Drugs to treat multiple sclerosis have some benefits but can be prohibitively pricey
http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-ms-drugs-20110720,0,3636799.story
“It’s not enough to bring a new medication to market — the cost-effectiveness of the drug must be considered as well. A study finds there is a high price for some drugs used to treat the symptoms of multiple sclerosis compared with medications that treat other chronic diseases.”
Note the “prohibitively” part especially.
That is the whole idea of INSURANCE — nobody knows what diseases they may get or accidents that can happen. That is why they have a pool of insureds of all types. It may or may not happen to any one person, but if it does, you are supposed to be covered and treated.
But if government is the one insuring you — as in obamacare, the most “cost-effective” thing is to NOT treat you, just go away and die quietly.
NAZI agenda. Get rid of defectives. Bastrds.
Ah yes! But we must require insurance companies to provide free birth control and HIV tests.
My son (11yrs old at the time) was diagnosed with MS. It specifically targeted his optic nerves. We were referred to a specialist who took a special interest in our son. He recommended a chemo treatment that was rather experimental for MS treatment. My son is now 16, and MS is in remission. He takes no drugs, and has had MRIs quarterly to monitor. No new lesions. We thank God every day.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0706383
it always costs more in the US than other counties
why is that?
the US always gets ripped off.
am I the only one who doesn’t like that?