent a lot of time and effort coming to what seems to me to be a reasonable decision.
Now they just have to combat the public, who usually have a lot less information at their fingertips and don't want to read it anyway, but will be very worried, because more is always good and less is always bad.
Perhaps more importantly, women undergoing treatment for breast cancer may have seen this drug as the gold plated weapon in their battle against a very scary disease. In such battles, attitude and hope can make a big difference to the outcome.
Those women and their families will have to take heart that they still have a range of treatment available, and combined with the 9 week herceptin course, have good chances to have good outcomes.
I also recall another health campaign where "more is good" was not the case at all. Pumped with fear over the deadly Meningococcal disease, many parents were cowed into demanding vaccinations to protect their young ones from certain death. It's not surprising - it's a fate not wished on anyone.
However, even back in 2005, there were legitimate questions being raised about the risks, the effectiveness, the costs and the side effects. Numbers of people contracting the disease from the time the outbreak peaked a few years earlier showed it in steady decline before even the first shot was fired. Those stats continued to drop throughout the programme, even though children needed "the whole set" to gain protection - this was the excuse used when vaccinated children caught the disease.
Now, in 2008 more information has come to light that continues to question the "more must be better" logic that pushed that particular decision. It was logic supported not by facts, but by the Health Department's search for hope.
It was, in effect, the reverse of the Pharmac decision, which seeks to provide the most optimal health care based on the available evidence, and leaves the supply of attitude and hope in the hands of the patient and their family.
I think that's all we can ask for.
A review of the government's $200 million meningococcal vaccination programme has found that the vaccine's effectiveness often wore off within just months of the injection.
Related Link: You are safe - for a month or two
Related Link: Pharmac Stands on Current Evidence
If you wanted a second opinion, Macdoctor dispenses alternate advice: The Price of Life
Women's groups split on Herceptin
Now they just have to combat the public, who usually have a lot less information at their fingertips and don't want to read it anyway, but will be very worried, because more is always good and less is always bad.
Perhaps more importantly, women undergoing treatment for breast cancer may have seen this drug as the gold plated weapon in their battle against a very scary disease. In such battles, attitude and hope can make a big difference to the outcome.
Those women and their families will have to take heart that they still have a range of treatment available, and combined with the 9 week herceptin course, have good chances to have good outcomes.
I also recall another health campaign where "more is good" was not the case at all. Pumped with fear over the deadly Meningococcal disease, many parents were cowed into demanding vaccinations to protect their young ones from certain death. It's not surprising - it's a fate not wished on anyone.
However, even back in 2005, there were legitimate questions being raised about the risks, the effectiveness, the costs and the side effects. Numbers of people contracting the disease from the time the outbreak peaked a few years earlier showed it in steady decline before even the first shot was fired. Those stats continued to drop throughout the programme, even though children needed "the whole set" to gain protection - this was the excuse used when vaccinated children caught the disease.
Now, in 2008 more information has come to light that continues to question the "more must be better" logic that pushed that particular decision. It was logic supported not by facts, but by the Health Department's search for hope.
It was, in effect, the reverse of the Pharmac decision, which seeks to provide the most optimal health care based on the available evidence, and leaves the supply of attitude and hope in the hands of the patient and their family.
I think that's all we can ask for.
A review of the government's $200 million meningococcal vaccination programme has found that the vaccine's effectiveness often wore off within just months of the injection.
Related Link: You are safe - for a month or two
Related Link: Pharmac Stands on Current Evidence
If you wanted a second opinion, Macdoctor dispenses alternate advice: The Price of Life
Women's groups split on Herceptin