A medical treatment that could have cured Colette Mills' cancer exists. The problem is that the UK's National Health Service wouldn't pay for the drug due to its cost -- and when Mills offered to pay for the medication, she was told that she would be required to pay cash for all treatment, not just the portion NHS was unwilling to fund. After all, they wouldn't want to set a precedent of creating a two-tier health care system.

So now Colette Mills' breast cancer has advanced to the point that a cure is not an option.

A WOMAN suffering from breast cancer has run out of time to benefit from a potentially life-extending drug which the National Health Service (NHS) denied her, even though she was prepared to pay for it.

Colette Mills has been told by doctors that in the four months since she asked for the drug the disease has taken such a hold in her body that the cancer will no longer respond to the treatment.

* * *

Asked about her future prospects, Mills said: “They are not hopeful of halting it. They will give you no promises. I didn’t ask and he [the doctor] didn’t say. It is not something I want to know just yet.”

In other words, Colette Mills is going to die because the principle of guaranteeing only a minimum of medical treatment for all is more important than actually saving the lives of the critically ill.

And now there are those who want to bring that system to America.

Which means that, if they succeed, effective treatments will be denied to people because they are too expensive, even if they wish to pay for that treatment themselves. Or if the patients are old. Or fat. Or smokers. Or otherwise deemed unworthy by the government.

Would someone tell me why anyone would support such a fundamental change in our system, when the cost will be measured in human lives?

Posted by: Greg at 02:10 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 335 words, total size 2 kb.