Results 1 to 38 of 38
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CajunJamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    167

    Snake bite cost man $130,000

    To me this is grossly abusive. I can't even fathom a dose of medicine costing $100,000 a pop.

    Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

  2. #2
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    Quote Originally Posted by CajunJamie View Post
    To me this is grossly abusive. [/url]



    And dying's not?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Whason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    430
    I didn't watch your video, but rattlesnake antivenom at my hospital costs approximately 2000 k per dose, and depending on what your coagulation profile looks like you could end up getting ten or more doses.
    "Chancho. When you are a man sometimes you wear stretchy pants... Its for fun..."

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 2wheelsnotfour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,017
    At one of the cancer care centers in the city in my area the chemotherapy drugs are amazingly expensive. However, they aren't expensive to "sock it to the patient" but due to the materials and research and development necessary to produce the medicine.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CajunJamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    167
    One of the reasons I posted this is because I have read other posts here by folks talking about seeing snakes on the trails, should they kill them, move them away, etc. One guy said he got bit and it cost him over $100,000.

    This video showed the price, JUST for the medicine, was $100,000 for the first dose and $25,000 for the second dose. That is ONLY the medicine. $100,000 for one dose. He spent one night in ICU and received 2 doses of medicine for $110,000. The other $13,000 were hospital fees.

    I thought this might have been a fluke and now that I see this article, I am pretty much of the belief that if you or I am out riding, get bit - BAM, $100,000 charge. That money has to come from insurance, or somewhere. I have insurance, but if some Joe is a student or something and the hospital wants to sue or put a lien on them for decades? Wow.

    Also, I have lived in South America and this guy was from Norway. Sure the cost to practice medicine is different in different countries, but the other impression I got was had this happened in another country, the price for the anti-venom would have been much less.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CajunJamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    167
    Here is a copy of the bill and two doses of anti-venom, only.


  7. #7
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    Quote Originally Posted by CajunJamie View Post
    That is ONLY the medicine.


    That is all.

  8. #8
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    1,267
    Pretty simple really, do not get bitten by a snake in South America.

  9. #9
    SS Pusher Man
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    7,393
    Well.....there is what the hospital is billing for said treatment.....it is another thing what small % they will actually get paid for said treatment.
    Bicycles donít have motors or batteries.

    Ebikes are not bicycles

  10. #10
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,119
    Again the cost of health care that side of the world makes me laugh.

    A lot of people do not realize how little the treatment they get costs.

    There is also an article complaining about the cost of an antivenom shot is Aus.

    Including medical treatment the guy got charged $300, which is quite steep, but understandable.

    Medical care in the USA is not only poor quality but a huge rip off.

    One more way for the big corps to control you.
    Why would I care about 150g of bike weight, I just ate 400g of cookies while reading this?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,148
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveGiant View Post
    Again the cost of health care that side of the world makes me laugh.

    A lot of people do not realize how little the treatment they get costs.

    There is also an article complaining about the cost of an antivenom shot is Aus.

    Including medical treatment the guy got charged $300, which is quite steep, but understandable.

    Medical care in the USA is not only poor quality but a huge rip off.

    One more way for the big corps to control you.
    You hit the nail on the head here big time.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,325
    Quote Originally Posted by 2wheelsnotfour View Post
    At one of the cancer care centers in the city in my area the chemotherapy drugs are amazingly expensive. However, they aren't expensive to "sock it to the patient" but due to the materials and research and development necessary to produce the medicine.
    Not really. Anti-cancer drugs are generally the cheapest to bring to market because in reality, the bar for safety and toxicity are quite low. Also, a little known fact is that until very recently, most oncologists could charge what ever they wanted for chemotherapeutic agents.

    Anti-cancer drugs are expensive because people are dying and you can charge them anything for a few more months of life. And that is all you get. No matter what the media tells you, with few exceptions, mortality rates from cancer have not changed at all.

  13. #13
    Is not amused
    Reputation: Hutch3637's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,205
    Quote Originally Posted by CajunJamie View Post
    I can't even fathom a dose of medicine costing $100,000 a pop.
    1) Pay attention to where your walking and surroundings
    2) This is Amercia!?
    3) Baby rattle snakes don't control the amount of venom they release and are actually more dangerous then an adult where adults may do a dry strike first then release the venom.

    Amercia 2102!

  14. #14
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    There is no "profit motive" in finding a cure for cancer.

  15. #15
    Formerly mtbnoobadam
    Reputation: Adam_B.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    694
    For the first 11 months of my daughter's life she had to have infusions of a protein called albumin 5 vials a day 5 days a week for her kidney disorder. With each vial of albumin costing $3500 the total cost for the 11 months of treatment was roughly $5,775,000. Then she was placed on dialysis for the next 12 months. The monthly invoice we got for her dialysis supplies was for $85,000. So for that year the total cost was roughly $1,020,000. Then the actual kidney transplant surgery cost nearly $700,000. So in the first 2 years of her life she cost roughly $7,495,000 to keep alive and that's not including her medications and numerous hospital stays. I've gotta say I'm definitely thankful for insurance.

  16. #16
    Good, green, Oregon.
    Reputation: Giant Chachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    789
    It would be interesting to know the mark up or profitability of this antivenom, and which drug company makes it. I know, R&D costs, testing, etc to get past the FDA, but for some reason I am beginning to have a thing against big-pharma these days. I know, how do you put a price on a life, but they did it with this drug.
    *2016 Transition Patrol Carbon (aka: Sweet Pea)

  17. #17
    Good, green, Oregon.
    Reputation: Giant Chachi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    789
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    Not really. Anti-cancer drugs are generally the cheapest to bring to market because in reality, the bar for safety and toxicity are quite low. Also, a little known fact is that until very recently, most oncologists could charge what ever they wanted for chemotherapeutic agents.

    Anti-cancer drugs are expensive because people are dying and you can charge them anything for a few more months of life. And that is all you get. No matter what the media tells you, with few exceptions, mortality rates from cancer have not changed at all.
    A man who does research and realizes what the main stream media feeds us (in the US). I like it! Taking it further, there are even stories (yes, I call them stories, at this point) about cancer cures being surpressed, based on the fact that drug companies would lose massive profits. Again, I don't doubt it. These stories have a familiarity to oil companies surpressing alternate sources of energy for fear of loosing trillions to the evils of free energy!
    *2016 Transition Patrol Carbon (aka: Sweet Pea)

  18. #18
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,378
    here is how they make antivenom. They take a rattlesnake of the variety that you have been bit by. They milk the venom. The immediately take that venom and inject it in appropriate doses into a horse. They take that horse and extract his response to the venom. They repeat this a lot. They then ship it to a hospital where it has about a 2 week lifespan.

    So you can see how something like this could be insanely expensive.

    Aside from the antivenom, there is the bodies reaction to the venom with needs to be counteracted with serious medical intervention depending on the severity of the bite. Many people loose limbs to cell death, have to have skin grafts and have lingering effects their whole lives posts bite.

    It is not like a proprietary cancer drug but a very rare and lifesaving commodity that has no artificial cheaper alternative. Snakes, horses and expedience is all that lays between you and death.

    The other thing to consider is that snakes release varying amounts of venom depending on their age and the conditions. A young snake attacking your foot because you stepped on it will probably be death if you aren't able to get to a hospital ASAP. A mohave rattler striking you because it thinks you are prey, you will probably die even if you get to a hospital asap.
    An older rattler that is startled might not even release venom. It really is the luck of the draw and a price that I would be willing to pay to not die from a snake bite which I have been led to believe is insanely painful.

    A lot of times the antivenom is sourced from a local university research department.
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  19. #19
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    ...for a few more months of life. And that is all you get.
    This is ********. Pure and utter ********. Some people don't make it, true. But some do. And some for a very long time.

    I have been given 27 additional months (so far). I think that counts for more than just a few, and I know people personally who have lived multiple decades post-cancer diagnosis and treatment.

    My treatment was expensive, but the chemotherapy drugs were not the most expensive part of it. The chemotherapy drugs I received had been on the market for a long time, for the most part, and that means for lower cost. I did receive one newer drug that had been fast-tracked approval by the FDA recently, but I only received one dose of it.

    The most expensive parts of treatment were the drugs used to stimulate my immune system and other supportive care I received. I received Neupogen (older, less expensive, but I received a LOT of doses) and Neulasta (new and very expensive for a tiny amount, but I received that one more infrequently). The frequent hospitalizations for blood transfusions were also very expensive, and the month I spent in a coma on life support was very expensive. The chemo drugs themselves were a relatively small proportion of the overall cost of treatment. And, with insurance, I am paid up, in full.

    I won't say that the process is not extremely imperfect and that major improvements need to me made even still, but you, sir, are full of $hit.

  20. #20
    Frt Range, CO
    Reputation: pursuiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,576
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    ...I have been given 27 additional months (so far). I think that counts for more than just a few....
    And so many of us are glad you're still with us. My wife is a breast cancer survivor (~6years) and I can tell anyone here once you're faced with that kind of crisis the cost doesn't seem like a big deal.

  21. #21
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24,390
    Quote Originally Posted by pursuiter View Post
    And so many of us are glad you're still with us. My wife is a breast cancer survivor (~6years) and I can tell anyone here once you're faced with that kind of crisis the cost doesn't seem like a big deal.
    congrats for your wife. I agree the cost is a minor consideration overall.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,561
    I think we are very lucky we can go out and get a snake bite
    and not die from it. I don't care how much it cost. If you don't like
    the cost don't bitc*, don't get treatment, and see if you make it.
    My life is worth more than a $100K.
    Best, John

  23. #23
    STEEL IS REAL
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutch3637 View Post
    1) Pay attention to where your walking and surroundings
    2) This is Amercia!?
    3) Baby rattle snakes don't control the amount of venom they release and are actually more dangerous then an adult where adults may do a dry strike first then release the venom.

    Amercia 2102!
    Do you remember the debate we had here a few years ago about whether a baby rattler is more dangerous than an adult rattler? I disagree with your opinion here but we'll leave it at that.

    The only other thing I have to say here regarding the cost of the meds for a snake bite is:

    Does this mean that I should stop taking risks by handling the rattlers I encounter???
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  24. #24
    Is not amused
    Reputation: Hutch3637's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    3,205
    Quote Originally Posted by ambassadorhawg View Post
    Do you remember the debate we had here a few years ago about whether a baby rattler is more dangerous than an adult rattler? I disagree with your opinion here but we'll leave it at that.

    The only other thing I have to say here regarding the cost of the meds for a snake bite is:

    Does this mean that I should stop taking risks by handling the rattlers I encounter???
    No, as I just found this site last year. I should have typed that one up better but, Rockcrusher went into more what I was referring to with the baby rattlers. No, you should pick them up and bite their neck to gain super human powers. I'm not sure about that last part of advice but, how do you say it? It's worth a shot.

  25. #25
    STEEL IS REAL
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,900
    Quote Originally Posted by rockcrusher View Post
    here is how they make antivenom. They take a rattlesnake of the variety that you have been bit by. They milk the venom. The immediately take that venom and inject it in appropriate doses into a horse. They take that horse and extract his response to the venom. They repeat this a lot. They then ship it to a hospital where it has about a 2 week lifespan.

    So you can see how something like this could be insanely expensive.

    Aside from the antivenom, there is the bodies reaction to the venom with needs to be counteracted with serious medical intervention depending on the severity of the bite. Many people loose limbs to cell death, have to have skin grafts and have lingering effects their whole lives posts bite.

    It is not like a proprietary cancer drug but a very rare and lifesaving commodity that has no artificial cheaper alternative. Snakes, horses and expedience is all that lays between you and death.

    The other thing to consider is that snakes release varying amounts of venom depending on their age and the conditions. A young snake attacking your foot because you stepped on it will probably be death if you aren't able to get to a hospital ASAP. A mohave rattler striking you because it thinks you are prey, you will probably die even if you get to a hospital asap.
    An older rattler that is startled might not even release venom. It really is the luck of the draw and a price that I would be willing to pay to not die from a snake bite which I have been led to believe is insanely painful.

    A lot of times the antivenom is sourced from a local university research department.
    Rockcrusher, your info on the Mojave Rattler is not quite accurate according to what my firefighter buddy who works at the Joshua Tree Station on Park Av. says. He has responded to several bite victims over the years.

    A nearby hospital (High Desert Medical Center) stocks the antivenon needed for Mojave rattler bites. Rarely does anybody die unless they are in poor health to begin with.

    The fact that the Mojave's venom is neuro toxic is actually a good thing as long as you can get help in due time. No tissue destruction from these. No loss of limbs, no heavy scarring. Just keep your heart pumping, your lungs filled with fresh air, have no allergic reaction to the antivenon, and you'll most likely live.

    Now, the other rattlers with hemotoxin... that's bad, real bad. If you survive that type of bite, you will have some degree of permanent physical damage... possibly enough to end your mountain biking play time forever. Yikes!!!

    Where I live in Los Angeles, we have the Southern Pacific Rattlesnake. It is reported to have special blend of venom that is both hemo and neuro toxic. That's really, really, really bad.
    Last edited by Hawgzilla; 07-31-2012 at 05:54 PM.
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  26. #26
    STEEL IS REAL
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,900
    Quote Originally Posted by Hutch3637 View Post
    No, as I just found this site last year. I should have typed that one up better but, Rockcrusher went into more what I was referring to with the baby rattlers. No, you should pick them up and bite their neck to gain super human powers. I'm not sure about that last part of advice but, how do you say it? It's worth a shot.
    The only part of a rattler that is dangerous is it's fangs and venom sacks. I know you are joking but I think you meant that I'd need to drink it's venom to become super powerful. If a rattler bit itself, it would die the same as anything else would without treatment. In fact, I once had a captive rattler that have bit itself by accident. It was a dead snake the following day.

    Recently that a Pastor from a church back East whose members handled rattlers for religious beliefs died of a bite.
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,325
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    This is ********. Pure and utter ********. Some people don't make it, true. But some do. And some for a very long time.

    I have been given 27 additional months (so far). I think that counts for more than just a few, and I know people personally who have lived multiple decades post-cancer diagnosis and treatment.

    My treatment was expensive, but the chemotherapy drugs were not the most expensive part of it. The chemotherapy drugs I received had been on the market for a long time, for the most part, and that means for lower cost. I did receive one newer drug that had been fast-tracked approval by the FDA recently, but I only received one dose of it.

    The most expensive parts of treatment were the drugs used to stimulate my immune system and other supportive care I received. I received Neupogen (older, less expensive, but I received a LOT of doses) and Neulasta (new and very expensive for a tiny amount, but I received that one more infrequently). The frequent hospitalizations for blood transfusions were also very expensive, and the month I spent in a coma on life support was very expensive. The chemo drugs themselves were a relatively small proportion of the overall cost of treatment. And, with insurance, I am paid up, in full.

    I won't say that the process is not extremely imperfect and that major improvements need to me made even still, but you, sir, are full of $hit.
    Actually, I am not. First, I am glad you are still with us. You are the lucky one. But you are an anomaly. My statements are about the bigger picture. Mortality rates from cancer (all cancer deaths) have not changed since our "war on cancer" started in 1971. The same number of people die of cancer today than in 1971. They live longer but that is really because of lead time bias and not treatment.

    Most cancer treatments are designed to extend life a few months. And they can do that. Take Sorafenib (also called Nexavar). Works great and can extend life by a few months. Most anti-cancer drugs are like that. There are exceptions, Gleevec has been great but even that has not proven to be the "Magic pill" it was thought to be.

    The drug you took to help with your side-effects, Filgrastim, is helpful, but it is a bandaid to cover inherant issues with the other drugs.

    And as someone in the field, I am not proud of this. If you look at what has been done with HIV or HCV, where we can basically either keep people alive forever or cure them, the cancer field has failed. Pitifully. We need to do better.

    So I wish you the best and hope to God your cancer is gone and you live a long and happy life. But never forget you are one of the lucky ones.

  28. #28
    Retired User
    Reputation: wbmason55's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    854
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    This is ********. Pure and utter ********. Some people don't make it, true. But some do. And some for a very long time.
    ^This. My mother's been cancer free for 11 years and living a perfectly normal life since radiation and chemo treatment for lymphoma. 11 years is a pretty sizable chunk of one's life and I'm happy to have had her around all this time. In those 11 years she got to see all her kids graduate from college, get married, and a few grandchildren.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nubster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    6,569
    I am in the camp of medicine being big business and as such, interest in curing people is not good business. Keep them sick, make more money. Pretty simple math. And yeah, I am in the health care industry. Pretty disgusting really.
    Kona Big Unit SS
    Kona Private Jake SSCX
    DiamondBack Release 3
    Norco Torrent HT 7.1

  30. #30
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24,390
    the whole point of my chemotherapy was to nuke my bone marrow. neutropenia was not a side effect....it was an intended effect. the point of the neupogen and neulasta injections was to minimize the time where I'd have wbc counts of 0.0. My chemo drug dosing was constantly adjusted to make sure that I'd never have counts that low for more than 1 day.

    That was why I only got one dose of Mylotarg when I was originally scheduled to receive 3 over the course of my treatment. The one dose kept my wbc counts at 0.0 for a number of days.

    For my specific type of cancer, doctors appear to have a pretty good handle on it. Survival rates are pretty good compared to other cancers that they haven't figured out as well (even other types of leukemias). They had identified the specific genetic mutations that caused my cancer before they chose which treatment to use. So yeah, I'm fortunate in that respect. But to claim that the "war on cancer" is a blanket failure is a bit inaccurate. Yeah, I have friends who have died from their cancers. But it's reaffirmed so often that "cancer" is really a suite of many different diseases with many different causes and different mechanisms at play. About the only similarities are that there is somehow DNA damage and that damage allows unbridled cell proliferation.

    Everything else is different depending on the piece of DNA that's damaged, how it was damaged (inheritance, chemical exposure, virus, radiation exposure, etc), the development stage of the proliferating cells, the type of cells proliferating, and the way those proliferating cells are growing (tumor, diffuse like leukemia, metastases, etc).

    I think looking at cancer mortality rates is a little deceiving, also. Many more types of cancer are known today than in the past. Our ability to diagnose them is improved, also. Survival rates are a better way to look at it, because it considers cancer deaths from folks who have received a diagnosis. For my age group, it is true that survival rates have not improved. Young adults are an ignored demographic historically. That is beginning to change. However, survival for pediatric patients and elderly patients HAS improved overall, but that certainly depends on the type of cancer. Some have very low survival rates.

  31. #31
    Axe
    Axe is offline
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,423
    Quote Originally Posted by CaveGiant View Post
    Medical care in the USA is not only poor quality but a huge rip off.
    You have not been around the world much?

    US medical care is actually very, very good. It the system for paying for it that is poorly organized and inefficient.

    But then, just keep insurance in order. If you can afford travel to US, you also can afford paying for a fairly comprehensive insurance.

    Even the common examples of Canada or UK - try to tear ACL and get fast a proper treatment there..

  32. #32
    Axe
    Axe is offline
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,423
    Quote Originally Posted by rockcrusher View Post
    here is how they make antivenom. They take a rattlesnake of the variety that you have been bit by. They milk the venom. The immediately take that venom and inject it in appropriate doses into a horse. They take that horse and extract his response to the venom. They repeat this a lot. They then ship it to a hospital where it has about a 2 week lifespan.
    Yep.. and how many bites they get per year, and what is the cost to keep it available.

    I would not be surprised that they did not make much money on it, after all costs are considered.

    In countries where they do not bill the patient - it costs the same. Just paid through taxes and even less accountability. Private insurance companies do actually negotiate for the lowest cost with hospitals.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,325
    Quote Originally Posted by NateHawk View Post
    the whole point of my chemotherapy was to nuke my bone marrow.

    For my specific type of cancer, doctors appear to have a pretty good handle on it. Survival rates are pretty good compared to other cancers that they haven't figured out as well (even other types of leukemias). They had identified the specific genetic mutations that caused my cancer before they chose which treatment to use. So yeah, I'm fortunate in that respect. But to claim that the "war on cancer" is a blanket failure is a bit inaccurate. Yeah, I have friends who have died from their cancers. But it's reaffirmed so often that "cancer" is really a suite of many different diseases with many different causes and different mechanisms at play. About the only similarities are that there is somehow DNA damage and that damage allows unbridled cell proliferation.


    I think looking at cancer mortality rates is a little deceiving, also. Many more types of cancer are known today than in the past. Our ability to diagnose them is improved, also. Survival rates are a better way to look at it, because it considers cancer deaths from folks who have received a diagnosis. For my age group, it is true that survival rates have not improved. Young adults are an ignored demographic historically. That is beginning to change. However, survival for pediatric patients and elderly patients HAS improved overall, but that certainly depends on the type of cancer. Some have very low survival rates.
    I think we will have to agree to disagree but your last point is the main point. Cancer survival is a 5 year metric. 5 year rates of survival have gone up for most cancers. For example, 5 year survival rates for breast cancer have gone from 75% in the 70's to almost 90% today. However, this is not because of an actual survival but rather in the earlier detection of the breast cancer. Same is true for lung cancer, colon cancer, leukemia and lymphomas.

    At the end of the day, we are saving the same number of people today as we did in the 70's, 80's and 90's. That is the big question. Why? Why aren't we any better at this. I think there is an answer and you mentioned it, but it will require lots of money and really tough decisions.

  34. #34
    Axe
    Axe is offline
    Custom User Title
    Reputation: Axe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    I think we will have to agree to disagree but your last point is the main point. Cancer survival is a 5 year metric. 5 year rates of survival have gone up for most cancers. For example, 5 year survival rates for breast cancer have gone from 75% in the 70's to almost 90% today. However, this is not because of an actual survival but rather in the earlier detection of the breast cancer. Same is true for lung cancer, colon cancer, leukemia and lymphomas.

    At the end of the day, we are saving the same number of people today as we did in the 70's, 80's and 90's. That is the big question. Why? Why aren't we any better at this. I think there is an answer and you mentioned it, but it will require lots of money and really tough decisions.
    I have poked around the seer.cancer.gov

    Age-Adjusted U.S. Mortality Rates By Age At Diagnosis/Death All Sites, White, Both Sexes 1975-2009

    1975 - rate 29.8
    2009 - rate 17.3

    Seems to be steadily going down.

    We do have a proof based medical care - treatments are not really approved without statistical scientific evidence. And with all the advances in information technology, data mining, genome studies... it will eventually yield results. It takes time.

  35. #35
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    I think we will have to agree to disagree but your last point is the main point. Cancer survival is a 5 year metric. 5 year rates of survival have gone up for most cancers. For example, 5 year survival rates for breast cancer have gone from 75% in the 70's to almost 90% today. However, this is not because of an actual survival but rather in the earlier detection of the breast cancer. Same is true for lung cancer, colon cancer, leukemia and lymphomas.

    At the end of the day, we are saving the same number of people today as we did in the 70's, 80's and 90's. That is the big question. Why? Why aren't we any better at this. I think there is an answer and you mentioned it, but it will require lots of money and really tough decisions.
    Just happened across this article and made me think about some of these things. And knowing what I do about my own cancer (exposure to secondhand smoke seems to be a large factor), I think the cancer problem is more indicative of larger social failings than failings of the medical industry to treat after the fact. I just cannot place much blame on doctors and hospitals. They are really powerless to affect real change because real change is prevention, which goes beyond what they do. it relates to personal choices (dietary), government policies (environmental protections or lack thereof), industrial trends (widespread use and distribution of synthetic organic compounds), and societal desires (society demands lots of cheap junk and processed foods).

  36. #36
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post

    And as someone in the field, I am not proud of this. If you look at what has been done with HIV or HCV, where we can basically either keep people alive forever or cure them, the cancer field has failed. Pitifully. We need to do better.
    You're in the industry? I call BS. You must know nothing about biologics and their success rate in recent years. Go look up Avastin data and then get back to us. And if you did work in the field, you'd have a basic understanding of biology and why antivirals are completely different than anti-cancer treatments.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nubster View Post
    I am in the camp of medicine being big business and as such, interest in curing people is not good business. Keep them sick, make more money. Pretty simple math. And yeah, I am in the health care industry. Pretty disgusting really.
    This is highly offensive and ignorant garbage. Cures are far more profitable than treatment in the lifespan of a patented drug. Pharma companies are full of people who want to cure disease. Do not get brainwashed by the media.

    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    You have not been around the world much?

    US medical care is actually very, very good. It the system for paying for it that is poorly organized and inefficient.
    The care is excellent. The insurance is a problem, as is the overall cost of medicine. The per-capita individuals gaining the most wealth from this system are the doctors and private clinics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Axe View Post

    We do have a proof based medical care - treatments are not really approved without statistical scientific evidence. And with all the advances in information technology, data mining, genome studies... it will eventually yield results. It takes time.
    It absolutely does take time. Many, many years of failed testing and bad leads to yield one small step in the right direction.



    I work in the pharma industry. I've worked for some of the top drug-producing companies in the world. I currently manage a study that is an effort to cure Hepatitis B. My company also aims to cure Hepatitis C within the next 24 months. People who bash on pharma companies or the healthcare industry as a whole have very little understanding of the work that goes into developing a drug or biologic.

  37. #37
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,106
    I have two contributions to this thread:

    First:
    Rattlers are dangerous critters, but not out to kill anybody. I still think its cruel for a person to kill a snake that's just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Many times the snake bites are a result of harassment, so my #1 advice is if you see a snake and don't know if its a rattler or venomous in general, just leave it alone.


    Second:
    100k is cheap for a life. My wife's medical bills last year added up to around 1.1 million. Thank God for insurance as we only had about 10k out of pocket total since we hit the cap (not counting the money lost from not working). Now she is as healthy as the crazy tom-boy she was prior to the down-turn. Perspective is what counts with medical care, she would have been gone without it. 1.1million is cheap for my wife's life.
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  38. #38
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    I have two contributions to this thread:

    First:
    Rattlers are dangerous critters, but not out to kill anybody. I still think its cruel for a person to kill a snake that's just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Many times the snake bites are a result of harassment, so my #1 advice is if you see a snake and don't know if its a rattler or venomous in general, just leave it alone.


    Second:
    100k is cheap for a life. My wife's medical bills last year added up to around 1.1 million. Thank God for insurance as we only had about 10k out of pocket total since we hit the cap (not counting the money lost from not working). Now she is as healthy as the crazy tom-boy she was prior to the down-turn. Perspective is what counts with medical care, she would have been gone without it. 1.1million is cheap for my wife's life.
    and two very solid contributions at that.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.