Whilst resources are finite, the demand for free health services is infinite.
NICE is a government body that decides which drugs the NHS should and should not provide, based on a cost / benefit assessment.
By the same logic, shouldn't there be a NICE for patients to decide which marginal cases should and should not be saved?
Cases at the margin which NICE decided should not be saved at public expense could be advertised on internet for private philanthropists to foot the bill should they choose so to do.
My point is that if it makes sense to ration across drugs, then doesn't it make just as much sense to ration across patients?
Overweight single 60-yearold smokers with heart disease: "sorry we bombarded you with health information that you chose to ignore. enough is enough and for you the show ends here".
Loved-up 30-year-old parents with leukemia: "it's a long shot, but society is prepared to take the 50/50 bet that these new drugs might work for you".
I'm not having a go at NICE.Clearly there needs to be rationing of drugs.My point is that if it makes sense to ration across drugs, then doesn't it make just as much sense to ration across patients?Overweight single 60-yearold smokers with heart dise
From a practical position, certainly. From a moral one, I very much believe people are a product of their environment, so I do have sympathy with, for example, addicts.
From a practical position, certainly. From a moral one, I very much believe people are a product of their environment, so I do have sympathy with, for example, addicts.