Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xsysmgr
Drug spending rose 13.6 percent in 2000 while the average price of drugs went up by a rate comparable to price inflation, at 3.9 percent. There's a big difference between 13.6 and 3.9.

And much of that increase in drug spending is for non-life threatening conditions. Consider Viagra, for example. Why any health plan covers it is way beyond me.

2 posted on 07/22/2002 7:17:31 AM PDT by freedomcrusader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: freedomcrusader
"And much of that increase in drug spending is for non-life threatening conditions..."

According to IMS Health, Viagra and Viagra-like drugs are NOT the the major increases in drug spending.

3 posted on 07/22/2002 8:01:32 AM PDT by Lou L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: freedomcrusader
Consider Viagra, for example. Why any health plan covers it is way beyond me.

While IMHO, Viagra is over-prescribed, impotence usually has a physical cause, such as disease, injury, or drug side-effects. It is not just psychological, nor is it always an unnecessary medical treatment, it is dependent on the individual circumstances. For example, my hubby had two major surgeries for kidney cancer followed up by "local" chemotherapy (through his urinary tract) over a 4 year period which affected the nerves, arteries and tissues in that area causing him to become totally impotent. We had only been married for 2 years at the time. The doctor did prescribe Viagra as a temporary therapuetic measure until his "system" was able to heal itself, which took another 4 years. In our case, our insurance did pay for it because it was deemed to be medically necessary.

6 posted on 07/22/2002 10:50:55 AM PDT by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson