Alzheimer's victims in England and Wales suffered a blow yesterday when the courts ruled that they would not be prescribed drugs that could ease their suffering - reports the Daily Telegraph.
Campaigners branded the decision "morally reprehensible" after a High Court judge upheld the decision by the drug's rationing body, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), to ban three new drugs; Aricept, Reminyl and Exelon.
NICE ruled that only those with severe Alzheimer's could have them. The drugs, which cost £2.50 per patient per day, can slow the disease.
Harriet Millward, the deputy chief executive of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said: "We are devastated that these drugs will remain unavailable on the NHS to people with early-stage Alzheimer's. We need to do more research, but it is hugely underfunded."
Gordon Lishman, the director general of Age Concern, said: "People with dementia will have to get much worse before they receive help."
NICE has refused to reveal how it calculated whether these drugs were cost effective in cases of mild Alzheimer's.
The ruling comes after Ivan Lewis, the health and social care minister, admitted that the NHS was failing the 600,000 patients with dementia.
While Ivan Lewis recognises the problem, clearly the necessary funds just aren't available to tackle it - for example by offering clinically effective new drugs like these on the NHS.
So in this context how is it justifiable to reward the audit-failing EU with a 63% rise in payments - handing over £2.5bn extra year (net) on top of the £3.5bn we already pay?
Who needs that money the most - Alzheimer's sufferers or Brussels? And why aren't minsters - and even some MPs no doubt with Alzheimer's sufferers and their families among their own constituents - being more responsible with the finite 'pot' of public money?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment