The American Spectator : The Death Panel's First Murder

Print Email

Text Size

The Public Policy

The Death Panel’s First Murder

By Peter Ferrara on 12.22.10 @ 6:08AM

The political logic of socialized medicine becomes colder and crueler in its display.

(Page 2 of 3)

Josh explains the message from the FDA’s decision to his mother, and to the American people:

By denying approval for this drug, the FDA is basically telling my mother and my family that her life just isn’t worth the price. They’re robbing her of a chance to celebrate her 30th wedding anniversary with my dad, or to see my little sister who is in kindergarten graduate from high school…. Avastin has given my mom priceless time — time to spend with me, my siblings, my father and all her other family and friends. No woman should ever be denied that opportunity by our government.”

Bloodthirsty Progressives

The Susan G. Komen Foundation opposed the FDA’s action. So did the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance, a cancer patients’ advocacy organization. The U.S. National Comprehensive Cancer Network, an alliance of 21 top cancer centers that issues medical guidelines based clinical evidence, also supports the continued availability of Avastin for breast cancer. Even in Europe, where health care rationing is prevalent, the European Medicines Agency, which is the FDA for the European Union, ruled last week that Avastin would continue to be available for breast cancer treatment there.

To no avail. In America, the FDA has spoken. Those super responders to Avastin like Mrs. Turnage, if not Mrs. Turnage herself, must die, the sooner the better.

As Sally Pipes wrote at Forbes.com last week, “Government drug rationing isn’t going to stop at Avastin.” The FDA decision is a straw in the wind, indicating an ominous turn in American medicine, if doctors, patients, and the American people do not fight back. What is needed is not a stop gap solution applying only to Avastin. The FDA must be fundamentally reformed, as specified below.

Avastin works by cutting off the blood supply to tumors, causing them to wither and die. It is still in use for the treatment of kidney, colon, lung, and brain cancers. Because of that, doctors can still legally prescribe Avastin even for breast cancer “off label,” which means for a use not approved by the FDA. But the treatment costs $88,000 a year. The FDA didn’t say so, but that cost is the real reason for its action.

The FDA’s decision means that Medicare and Medicaid will likely refuse to pay for the drug for breast cancer. These government programs do not pay for costly medicines where not FDA approved. This in turn provides the legal foundation for private insurance companies to now refuse payment for the treatment as well. They are not legally obligated to pay for costly therapies denied FDA approval and rejected by Medicare and Medicaid. Otherwise, they could be forced to pay for dances by Indian Medicine Men to cure cancer.

Ignorant liberals running your mouths about insurance company rationing, take note of how this works. No insurance company has the power to weigh costs against benefits, and tell you that your health if not your life is not worth the money. But the government has now arrogated to itself the power to do precisely that. That is the meaning of the Avastin decision.

When a third party, not the patient with his doctor’s advice, weighs your health and life in the balance like this, I call it Fascism. It is a perfect analogue to Nazi practices, and we are not going to accept that in America. The American people need to go to war now against the FDA.

But the FDA decision is just one symptom of that more ominous, fundamental turn in American medicine mentioned above. The decision reflects a new fashion rising among America’s Ruling Class, the imperious “judgment” that the latest, most advanced medical care for America’s most seriously ill is too costly and not worth it.

The great virtue of American medicine is that it provides to the broad public, rather than just to the rich as in some enclaves around the world, the latest, most technologically and scientifically advanced health care on the planet for the most sick. Those suffering from cancer and heart disease, seniors suffering from the infirmities of advancing age, premature babies born smaller than your hand, are consequently rescued from premature death and incapacitating suffering far more than anywhere else on earth.

It should be no surprise that most health care spending is actually spent on the sick. That is what health care is for. But that is a big revelation to bloodthirsty progressives in the Ruling Class. In their emerging view, so much could be saved if we would just cut off the costly health care for the sickest and most vulnerable, and they would just fulfill their social responsibility by dying a cheap natural death that would not so burden the glorious Welfare State.

But what else could we better spend our money on but our health and our very lives and those of our loved ones? The progressives in the Ruling Class have their own dark answer to that question.

The rising anti-health care fashion is fueled by the realization of those in the know with access to the levers of power that they can buy far more votes spending all that money elsewhere than on health care for the sickest and most vulnerable. Those suffering from cancer and heart disease are too weak and sick to be relentless, effective political advocates. They may well be dead before they can even vote in the next election. Far more votes can be bought spending that money on younger, healthy voters who will be around a long time to work on, contribute to, and support campaigns and the progressives’ Ruling Class political machine. Maybe spend it on more welfare for young families, or on more corporate subsidies for the endless “Green Energy” funding drain.

Page: < 12 3 >

About the Author

Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (177) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Appleby| 12.22.10 @ 6:45AM

If this drug cured testicular cancer, it would be handed out free in high schools.

Shamus| 12.22.10 @ 8:09AM

Obamacare hands out free Viagra to sex offenders, so I suppose there's some basis for this comment.

Booger | 12.22.10 @ 8:38AM

From the desk of United States Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius:

Dear Comrade Citizens,

As you are well aware, my department has been conducting an extensive survey of the so-called cancer drug Avastin. While we did find that this drug has been used by many physicians in treating cancers of the colon, kidney, lung, brain, ovary and breast as well as providing promising results in the treatment of macular degeneration, it is our finding that these physicians have been guilty of malpractice and malfeasance. With my expert training in the field of public administration (I have a Masters degree!) I have been able to determine that this drug is in point of fact completely ineffective. The only reason that these doctors have chosen to administer it is therefore quite clear: It is an extremely expensive drug and they are receiving kickbacks from the sinister forces which run this nation's drug companies.

Our Great Leader, President Obama, has already brought this type of behavior to the nation's attention during the campaign, when He warned us against those unscrupulous and greedy surgeons who will happily remove your appendix and tonsils for no good reason when you are perfectly healthy. And why do they do it? For the money, of course. By the way, I don't think I have to mention just how many of these doctors are Jewish. It's high time somebody brought these money-hungry medical vampires to justice, and I am just the woman to do it! Now that I am in charge, there will be no more dispensing of these ridiculously expensive drugs, no more greedy doctors making a killing with their Jewish kickback schemes, and no more drug companies raking in their obscene profits.

We have been getting a lot of flack here about women calling in suggesting that I am insensitive to the needs of breast cancer patients. Well buck up ladies, it's time to quit crying and get proactive! Look, every year you have your silly little "race for the cure" business, and you go around wearing those ridiculous pink ribbons, and everybody wants to hug a "survivor". For crying out loud, let's go ahead and look at the real problem: It's those stupid, giant udders that so many of you insist on carrying around everywhere on your chests! Look, I'm a successful, beautiful, intelligent, universally beloved civil servant, and I've been happy with my A-cup all my life. So what you crybabies need to do is go ahead and get yourselves preventative masectomies. You go around getting all the guys to ogle your stupidly gigantic B, C and (UGH!) D cups and think you are oh-so-great, until you get the big C. Well face it, you had it coming, didn't you? You could have had those stupid giant things lopped off years ago, but you were just too proud of them, weren't you? Well whose fault is it now?

So honestly, do you really think bankrupting the country for the sake of your floppy skin-bags is worth it? Well I sure don't. And as for all of you who think you're so much better than me since I'm "small" on top, who's laughing now? After all, with my Master's degree in Public Administration (from the mighty University of Kansas, go Jayhawks!) I know that since I only have an A cup I don't have any risk of breast cancer.

So what do you do? Chop them off before they can turn on you, then learn to be happy with a flat chest. I know it can work, it's worked great for me all my life!

Sincerely,

Secretary for Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius

http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.22.10 @ 9:05AM

Booger,
On that one, I had to laugh...to keep from crying.

Occam's Tool| 12.22.10 @ 11:47AM

It's worse than that, Ken. When I was in NZ, the FDA approved Herceptin for a 52 week course for Breast CA. The New Zealand Pharmac would cover 11 weeks--length of treatment arbitrarily chosen by the government. Don't get me started on psych treatments, by the way. I have a laundry list of true stories.

Ackston| 12.22.10 @ 3:12PM

is iping away tears.

Anastasia Mather| 12.22.10 @ 9:49AM

That's sooooo funny until you really think about how true a portrayal it is. Sigh.

And just think of all the money that went into the research that the company will not be able to recoup, preventing the discovery of other better drugs and treatments. It boggles the mind and stokes the anger.

hunce| 12.22.10 @ 11:04AM

Kathy is full of shit. I have a cousin who has "A" tits, and has cancer in the left one. Maybe the halfbreed plays with your "A" 's enough so cancer doesn't have time to form?

hididdlediddle| 12.23.10 @ 10:15AM

Unless U R a BC survivor U'll never never understand the emotions one goes through!! Size means nothing, joking means nothing, joking can cause more harm or "pain", it's trama to the body, don't let anyone tell U different. My cousin went through 4 yrs of chemo - cancer went to her brain - her death was slow. I was lucky, caught early, had surgery, cancer free for almost 9 yrs. This time of year is hard for me, U see I had biopsy 12/24 told 12/26 I had IDC. "Until you walk in MY shoes keep you mouth shut..."

Wanda| 12.22.10 @ 11:12AM

You are OBVIOUSLY brainwashed too. Just because you have a Masters degree makes you the authority.. EXACTLY When did God die and leave you in charge.. God has not notified me of that so, your comments mean absolutely nothing.. except government take over... and you have some sort of idea that you are above God, if anything you are evil.

Charles Martel| 12.22.10 @ 12:59PM

Wanda, you might want to take some of that rage over to the *real* Secretary Sebellius, and not dump it on our humble correspondent, Booger.

+++

jonrd| 12.22.10 @ 11:12AM

Booger your fantastic. Are you sure that you are not already writing excuses for Obamacare? This is a perfect example of just how our government acts when it comes to the invalids and elderly.
Unfortunately those elderly still vote those progressive politicians into office. When are they going to really wake up to the fact that they are simply numbers to a government that puts themselves above them. For instance a medical program with no limits against a program that places price limits on the public. Wake up people, start voting those creeps out of office. And a good place to start is 2012. And the first person on the list should be the President that hasn't told us the truth since he has been in office. Secondly is the senator leader who learned so much in a whorehouse. Following him should be anyone in his party who agrees with him. (For instance any liberal)
Then elect those who follow the guidelines set forth in the constitution, and who put the programs in place that will benifit the common citizen. Come on folks wake up! Get those liberal creeps out of office.

RoyfromKs| 12.22.10 @ 11:29PM

Sebelius is a educated idiot! I know I'm from Kansas! She is another idiot that believes in youthnasia! A youthnasia doctor done my mother in when she was 91 and still had her right mind! The doctor (a woman) waited till every one went home after midnight and took her off any life support! This was against all the papers the family signed to keep he alive! Sebelius is this same type individual! I don't care how much education she has It doesn't help her common sense! She don't have any! I know, she was our Governor of Kansas and couldn't wait for her to leave! She was about to go crazy waiting for Obama to choose her for something in the Whitehouse....anything! KEEP FIGHTING FOR THE RIGHTS AND MEDICINES FOR US OLDER AMERICANS! Otherwise we'll just die and fade away!

Wanda| 12.22.10 @ 11:24AM

OBTW.. Kathy... let's see what you want for yourself when YOU get breast cancer. Maybe they will refuse treatment for you... hmmmm, a very comforting thought for me.

Charles Martel| 12.22.10 @ 1:00PM

At the risk of repeating myself... Wanda, you might want to take some of that rage over to the *real* Secretary Sebellius, and not dump it on our humble correspondent, Booger.

+++

apnep| 12.22.10 @ 2:45PM

Haha! Seriously, Wanda is killing me.

floridaeagle| 12.22.10 @ 4:41PM

welcome to the group wanda! Booger is practicing editorial sarcasm.
have a good day

Bob K.| 12.22.10 @ 11:27AM

Booger,
For once one of your interminable maunderings is on point You are to be commended for keeping your ego out of this one.

Occam's Tool| 12.22.10 @ 11:48AM

You know, Bob, "dying is easy, comedy is hard." I appreciate Booger's efforts, even when they sometimes fall flat.

anthony Jecen| 12.22.10 @ 11:34AM

Spoken like a true Socialist. Chairman Obama love you. The people will run your commie butts back to the hole you crawled out of.

Charles Martel| 12.22.10 @ 1:01PM

It's disheartening to see how often satire is lost on people.

+++

RAMIII| 12.22.10 @ 5:21PM

Yes sir, you have it there! It is caused by the lack of reading/comprehension due to the inadequacy of our wonderful educational institutions (many colleges included btw). Or perhaps they are just humorless!

shirley williams| 12.22.10 @ 1:01PM

toyou the so called U S Secretary of health and human services read and if you can really understand in the Bible romans1:22 with your big degrees and your lack of Comensence and true Human Passion figure this out if you can read and comperhend what you read Professing themselves to be wisethey become fools.wakeup Know it all.

Charles Martel| 12.22.10 @ 1:02PM

At the risk of repeating myself... It's disheartening to see how often satire is lost on people.

+++

Paul| 12.22.10 @ 2:06PM

"Hammer-ing" that to death aren't you Martel!!

Ackston| 12.22.10 @ 3:24PM

In deference to the Hammer's namesake he can hammer as much as he likes as far as I'm concerned. ;)

Paul| 12.22.10 @ 4:13PM

Oh, I agree...

Art| 12.22.10 @ 5:14PM

Charles,

Although this may have been satire, the point is, "most people believe that IF Kathy had written this piece, this is exactly the atttitude she would have espoused".

Chicken Little| 12.22.10 @ 1:18PM

The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming! The death panels are coming!

And I'm frightened out of my wits! I'm running around warning all the barnyard animals.

But let me pause briefly and wish all of you AmSpec hogs a Happy Christmas!

joli| 12.22.10 @ 4:21PM

Wow! I lack the poor grammatical skills to even begin to respond to this!

patricia| 12.22.10 @ 4:18PM

Thank you so much for a sorely needed laugh. Hope you have a merry Christmas and a blessed and happy New Year.

Patricia mcMillan| 12.23.10 @ 12:14AM

You are one sick person.

marsha callane| 12.23.10 @ 4:07PM

COMRADE??????

Rebekah| 1.17.11 @ 7:04PM

You really dont think your being insensitive? mayb people dont think they can afford the masectomy or whatever it is to chop off their breasts. And hey guess what some people are actually just happy to say guess what i survived it and here u basically just called every woman in america stupid. I dont get into the whole walking for the cure thing, but i support the people who do so you can go fly a dang kite for all i care. If the drug worked for some people then mayb it actually is worth it. You really need to get your crap straight lady. Dont kill someones hopes of saving the person they love just bc YOU, ONE doctor thinks that Atacin or whatever doesn't work. Shut the hell up and dont let the FDA control who lives and dies cuz they think the medicine isn't worth saving someones life. im 16 with an aunt who's fighting cancer and i think your an insensitive woman who needs some serious mental help.

Ronald Reagan| 12.22.10 @ 1:24PM

MERRY CHRISTMAS FROM HEAVEN

I love you all dearly,
Now don't shed a tear,
I'm spending my Christmas,
With Jesus this year.

Ronald Reagan

(I just was released from purgatory, and I thank all of you for your prayers.)

Troll from Huff Post| 12.22.10 @ 1:34PM

This Ronald Reagan post is in very bad taste, and the person who made this "joke" is lacking in basic respect for a president who was, not only a good president, but a good man, as well.

I may not have agreed with all his policies, but I respected the man.

Jason | 12.23.10 @ 2:25PM

Uh, they said he went to heaven, what more do you want? We all spend time in purgatory as our souls are cleansed. Maybe you're on the fast-track somehow?

Michael| 12.23.10 @ 2:14PM

Swallowing the GOP talking points, without thinking and checking for facts, huh Shamus?

79@feelin'fine| 12.22.10 @ 1:11PM

I am 79 years old and in good health.

However, many of my friends and acquaintances my age and older are in terrible, painful, terminal conditions, yet medications keep them living on and on and on like the EverReady bunny.

There are two crimes that too many seniors are committing without any effort:

1. They are living too long.
2. They are dying to slowly.

When it comes my time to go, I want to go! Go, go, go!

I think it's high time we have death panels.
We're wasting far too much health care moneys on patients whose quality of life makes their lives not worth it.

When terminal patients begin the dying process with pain and suffering, they should have the right to ask their doctors to ACCELERATE THEIR DYING. Yes, you heard me correctly. This is the moral, merciful thing for the medical profession to do.

I'm not afraid of death panels. We need them, and we need them now.

And for all you Christians who plan to live the life eternal in heaven, you're ready to go, I'm sure. You want to go to heaven, don't you? Yes! You want to go to heaven, but you surely don't want to die, do you. An amusing parodox. Sooooo amusing.

And a Merry Christmas to all!

from 79@feelin'fine

Grim Reaper| 12.22.10 @ 1:40PM

Come visit us in Holland when you tire of this mortal coil.

Appleby| 12.22.10 @ 2:53PM

When my beloved uncle decided recently that enough was enough, he asked to leave the hospice and head home to die with dignity among his family. The hospice concurred with his wishes and they gave him palliative care at home until he shuffled off this mortal coil.

It can be done; what those of us who are not in a hurry to hit the street are worried about is the bureaucrats who want that Death Tax Money.

Ackston| 12.22.10 @ 3:34PM

@79 etc. We in the massive nanny bureaucracy applaud your willingness to put your life in our hands. We were all just joking around the cooler about how wonderful it is that you're so eager to be written off at the whim of we compassionate civic union workers. Let's see, which of your friends and family that you think are living too long and dying too slowly would you like us on the "death panel" ;) to get rid of first. Perhaps we should start with you. You Are setting a terrible example by feeling so good at your old age. More folks are just fooled into wanting to live longer -and we peeked in your health records -you just aren't That healthy you know. So we moved you to the top of the list. Merry Christmas -you might not be having a New Year when the death panel next decides.

jonunr| 12.22.10 @ 8:44PM

79@feelin'fine,
You are right, we Christians want to go to be with the LORD. And the older we get the more we want to go and the more ready we are to go. The cares of this world are not as important to us as they once were. BUT, we want to go in God's own time and by His own method. We know that there is purpose in suffering. And that purpose is always for our ultimate good.
And by the way, death panels have always been here. If you are in such a hurry to relieve the
"misery" of the "suffering elderly", you could use the 12 gauge double barrel death panel. But you want someone else to do the dirty work don't you? You want a doctor or a nurse to murder them by injecting poison.

RoyfromKs| 12.22.10 @ 11:45PM

Congrats to you! I'm selfish, I want to live forever because when you're dead ....you're dead! If you want to go so bad why do you need a doctor? That will cost family more money! It sounds like you don't want to spend any money to better livelihood and our medicines so what are you waiting on! Bye, Bye! As long as I have my right mind I figure I can offer something to society even if it's not physical labor! Anyway, I hope you aren't dis-satisfied when you get to Heaven!

JF| 12.23.10 @ 4:23PM

79 - please spread your joy and good cheer to those "friends" who are living too long. From where I sit, no one is forcing them to take those medications that keep them clinging to life. When my mother realized she had cancer, she CHOSE to forego chemo and surgery. She weighed the cost and benefit of medical intervention (she was 75) and decided to let nature take its course. Your friends obviously still want to live; you obviously believe the government should have the right to take that choice away from them. As the saying goes, with friends like you, who needs enemies?

Melvin| 12.22.10 @ 6:58AM

This is one of those articles that makes a person stop and contemplate in what the author is trying to convey.
But the thought by me the reader is first based upon emotion not rage, but, "How the hell can the very people who represent us, legislate our own selected demise.
Right here, right now it is not rage that consumes me, but fear and helplessness. Because a serious illness is one of those things that is based on trust and for the most part your putting your life into someone else's hands.
For clarity I can only speak for myself, but millions of Americans share a similar life. Before joining the Marine Corps for a career, I was in construction with my father, hard laborious work, from sunup to sundown. My career in the Marine Corps was the same, but more concentrated. I was exposed to environments that were full of toxic chemicals and compounds.
I am 53 years old and my body isn't working the same as it used to. But I persevere because as my wife puts it, "Sometimes your just too damn stubborn." This is who I am, and I refuse to give up to be a burden on anyone, and by God I am still a productive citizen who gets up and goes to work everyday.
I don't go to the doctor as much as I should, but even my stubborn butt realizes that there will be a day, that I will have a Mrs.Turnage revelation.
And when I extend my hand and basically put my life into that doctor's hand to seek that trust and have that confidence that my doctor will do everything that modern medicine can provide, will refuse to extend his hand and face me with the realization of. "I'm sorry Mr. Leppla, there is no treatment that is available to you, but all we can do is make you as comfortable as possible."
I can maybe accept this for myself, but not for my wife. My wife is my world and the sole reason for me getting up everyday.
I post here at American Spectator religiously, and many of the regulars know me to a certain degree. People, we are not Europe, we are not Europeans who passively accept shit like Obama Care. I will tell you we need to storm Washington D.C. and take that damn accursed city apart brick by brick and cast those Godless bastards and crucify them and place their worthless carcasses on the Washington Mall for all those who wish to go into politics to see as an example of what happens when corruption, greed, and arrogance will get you if you push the people too far.
I alone know when it is my time to die, there will come a time, where I will look into my doctors eyes and tell him or her, "No doc, no more, I just want to go home to my family, please let me go."
I don't need some Fu$*%&@ bureaucrat to take that decision away from me. Lets face it my fellow Americans like it or not if we truly love our loved ones we're going to have to fight for them.
I apologize for being wordy, but this message is from a middle aged jarhead, that suffers from male pattern baldness who is scared and angry, and for the first time in his life, who is uncertain about his and his beloved wife's future.

Mimi| 12.22.10 @ 7:56AM

Melvin... The good guys are on their way to arrive Jan. 5th. I am hopeful they can stop the "MADNESS"... that seems to be escalating since the slight reprieve of outrages during the election...Yes indeed it's the FDA just what are they up to? Peter filled us in... and then the FCC and control of the internet ...on and on..more and more. They must stay strong and e must support them to roll this stuff BACK.

Mimi| 12.22.10 @ 8:00AM

"WE" must support them..oops.

SonOfSam| 12.22.10 @ 8:11AM

Dear Mimi,
The "good guys" have got one more chance to get it right. If they prove to be the same scrotum-less cowards they've shown themselves for the past 20 years, then I for one say its time for the Melvin solution. We should not rest until every America-hating, traitorous ObamaNazi scumbag is either in the ground, in prison or in exile

Brian Mc| 12.22.10 @ 9:47AM

"...and, so that this government of the people, by the people, and for the people..."

Earl| 12.22.10 @ 11:41AM

Rightly Put We Be the People

Kuhlie| 12.22.10 @ 11:12AM

Wow, Now there is a Christian based solution to our problems.

What a moron you are.

Son Of Sam| 12.22.10 @ 11:28AM

well Kuhlie, there's always the jihadist solution to our problems. Bucket-mouthed pathetic spewers of monkey shit like yourselves would be first in line to receive the "treatment"

btw, dumbass, who said anything about being a Christian? Only an an ACLU pos atheist like you ever brings it up. This is about national survival, even for imbeciles like you

David W| 12.22.10 @ 12:11PM

Christians only have two cheeks. After getting both slapped then what do we do? And while I may present my other cheek when "slapped", I won't do that when it comes to family members and their safety/health/well being. For too long Christians (especially the wimpy left ones) have gone too far to the passive side. If we don't fight back who will? Holder? Obama? Soros?

Eddie74| 12.24.10 @ 11:51PM

If you will NOT violently come to your own defense, and come to a death by your reluctance, YOU are then as complicit in your own Murder as much as that person who delivered your death.

muslims are pigs| 12.22.10 @ 2:37PM

S of S,... I'll second that one !

pigs are muslims| 12.22.10 @ 8:43PM

We like this religion. They don't eat us.

MikeD| 12.22.10 @ 8:55AM

Melvin; Well said, and not nearly as 'wordy' as you think. I am 63; and; after a long life filled with all sorts of adventure, I was striken with a degenerative nerve disease. My body is wasting away while our fearless leader, barry the muslim, brays on about his great achievements; including setting up a mechanism for killing us off. Do you think it is a coincidence that barry and his fellow dems set up a system to kill us 'oldsters' off AT THE SAME TIME HE TRIES TO INCREASE THE DEATH TAX? How else is he going to pay for his monstrous plans and self aggrandizement? (Especially since his 'Cap and Tax ponzi scheme has been discredited.)

We had better make sure we keep on the Republicans like flies on sh*t so they go after our 'community organizer' and his dem thugs nonstop.

These criminals have destroyed every weekend over the past year by jamming their alleged votes through on Saturday nights so we can't see quite as much as usual. Don't trust either party until the Republicans grow some gonads and the demoncraps are crushed. There are supposed laws against saying what I'd REALLY like to do with barry, reid, pelosi, durbin, etc... and the rest of their thugs; but you can probably read between the lines. One of these days the Americal people are going to have to invoke our Second Amendment rights personally. Can anybody guess why barry the muslim and his thugs also have done everything they can to steal our weapons? Remember, the founding fathers didn't insert the Second Amendment to protect us from the British; but from our OWN GOVERNMENT.

SEMPER FI!

Occam's Tool| 12.22.10 @ 11:50AM

Oh, Mike--- Merry Christmas, and G-d Bless You.

I've actually treated patients in an NHS. Yikes.

Anastasia Mather| 12.22.10 @ 9:51AM

Amen.

These choices should ALWAYS AND FOREVER be left between physician and patient, not faceless droning government bureaucrats who haven't a clue.

DRed| 12.22.10 @ 10:07AM

Melvin, no need to apologize for being wordy. This article talks about a woman who may be helped by an experimental, expensive procedure. If she can't afford it, but it's what her doctor recommends, than who do you think should pay for it?

loulou| 12.22.10 @ 11:42AM

The point is that these Death Panel decisions will inhibit the research and development of new and effective drugs. In the long term we ALL suffer, not just the individuals who need the particular drug.

And the gold standard of medicine, American medicine, will go down the tubes. But then, that's Obama's plan, isn't it?

Occam's Tool| 12.22.10 @ 11:54AM

DRed: that's actually not the question here---the FDA withdrew approval for the drug. Legally, it can't be used regardless of ability to pay. THAT's the first strike of the Death Panel---not allowing people to use their own means to take care of themselves.

DRed| 12.22.10 @ 1:20PM

From this article:
It is still in use for the treatment of kidney, colon, lung, and brain cancers. Because of that, doctors can still legally prescribe Avastin even for breast cancer "off label," which means for a use not approved by the FDA. But the treatment costs $88,000 a year.

So what's the problem? This woman can still get Avastin, all she has to do is pay $88,0000. If she can't use her own means, then she can die. Or are you arguing that We the People should be taxed and made to pay for her coverage?

joli| 12.22.10 @ 4:42PM

No, the point is breast cancer treatment shouldn't have been eliminated as an approved use of the drug, so that her insurance could continue to pay for it. No one suggested that the public be taxed to pay for these treatments--that's what insurance is for. BTW, your compassion is stunning.

DRed| 12.22.10 @ 5:29PM

I don't understand your argument. If the FDA approves this treatment, the public will be taxed to pay for these treatments. That's how Medicaid and Medicare work. So either we, as a people, pay a lot of money for people to get a treatment that in most cases seems to only offer a slight improvement in surviving a horrible disease. If we had no public healthcare, do you actually think that the market will cover most people when they want expensive, unproven treatments?

beebop| 12.26.10 @ 4:21PM

I would rather see tax dollars support her treatment than:

1. 99+ weeks of unemployment
2. Food stamps
3. Section 8

So. Those are my choices. If you are healthy, you work and contribute. No unlimited handouts.

Enough.

kywrite| 12.23.10 @ 11:50AM

DRed, you are clearly a troll trying to use conservatives' own "foibles" to trap them into admitting how dreadful they are to not want to pay for this woman's treatment. Still, I'll bite.

As the original author of this article pointed out, once the FDA withdraws approval for a particular purpose for a drug, even if it is still available as an off-label treatment, Medicaid and Medicare WILL NOT APPROVE IT for an off-label treatment. When there is a drug that the two Ms will not approve, the insurance companies, which those of us who are insured pay for WITH OUR OWN MONEY or employment, have a reason to not approve it.

In simpler terms in case you really don't get it, the "death panel" timeline is as follows:

1. FDA withdraws approval for a drug's use in a particular case.
2. Medicare and Medicaid cease payment for that drug's use in that particular case.
3. Private insurers, knowing they are now safe from lawsuit, also withdraw coverage for that drug's use in that particular case.

End result: no one who does not pay out of pocket is covered for the drug, even if their insurance had been covering it all along, all due to a single decision made by a government panel. Yes, a death panel. So it's not targeted at specific people. So what? Most cases of governmental mass murder were targeted at a class, not at individuals.

Simple enough for you, there?

And FYI: this taxpayer has no problem with finding a way to help people get treated for terrible diseases that they contracted through no fault of their own. Does that mean I am a compassionate conservative?

Jack London| 12.26.10 @ 9:10AM

If the drug doesn't work, how is this a 'death panel'?

Stephanie| 12.22.10 @ 11:18AM

You're wife is lucky to have someone like you and you her. God Bless you Melvin and stand strong. We're going to win this good against evil battle. I feel sure of it.

RalphB| 12.25.10 @ 1:59AM

I don't think DRed is a troll because I had the same questions, and I'm no troll. Commenter "joli" remarks on DRed's lack 'compassion' but there is nothing compassionate about taking one man's earnings by force in order to pay another's medical bills. Commenter "kywrite" makes a plausible case for the detrimental effects on private insurance coverage of FDA decisions but does a poor job of defending the morality of armed robbery for good causes. Has "kywrite" ever heard of private charity, including raising money for cancer treatment centers that subsidize expensive treatments? Maybe "kywrite" is a progressive-liberal troll trying to sell us on the necessity of big government solutions to all the unfortunate contingencies of life.

loulou| 12.22.10 @ 11:45AM

Melvin, every word you wrote was important--so I don't call you "wordy."

All federal bureaucracies need to be cleaned out from top to bottom. I hope this process begins in earnest once the Democrats are expelled in January.

Nancy in NC| 12.22.10 @ 12:30PM

I'm right there with you, Melvin. I'm a middle aged wife of a jarhead, and I'm so disgusted with all those nimrods in Washington that I really do want to shoot something. Apparently, almost all of them think nothing of breaking one or more of the ten Commandments every day. And they encourage all other Americans to break another...thou shall not covet...on a regular basis.

But the people that that really drive me over the top are those that say something like "I trust the American people...that bad stuff could never happen here." I wonder how much bad stuff will have to happen before they get it. I suppose until everyone personally feels the loss of liberty in one way or the other, the status quo will continue.

I'm not giving up, Melvin, and I know you won't either. I'm going to fight this evil empire with my last dying breath.

Ackston| 12.22.10 @ 3:45PM

Well said sir! Thank you for your service, from the bottom of my wicked, cruel, heartless conservative heart. No need to feel helpless though -We Outnumber Them!!!
aut viam inveniam aut faciam : I shall either find or make a way.

joli| 12.22.10 @ 4:43PM

"heartless conservative heart"? Oxymoron much? :)

Ackston| 12.22.10 @ 4:01PM

Our Tea Party organization took a number of buses to the 9/12 rally in DC. As we were all walking to the event we passed a line of veterans in walkers and wheelchairs. Of course we slowed as we passed to thank them for their service. A number of them called out to us and I'll never forget what they said. "We did our bit, it's Your turn now!" Still brings a knot to my throat and tears to my eyes.

dennis2j| 12.22.10 @ 8:17AM

I'm with you, Melvin, for precisely the same reasons. See you in DC....

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.22.10 @ 8:28AM

Melvin,
Your thoughts are mirrored in my own, sir. Well spoken.
Damn! We old fartes may have to mobilize...again. Does your uniform still fit? etc?

Peter,
I know I must sound like a broken record, but thank you again, Paul Revere!

The redcoats are indeed coming. One of our posters here listed our boxes...The soap-box, the ballot box, and the bullet box as a last resort.
Well, we will soon see the effectiveness of the first two. I pray earnestly for our new Congress to do the right things.
Ps: Melvin, Peter, please contact me at sales@texassaidno.com

Melvin| 12.22.10 @ 9:54AM

My dear brothers. For we have but one battle, and one last hill to take. For many years we have stood tall being the Centurions of freedom across the globe. And now we must stand tall again, with a little help from Advil, to thwart those who wish to strip us of our identity.
We are Americans dammit, and Americans we will be to the bitter end.
Barry doesn't know it yet, but he is about to run head-on into one very hard, very stubborn, and one very immovable camouflaged wall. And this wall doesn't bend for no damn body.

patricia| 12.22.10 @ 4:33PM

At the the rate this "government" has been spending YOUR money, he definitely owes you a new one.

Louis Jenkins| 12.22.10 @ 8:28AM

Had enough America? January the 5th is around the corner. We'll have to await their arrival and see. While I don't see any great changes, there will be some. Hopefully for the better. Otherwise, I'm with you Melvin.

apnep| 12.22.10 @ 3:00PM

From your lips to God's ears. Let's hope they do what we elected them to do and kick some liberal/progressive/marxist a$$.

Curly Smith| 12.22.10 @ 8:41AM

There are two harsh facts of life that won't go down easier with an Obama pain pill:
- if you're spending other people's money then they have a say in how that money is spent
- the only person who truly has your best interests at heart is you

We've been steadily moving away from taking responsibility for our medical care since the 1960's. Medicare was the first step toward socialized medicine, followed by the HMOs of the 70's, and so on until ObamaCare passed. We used to have "Major Medical" that everybody understood was insurance against the limited need for catastrophic care and anything outside of that was on you. Now "health insurance" is supposed to cover everything from heart attacks to the flat tire you got while driving to the doctor's office. We've allowed politicians to systematically strip us of our decision making role and have stood idly by why their "concern" did nothing but create inefficiencies and drastically increase costs.

Lenin allegedly said "Medicine is the keystone in the arch of the socialist state" which means healthcare is the key to controlling the people. So the solution is pretty obvious - repeal every piece of health care legislation passed in the last 50 years. Get government out of the health care business. But the prognosis isn't good, recall that all of that legislation passed with broad bi-partisan support. If you're keeping score then the Democrats are Communists while the Republicans are Fascists. They both believe that Government should control everything, they just disagree on whether the proles get to own anything.

Notary Sojac| 12.22.10 @ 10:07AM

Curly, your comment is the only evidence of common sense in this whole thread. Please let me repeat it for the willfully ignorant among us:

"If You're Spending Other People's Money Then They Have A Say In How That Money Is Spent."

Everyone on Medicare and Medicaid is spending my money. I do not want that money to go to colossally expensive therapies with marginal rates of success. Nor do I want that money to go to three month stays in hospital ICUs which have zero probability of anything but a fatal outcome.

That's because it's MY MONEY. Spending your own money??? Buy all the health care you want, with my blessing.

Thom| 12.22.10 @ 11:35AM

But, Notary, your post isn't entirely filled with all truth and justice. How many others besides you do you think are taxed, and have been taxed for years, with the promise of Medicare? I think your argument is a light on all that BO promised would work. If we can't do this for those who have paid for decades into the 'system' then what hope is there for more of BOcare?

Notary Sojac| 12.22.10 @ 2:02PM

"with the promise of Medicare"

Many a "promise" made by past politicians is going to be broken over the next couple of decades. This will happen regardless of whether conservatives or liberals are in power.

Time to start getting used to it.

Curly Smith| 12.22.10 @ 2:12PM

That's right, it was a promise of Medicare. We have a disconnect between intellect and emotion. Intellectually we've known for over 30 years that Medicare will go bankrupt when the Boomers retire. Emotionally we've wanted to believe that some miracle will happen and that there's something besides a pile of worthless IOUs in the "lockbox". Sorry, that money is gone. The Boomers got hosed by their parents and grandparents because Medicare was nothing but a massive wealth transfer from the young to the old and there aren't enough new young to take up the Ponzi scheme The young will have to choose between their standard of living drastically deteriorating or your life. They'd want to save their Mother's life but yours... not so much. If your retirement plan hasn't included a medical fund then you haven't been saving enough.

Curly Smith| 12.22.10 @ 2:17PM

And just so you know, I'm one of the Boomers that got hosed. I've known since Greenspan's Commission to save Social Security and Medicare (circa 1982) that it'd be foolish to expect either program to be around in any meaningful way when I retired.

Joe Oliva| 12.22.10 @ 3:43PM

Correction folks. It is we the boomers who have screwed our own kids and grandkids. We have been living high on the hog increasing our debt, and passing it all along to our kids.

If you pay attention, you will see that it is the about to retire boomers who are suddenly screaming about cuts in SS & Medicare. I am 64 and will probaly have to work past retirement age, but one thing I will say, I am willing to take cuts in both of those programs if it will help my kids and grandkids.

Curly Smith| 12.22.10 @ 6:36PM

You're right and you're wrong. It is the Boomers who are screaming about the pending cuts because the reality of the pending disaster is finally dawning on them. The Baby Boomers were born between 1946 and 1964 so go here and take a gander at leadership positions before you accept the blame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....ors_by_age
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....generation

Note: I'm not excusing the Boomers as they've done nothing to help the problem but they/we did not start the snowball rolling.

LibertyAtStake | 12.22.10 @ 8:45AM

This just in: Kathleen Sebelius has authorized $5M for a 20 foot tall Josef Mengele statue to be erected in the atrium of FDA headquarters.

http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
"Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive"

WRTolkas| 12.22.10 @ 9:00AM

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Am I depressed - yes. Am I helpless - no. We just voted in a batch of 63 new Representatives to effectively remove control from the wicked witch of the west. The court in Virginia has started to deflate obamacare. The dismantling of obamacare is gaining momentum. In two years we have our second chance to "change" the senate.

To the citizens of Michigan: stabenow voted for this, stabenow was one of the members that stood and applauded when the president of mexico insulted the State of Arizona, stabenow is for the Dream Act. Remember on November 2012. Tell your friends.

Merry Christmas to all,
WRTolkas

oldfart| 12.22.10 @ 9:09AM

This is just the start. Let me relate a personal experience. My wife's Aunt had an incident occur a couple of months ago. She was at first diagnosed with Alzheimer’s but we insisted she get a second opinion because she had (to us lay people) the symptoms associated with mini-stroke. The second Doctor properly ordered a MRI to see what is going on. There were over 20 ‘suspect’ areas on her brain. Obviously not the ‘mother-load’ a CAT scan of the body revealed a mass in the lung about the size of a fist. A ‘sleeper’ that produced NO symptoms in a person who had never smoked. (Side note – these sleepers are showing up in older people who have never smoked, perhaps caused by second hand smoke in the work place from the 1940’s through 1970’s. People get your older relatives tested!!!)
She is currently undergoing treatment, however, because of the distribution of the cancer, and her age, her prognosis is not that good. BUT with the treatment she is getting she did enjoy another Christmas and will see another Spring and perhaps Summer and will be able live semi-independently for most of that time.
When I individually pushed the Doctors on the issue of Obama Care, I got one answer: In Britain, Canada and under Obama care should be dopped up, dressed in depends, in a common ward until the cancer overran her brain. ‘It would cost too much’.
Bottom line – human life is now subject to a ‘cost-benefit analysis’. Perhaps this is not discrimination in the terms we are used to seeing – but nevertheless – in the future we will be like the draft horse – kept alive only as long as we have economic value to the ‘state’.

Occam's Tool| 12.22.10 @ 11:57AM

Correct, Oldfart (NOT the name I would call you. Sagacious Solon, perhaps). Incidentally, for thiose of you who are of Orwellian bent---the name of the organization that does these murderous cost-benefit analyses is Britain is the National Institute for Clinical Excellence---or NICE. The English are known for their sick sense of humor.

Tim the Enchanter| 12.22.10 @ 1:06PM

Occam: that was also the acronym for the evil state organization in C.S. Lewis's "That Hideous Strength" (the third of his Space Trilogy). In the story, the acronym stood for the "National Institute for Coordinated Experiments". You can imagine what the "experiments" were.

Ackston| 12.22.10 @ 3:51PM

Orwell was a leftist until he read F.A.Hayek's "Road To Surfdom". It turned his thinking around. He realized that it was the leftists and their collectivist, authoritarian instincts that dehumanize and enslave. He subsequently wrote 1984.

MoeBlotz| 12.22.10 @ 9:31AM

In RE: young voters our leaders want to buy. Do those people realise that when they reach our age the care stops for them as well?

YeloStalyn| 12.22.10 @ 10:13AM

Unfortunately... no. The young are also the stupid. I say this as, what I feel, one of the few "young" that can put two thoughts together and come to some conclusion other than, "I love Justin Bieber!!!"

I see, over and over, more and more people comming to the realization that it may be getting close to time to take the revolution past the ballot box. Unfortunately, a lot of our "leaders" are unwilling to discuss this. Ever notice how when a caller calls one of the Big Three on the radio, lays out the facts about how the ballot box has failed, how future success at the box is now rendered pointless given the ancilary govt. bodies that regulate and the courts... they shut the caller down. The other "leaders" we have are, by and large, the problem themselves. They are in the halls of Congress as we speak.
People keep talking about the "Good Guys" commign in January. Do you really have that much faith in a politician? At the end of the day, that's what they are. Politicians. There is only a VERY select few of them that I trust. The only two I can say with any certainty are Tom Coburn and Michelle Bachman.
Glen Beck talks about the next George Washington. But think about that great man. What was his role in founding the nation? First president because he was such an honorable man? No. That role was after the fact. He first had to forge this nation out of the blood of the English soldiers. He was a warrior. We need THAT man. A man not afraid to tear down the ruling class even at the point of a gun.
I keep thinking to myself about the term revolution. And I think it wise that we begin to understand the revolution happened and it was by the left and they have won. We are NOT a Constitutional state any longer. What we need is a Restoration. To RESTORE the Constitution and rule of LAW instead of rule of MAN.
We praise our military men, and very rightly so, for their willingness to go and fight. Why, then, can we not begin to praise, support, and endorse those willing to STAY and fight? Why are we scared of this? I say it's because at the end of the day, we're all talk. We talk about fighting the Ruling Class and throwing them down... but when it comes down to it... it's always "Well... I'll follow if someone else leads" because we're scared of the government and what they will do to that leader.
Food for thought.

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.22.10 @ 1:06PM

Yelo,
Timing is everything. see www.texassaidno.com

...There is an "event horizon" approaching.

prepare!

Tim the Enchanter| 12.22.10 @ 1:09PM

Ken- I wonder... is you book any good?

Tim the Enchanter| 12.22.10 @ 1:14PM

Sorry- "you" should be "your".

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.22.10 @ 4:37PM

...Enchanter
My novel just may save your life. Is that worth $10?

Folks, we are at the brink of an "event horizon" where light itself cannot escape.

Enchanter, I have written TWO number one bestsellers. I have ALWAYS given a money-back guarantee.
I have NEVER gotten a request for a refund...but it still stands.
Best regards www.texassaidno.com

joli| 12.22.10 @ 4:51PM

Ha! My daughters: "Justin Bieber sounds like a GIRL!" They're 11 and 9. Mama didn't teach them to follow the crowd...

JP| 12.22.10 @ 9:36AM

Government by decree is the Progressive way. Thier assumption is that the "masses" are just too ignorant, apathetic, and too consumed with pleasures to really respond to thier oppressive ways. For those who do dissent, they villify, mock, and threaten. The FDA's ruling is part and parcel of a long term project to circumvent constitutional government. We shall see how the 60 newly elected GOP reps legislate. We already know how the Senate GOP will behave. Like thier Progressive counterparts, they haven't yet gotten the message (perhaps someone will run against Sen Lugar in 2012).

daddio| 12.22.10 @ 9:50AM

This just pisses me off! The real threat to us are the bureaucrats who are anonymous and working in the corners under the cover of darkness. They cannot be reached by the voters. I want to just drain the whole swamp that is DC, and defund all of these agencies that have so much control over all of our lives. I want to fire (and possibly criminally charge) all of these people who have caused so much misery for so long. I'd like to have my own death panel!!!!

muslims are pigs| 12.22.10 @ 3:34PM

Well lets see,... we could always drain the blood out of the bastards and make gloves out of them, then wear'em when we wipe our asses !!!

VBMax| 12.22.10 @ 10:14AM

I was going to post some things that I thought might be profound but I realized that Melvin has
really said it all for me. There are still a lot of us out here who remember a better America before the progressives made their mark. Don't forget to tell your kids and grandkids how it used to be.

Barb B.| 12.22.10 @ 10:20AM

Does any of this surprise us. And it only get worse. Obama will get any thing he wants. If the Congress doesn't pass his bills, He will just use his Executive Order. He is taking this Country down!!! and we have some RINO'S who are helping him. Collins, Snowe, Brown, Lugar, Voinoich, Murkowski, Bennett, and guess we should question Isakson, Gregg, Corker, Alexander. I hope they can all live with themselves.

Lois| 12.22.10 @ 10:43AM

We the people must get rid of these big government Socialists that Obama is putting into power in Washington. The real danger to our republic is rampant Socialism/Marixism that we have allowed to creep into our government and education institutions.

I am hopeful that the 112th Congress can put the breaks on the FDA, EPA, FCC, NEA and all the other bloated, power hungry and unnecessary agencies that have been foised upon us by the big government politicians. How about we find candidated for office in 2012 and run on a platform of constitutional government. We must advocate and implement a dismanteling of all this cancer (government agencies) that is killing this country from the inside.

RoyfromKs| 12.23.10 @ 12:03AM

Lois; We have two years to determine if the new 112th Congress will be up to the task! The Conservatives must stick together if we ever expect to turn this crazy government around! We will need a replacement President to run in 2012 with all the attributes of the 12 people that's now our " hopefulls" pooled into one gigantic leader! MAN OR WOMAN!

Michelle| 12.22.10 @ 10:51AM

This is a disgrace and makes me very angry.

marcel duranleau| 12.22.10 @ 10:53AM

America be free get the truth. Republic vs US Corporation : www.usavsus.info USA Gov't is run by Corporation De Facto. America becomes member and a founder Republic july4,1776.
www.republicoftheunitedstates.org/ Reel Gov't
De Jure Republic. God is Great. Be free again.
I am a Sovereign Being of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. God bless you all. USA Gov't is
Babylon Revelation 18:4.Come out of her.

Melvin| 12.22.10 @ 10:54AM

daddio made an important observation here. "(and possibly criminally charge)"
Right now other than throwing the bums out of office is the only recourse currently that we have.
The corruptors know this and exploit it. They can bankrupt us with their financial schemes, they can leave the borders open the the 3rd world hoards, and they can pocket millions upon millions of dollars from taxes, launder the money through lobbyists and then use that as campaign money.
There is no oversight, no ethics. The ethics is left up to them and that is like putting the fox in charge of an investigation why chickens are disappearing from the hen-house.
The poster boy for corruption Charles Rangel walks away from the Ethics Panel with a slap on his wee wee and laughing all the way to the bank. The man should be in jail, he didn't even have to pay a fine or interest on the taxes he avoided.
Fanny Mae, and Freddy Mac is the largest Ponzi scheme in our history and Chris Dodd gets sweatheart loans from Country Wide, and he is still walking around a very rich free man. Harry Reid makes millions from real estate deals from legislation that he rammed through the Senate and he is also still walking around a free man.
But these very same bastards will push for legislation and by executive fiat, for you and I to basically just march to the gas chamber because we are no longer economically viable.
My God my fellow brothers and sisters we are not even considered human beings any more, but are just revenue streams to be bought and sold on the human commodities market. I bet there is even a hedge fun that bets on how many Americans will die under Obama Care.

Anthony| 12.22.10 @ 11:06AM

Along the same Alice-in-Wonderland logic, recently, if memory serves, there was a group of lefty lawyers or bureaucrats demanding that the drug administered just prior to the lethal injection drug, given during a death sentence, had to be banned as it was "potentially harmful" to the inmate.
May I suggest, when the Revolution finally comes about, that all government agencies be raized to the ground for cattle grazing pastures, in order to produce prime steaks. Oh, and add to global warming with more cow flatulence.

Georgefl | 12.22.10 @ 11:21AM

Global Warming? Oh, you must have missed this story:
http://www.smh.com.au/environm.....1945a.html

Can you say "Global Cooling"?

www.unmitigated-truth.com

Kent Lyon| 12.22.10 @ 11:09AM

What the Death Panel has killed is American Medicine

Richard Baker| 12.22.10 @ 11:12AM

Sieg Heil, Sebelius!

Jack London| 12.22.10 @ 11:28AM

This is a disgraceful, scientifically illiterate article. Sadly, Avastin doesn't work and it can have horrendous side-effects, and there is evidence that it actually progresses advanced breast cancer.

This is what the National Breast Cancer Coalition says: 'We applaud the FDA for responding to the scientific evidence in the face of significant political and public pressure. Women deserve access to treatments that evidence proves effective. We understand how painful it is that we do not yet know how to cure metastatic disease. But we need to focus advocacy, public policy and resources on saving lives and doing more good than harm. Today's decision supports that approach.'

Shame on the author for using terminally ill people to spread his toxic views. It doesn't get much more base than this.

Neanderthal| 12.22.10 @ 1:08PM

Do you work at the FDA, Jack? It certainly sounds like it.

Have you had a loved one go through serious cancer? My wife has gone through two bouts of ovarian cancer. What we've learned is that there is no magic bullet, and that each patient responds differently to each drug. Sometimes they don't do much good, sometimes they knock it down for years, and sometimes, if you're lucky, you get a remission. It is quite easy for bureaucrats running statistical analysis to judge that "on average", this or that treatment doesn't provide enough bang for the buck, but, of course, when they do, they take away one more chance for a cancer victim to beat the disease. It's even easier for someone with an axe to grind to cite "horrendous side effects". Please let me know if there's a chemo drug out there without them. My wife's first round was taxol and carboplatin, which is about as mainstream as it gets for ovarian cancer, and the drug regimen nearly killed her.

The other thing you ignore, in your zeal to support government control of our lives and decisions, is that by raising the bar so high for approval of new drugs, you discourage investments in them. It is hard enough to get drug companies to invest in drugs for "minor" cancers now (when things like ED are so much more lucrative), it will be impossible once the govt. makes it clear that they will not approve them.

So shame on you, "Jack London", for being willing to write off the most vulnerable in our society in order to spread your toxic views, and perpetuate your statist ideology.

Jack London| 12.22.10 @ 2:25PM

No, I don't work for the FDA. But I have read its reasoning on Avastin in advanced breast cancer before I posted the above, and I do know a fair amount about cancer (wives of close friends were lost to breast cancer). There are a few points to make.

First, it is not uncommon for a drug to be withdrawn from certain uses because it turns out to do more harm than good or is ineffective. The evidence about Avastin puts it clearly in this category. As the FDA says: '...patients treated with Avastin did not live any longer than patients who did not receive the drug, and yet were at risk of experiencing severe side effects, including side effects that are unique to this drug. None of these studies showed evidence that Avastin extends the duration of survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer or in any way improves symptoms.'

Second, we need to decide whether to ignore this evidence because some people may live a bit longer with Avastin, But we don't know whom and we don't know if it was Avastin that had that effect. This means that all of us need to be informed about the costs to our premiums and to Medicare about using treatments that are ineffective and often very dangerous in say 95% of people and which in 5% could have had an effect or maybe it was the standard chemo that worked - we don't know.

Third, taking that a stage further, would we be better spending all that money on finding treatments that have proven effectiveness. Perhaps you can say why the National Breast Cancer Coalition is wrong to welcome the FDA's decision on Avastin and what you would do if you were representing women with advanced disease.

Your point about where we put the bar is well made - I see though that the FDA did rush through approval for Avastin in advanced breast cancer based on some promising early results just on delaying growth. Maybe it should have waited. Again, where would you put the bar? Is say $500,000 for one week extra life in a coma worth it? I think we should be setting our bars a lot higher than that.

Steve A| 12.22.10 @ 2:37PM

Thanks Jack, You have persuaded me that the FDA is so far more intellectually advanced & knowledgeable about my family's personal medical conditions, Dr's experience & expertice & my own ability to decide on the risk reward of a treatment that has shown huge positive impact on individual varying cases. Thank God the FDA is there to protect me from these evil, profit driven drug companies, quack physicians & my own ignorance. It's people like YOU ( & the FDA), in charge of my personal medical decisions, that make this country great. Thanks again!

Jack London| 12.22.10 @ 3:51PM

Perhaps you'd like to cite the studies that show that this treatment 'has shown huge positive impact on individual varying cases'. I'll help you out: there are none.

Do you think that every drug that's dreamed up should be put on the market or left on the market - do we really not need an agency safeguarding safety and efficacy? Do you not want studies done to determine whether something works or not?

Steve A| 12.22.10 @ 4:02PM

Well there Jack. Let's just start with Miss Turnage referenced in the above account. Shall we toss her out the window?? It is EXTREMELY fortunate for her that she is not the (sister, daughter, mother, spouse) of Jack London with discretionary power resting in the hands of said Jack London as she would surely be in the ground as we speak, as would all future "Miss Turnages" who may respond to the drug in similar fashion.

You are Nazi light, there pal, & I do not offer those words flippantly.

Jack London| 12.22.10 @ 4:38PM

No point in throwing nazi labels around Steve - I'm just trying to point out what the science actually says here and as you'll see above I ask whether we should let drugs like this loose without evidence - I didn't say we shouldn't but we'll have to pay for them and we may miss better stuff because we've wasted all that money on nothing.

As for the example of Mrs Turnage, this isn't a study but an anecdotal sample of one person where we don't know if Avastin has made a difference.

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 10:46PM

No, Jack, it appears to be an actual story where Avastin did make a difference.

If Avastin cured 10% of cancer and killed the other 90%, a statistical inference could be that it killed 9x more people than it helped. That, of course, would be simplistic to the point of absurdity. Why do people misunderstand statistics at such a basic level?

Jack London| 12.23.10 @ 5:54AM

No, the story does not prove anything. You don't seem to understand the science and stats here. As I said above, adding Avastin to the treatment does not add to survival time across the study subjects. But some people will live longer (and shorter) than the median of course. The studies did not find that Avastin was making any significance to the distribution (although in fact one found it made things worse).

beebop| 12.26.10 @ 4:35PM

"Second, we need to decide whether to ignore this evidence because some people may live a bit longer with Avastin, But we don't know whom and we don't know if it was Avastin that had that effect."

I am sorry but you seem to have totally contradicted yourself within one posting.

Forgive me but as the daughter of someone who was pronounced dead in six months and lived an additional 2 and a half years -- long enough for her grandaughters to have formed memories of her -- I ask just who the hell are you to decide "worth?"

Ken (Old Texican)| 12.22.10 @ 1:15PM

Jack London,
Are you terminally stupid, or terminally young and stupid?
Sorry,
We just can't fix stupid here.

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 1:26PM

Oops! Better check with the NIH:

"The women were treated with bevacizumab in combination with paclitaxel, or paclitaxel alone. Those women receiving combination therapy showed a delay in development of their breast cancer that was statistically significant. This was the first study to show the benefit of anti-angiogenic therapy for breast cancer and was a major advance in the treatment of patients with metastatic disease."

I'd be happy to explain "statistically significant" to you, Jack.

The opposition is based on "public policy" (Jack's phrase), i.e., cost. Shame on you, Jack, for not getting your facts straight.

Funny that liberal women howl about keeping their bodies to themselves when it comes to killing the unborn but we're expected to line up like sheep to the slaughter in the interest of "public policy."

Jack London| 12.22.10 @ 3:30PM

Publius, from what I can see the result you cite is from the earlier study that got the drug approved in the first place. The problem is that now it's been around longer other studies show it doesn't work.

Publius | 12.22.10 @ 4:09PM

Cite the research, being particularly careful to show how the newer data is contradicted by the older.

Jack London | 12.22.10 @ 5:02PM

From reading up on this:

The first study, which got accelerated approval for Avastin, showed 4 months halt in tumor growth but no better time to live. In fact the FDA's own oncology committee said it shouldn't have been approved from this but they went ahead.

As conditions for approval, the drug company did two more studies. One only showed 24 days halt in progression and less time to live. The other, which was run with two other drugs, showed 2.9 and 1.2 months halt in growth and no increase in survival.

Quality of life due to side effects is also a big factor with the drug and I think can cancel out some benefits.

There's a really good write up here that I found:

http://scienceblogs.com/insole.....cancer.php

It would be nice to discuss this on the science but as the author says: 'What science can't tell us is whether that modest benefit is worth the cost.'

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 10:44PM

Modest benefit? I thought it was shown to have no benefit that outweighed the cost?

Jack London| 12.23.10 @ 5:49AM

If you read the report you'd see that the modest benefit is a few weeks where the tumor doesn't grow. But giving Avastin does not increase the time that people live - you do understand that, don't you.

Randy131| 12.22.10 @ 11:58AM

A very good article on prognosticating what's coming down the Pyke. This is truly the new procedures of what the healthcare system is going to be like under Obamacare. All these liberals have convinced themselves that they've done something great by providing healthcare to people who were uninsured, but in actuality all they have done is to guarantee the sick and ailing will die sooner than later in order to save the government money. What's so hard to understand about bureaucrats not being proficient enough in the medical field to determine the health care for anyone? The shape our economy is in proves that they are not even proficient in determining good financial decisions. So now Obamacare will have the bureaucrats making these medical decisions they are not qualified to make for financial reasons they have proven to be inadequate at. The thing that Obamacare will achieve is to keep our population young and healthy by killing off the old and ill through denying them healthcare because it is not cost-effective for the short time it provides. The American utopia under Obama and the Democrats, isn't it great?

Mike H| 12.22.10 @ 12:29PM

How can so many not be aware that what booger wrote was satire?

WAH| 12.22.10 @ 12:42PM

American's, WE the PEOPLE, how long are we going to put up with crap like this Sebelius is jamming down our throats??? Most of us will pray for results to change her and others minds, and some of us will hope she herself will end up with breast cancer or even better someone close to her. In the mean time everyone should give her something to think about, like calling for her head on a stick. Maybe then she would start doing the will of the PEOPLE instead of trying to may Obamhitler happy. Pass the word that she should watch her back, and or move to a country that accepts her ways. This is America and we are not going to accept her ways. WE don't want Obama's change or hers.

Yosemeti Sam| 12.22.10 @ 12:54PM

Yep - the BHO administration is that 4th Horseman!

Yosemeti Sam| 12.22.10 @ 7:57PM

Parenthetically, a mighty BIG swipe of the scythe was the clear cutting of 500 BILLION from Medicare.

Affecting exactly which highly vulnerable age demographic?

Mike in Kansas| 12.22.10 @ 12:55PM

WAH... calm down and act rationally. It is childish of you to talk this way. Don't forget, Kathleen Sebelius was elected to two terms as governor of Kansas, and remains the most popular politician in this nominally Republican state. And, speaking of governors, the closest thing America has actually seen to a Death Panel is Republican Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona's unilateral life-and-death decisions concerning those already on transplant recipent lists in her state.

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 1:30PM

Well, if she was elected governor of one of our smaller states twice, then by all means we should allow her to decide who lives and who dies! Jeez, I thought she was just playing god but I didn't realize that she had been elected governor of Kansas TWICE! What better qualification is there to play god?

Charles Martel| 12.22.10 @ 1:13PM

At the risk of sounding flippant... can you still get it in Mexico? As Dave Atell once remarked on his travelogue show "Insomniac" when he visited San Diego, er, I mean Tijuana, "In the States, you need a doctor; in Mexico, you ARE a doctor."

+++

e cowan| 12.22.10 @ 1:32PM

'her chemotherapy treatments '
Therapy means treatment
Chemotherapy treatment is saying
chemical treatment treatment
It is as redundant as the FDA is arbitrary and arrogant.

Wayne | 12.22.10 @ 1:34PM

What conservatives need to come to grip with, is that the FDA has been a DEATH Panel for decades. I have good friends who have had to get medications that the FDA bans. They have had to go underground and order it from another country. What does this medication do? When they apply it to their skin cancer, the tumors actually fall off.

If we do research, we will see that the AMA became of federally mandated monopoly and they filled the FDA with those who have a single mind-set.

What we need to do is get rid of the FDA all-together.

Neanderthal| 12.22.10 @ 3:33PM

Well put, Wayne. Any institution responds to it's incentives, and the incentive for a bureaucracy is CYA. No one at the FDA ever got in trouble for turning down a new drug, even if it results in the deaths of thousands who could have been helped, but let something like thalidomide slip through and you'll have "60 Minutes" camped out on your front lawn asking why you haven't taken hemlock yet.

Bill| 12.22.10 @ 1:54PM

I'm sympathetic to the argument that the use of drugs like Arvastin that are very expensive are part of the very real damage that cutting back on government expenditures will involve if we are going to get control of our government back.

But I can't help but wonder why the article doesn't tell us what the FDA considers the risk associated with the use of Arvastin, since they are revoking their approval of this drug because its beneficial effects don't outweigh its risk. So the article and the FDA ought to be telling us what the risk is.

Otherwise, as many have said here, it's just some government bean-counter substituting his judgment for someone else's.

Bill| 12.22.10 @ 1:56PM

Avastin, not Arvastin. Sorry about the error.

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 4:11PM

The risks must be incredible since a fairly sizable portion of those for whom Avastin is prescribed are diagnosed with Stage 4 metastic cancers.

Pete| 12.22.10 @ 2:15PM

Do not question your superiors, Bill. That's the whole point, the government doesn't HAVE to explain anything. Thou shalt obey and not complain.

kerry| 12.22.10 @ 3:34PM

my question is: medicare is broke. Who is paying for these medicines that are thousands/millions of dollars. Not to be politically incorrect, but medicare and prescription drug coverage is a huge issue and it is bankrupting our country.
So, is it unethical of me to ask all of you, who is supposed to pay for another's drugs? Isn't medicare itself unconstitutional? yet, would seniors be able to obtain insurance on an open market? Or would they be denied because of pre-existing conditions?
Where do we draw the line when it comes to government spending on healthcare.
Everyone says that they want obamacare struck down (including me, a tea party organizer in Va), but when we talk about cutting medicare and the prescription drug coverages for expensive drugs such as this and others, especially for seniors, no one wants to talk about it anymore.
Quite a dilemma!

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 4:16PM

You've hit the nail on the head, kerry. Each of us should be free to purchase whatever insurance we can qualify for. If you want a Cadillac, you pay for it. If you want to go cheap, you save some money but at the cost of benefits.

Now the USG has usurped the authority to enter into an insurance contract, we're going to see more of this Avastin nonsense.

FWIW, I'd buy a modest insurance policy and a great catastrophic policy, if the Constitutional were still in effect and our free market rights were not seized by the government.

DRed| 12.22.10 @ 5:04PM

And you think your private insurance company would cover an experimental treatment that hasn't been proven to be effective, and that costs $88,000 a year? You should come visit me in Brooklyn-I've got a bridge that I would love to sell you.

Publius| 12.22.10 @ 10:42PM

Pay attention, DRed. Avastin was covered until the FDA decided to pull MBC as an indication.

DRed| 12.22.10 @ 10:59PM

I was imagining a world devoid of the tyrannical jackboot of the FDA. Where your free market rights could roam free.

Back here in the real world, what should we do? Should the FDA approve this drug, even though there doesn't seem to be much evidence that it increases the lifespan of those who take it? It seems to me that many of you argue that the government should have nothing to do with healthcare, while at the same time suggesting that it should provide unlimited benefits.

Jack London| 12.23.10 @ 7:21AM

In this case there is no evidence it increases lifespan. I can't see how a free marketeer could argue that this drug should be funded under Medicare as this is their tax dollars, and I can't see either how they can argue that their private insurer should raise everyone's premiums to pay for it.

What they don't seem to grasp is that these very expensive end of life treatments, many of which have no or very limited benefit, cannot be afforded alone by anyone but the wealthy, so there is no individual free market choice - it has to affect others in the insurance pool.

As for the FDA, it gets hit both ways - when it's accused of being slow and cautious it has pushed through fast approvals, eg Avastin for advanced breast cancer, based on promising results. Then when more results come in that show the promise was false, they get hit again for, er, being honest about the lack of benefit.

Go figure the thinking patterns of the critics - no drug will cure them...

NJK| 12.22.10 @ 4:12PM

Watch this video. This is who Obama is working with. Remember he started his political career in the home of William Ayers.
This is no joke. Obama is not who he says he is. That is why his birth certificate and college records are being hidden.
http://youtu.be/HWMIwziGrAQ

Denny| 12.22.10 @ 4:35PM

One of the reasons the U.S. leads the world in medicine (and it does, as any fool or Saudi prince knows) is because it has not (until now) curtailed clinical treatments and research arbitrarily because of cost. The results of research cannot be predicted. Accidental discoveries drive much medical progress.
If the current crowd at the FDA were making decisions in the 50's, childhood leukemias would still be a death sentence. With experience and broader use of Avastin, oncologists will almost certainly be able to identify superresponders before treatment (saving lives and money) but costs will come down anyway. Plus various combination therapies (including Avastin, perhaps) will be developed, possibly with greater efficacy even for patients with less responsive breast cancer. A bureaucrat at the FDA will never cure anything.

George S| 12.22.10 @ 7:20PM

What substantial benefit does the FDA provide? Their "approval" does not hold a drug manufacturer harmless. Without the FDA, a drug manufacturer could be sued out of production if their products harm people; with the FDA's approval nothing changes. So, again, what is the purpose of the FDA?

The FDA's annual budget is 2.5 billion dollars. That's enough Avastin for 24,500 cancer patients. Priorities anyone?

Intelligent Design| 12.22.10 @ 8:20PM

Free enterprise has given us the best medical care in the world. Now the Demo-Socialists want to replace it with government medicine. They have learned absolutely zero from the collapse of the USSR. What we need is far, far less federal involvement in medicine, not more.

Nite| 12.22.10 @ 8:22PM

DHS and their quality committee decided to not offer mammograms until age 50. Now they want to remove Avastin which is very effective from aggressive breast cancer. My sister and I both would have died with those guidelines. Our first cousin did die. This all about money people and the Dems love affair with the England and Canada public healthcare system. Both countries have considerably death rate for all kinds of cancer. The US has been tops in the world, but Obama and his radicals want to take several steps backwards.

Nite| 12.22.10 @ 8:26PM

I meant to say Canada and England have considerably HIGHER death rates than the US. They also use the older drugs which is not as effective. The death rates in those countries is calculated differently than CDC. So all the Dems who say that we have a maternal mortality rate or other diseases including cancer, is way off base. People who come to this country for anchor babies and get free medical care, skew the statistical rates. Consequently, the Dems do not know what they are talking about in this matter.

Emma| 12.22.10 @ 9:04PM

"By denying approval for this drug, the FDA is basically telling my mother and my family that her life just isn't worth the price."

So her son, Josh, has it figured out. Don't know when he figured it out. I knew this is where we were going 18 months ago when I began reading the murder plans that had been documented in writing years ago, written by Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel. None of this is new. I suppose the hope now is that people will be believing that it's real. Good luck with that. The Nazis would have absolutely loved running the system that is coming at us: how long will it take before the obvious is believed? I truly hope Josh wasn't all shocked and stuff. The FDA is poised to tell all of us exactly what they think our lives are worth. Not much. Of course, this is the same crew that thinks partial birth abortions are fine, so I really think people should not waste a lot of time acting shocked about this. For crying out loud, this truck has been screaming down the center of the highway straight at us for 30 years. PLEASE don't act this is a shocking development. Murderous, yes. Shocking? It shouldn't be. The only people who are shocked are people who haven't been paying attention.

ari| 12.23.10 @ 12:27AM

I'm not quite sure why there is an FDA around at all, in the first place. It's first big win was suing Coca- Cola for not including cocaine. Second, I, a stay at home mother, living under a rock, basically, have run into people who had lawyers outside their hospital room to block the FDA from stopping their life- saving surgery. If I can meet someone like that, who else knows someone affected by the FDA?

Finally, why not publish the abstracts and research papers for various drugs? There are enormously detailed ads in Arthritis Today, for instance. They have helped women ( mostly women get arthritis) to advocate for particular drugs, to help them. At fifteen minutes with a doctor as an average visit- I visit with my car's mechanic more often, and more thoroughly- I don't see putting my complete care into the hands of a doctor, or a bureaucrat, as necessarily a good idea.

Besides....Obama is wrecking insurance another way, anyway. Your premiums aren't put into a "lockbox." They are invested in the stock market. That's how there is enough marginal money to pay for people's surgeries, major illnesses, and end of life care. If you just had premiums, and no market growth----well, you'd have.......at best.....a timeshare at a lodge in Vail masquerading as a hospital. maybe not even that nice.

I really wish Progressives would quit pretending they are any good at caring for anything alive. Hospitals were founded, initially, by Christians, to care for the ill and indigent. The first ones were Syriac and Nestorian Christian foundations. Prior to that, the Roman formulation was that wealthy people received good care, while poor people must die, but not stoically, b/c that showed good character. They were to die in humiliating circumstances, as entertainments. Which sounds more progressive?

jerry| 12.23.10 @ 2:41AM

Ihaven't read a better comment here than posted by melvin, I have worked all my life from age of 17, I finaly was able to retire and try to enjoy life, it makes me mader than hell that these damn thives(congress) have stolen all of social security monies and now tell us we will have to accept less or maybe none, now they want to just kill us of and not have to puy with us older folks, I think it is time to get rid of these damn crooks by forming our own death panels, Give them death for too many years of stealing from the american people

Harrison | 12.23.10 @ 1:17PM

While I'm not totally disagreeing with the premise of this article, this part makes the conclusions somewhat dubious:

"The FDA didn't say so, but that cost is the real reason for its action."

If the death panels have started, some proof would be nice.

Richard| 12.23.10 @ 1:48PM

Face it, the government doesn't want you to live because then you are a burden on Social Security. The sooner you die the better.

Mike in Kansas| 12.23.10 @ 1:58PM

I wonder if Publius realizes what he sounds like if he substitutes "Palin" for "Sebelius", and "Alaska" for "Kansas". Oh, wait... Kansas has considerably more people than Alaska, and Palin only served half of a single term before she quit...

Kingofthenet| 12.24.10 @ 2:55AM

I love how everyone is 'up in arms' about the Govt. trying to make tough choices about spending big bucks for dubious benefit. Why aren't you all crying about your great private health plans that do EXACTLY the same thing,EXCEPT it isn't to prevent a 'waste' of money, it's for PROFIT! It is FAR worse in the arena of Private insurance, sure the Govt. doesn't want to shove money down a 'rat hole', but I don't see them wanting to limit Transplant or Implant(Dental) Surgeries that without a doubt have good success rates in younger people and dramatically improve quality of life. Private Insurance HATES to give these things Not because they are not effective, but SIMPLY because they are expensive. Any Health plan whether from the Govt. or private Insurance is NOT going to say YES to any untested or ill advised treatment, you want that PAY out of Pocket, otherwise for the other 95% you will get coverage. I'd be curious how many 'Average' Health Plans would cover a treatment regiment for this drug NOW? Does YOUR insurance? What Percentage do they cover?

Spice Valley Road| 12.24.10 @ 7:52AM

Yipe! I've read several comments. Sounds like the US is headed for life/death depicted in Soylent Green. Frightening. To those who say they want to end life quickly, man cannot punish folks who commit a successful suicide. And, as the M.A.S.H. theme purports, "Suicide is Painless".

Cindy | 12.26.10 @ 8:25PM

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/.....ssage/9187

'healthcare' horrors-murder boomers,mark of beast

Cindy | 12.26.10 @ 8:30PM

Since my link doesn't look like it posted, I'll try again: (with it broken, so you'll have to 'put it back together')
Re: 'healthcare' horrors-murder boomers,mark of beast http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ pretribonly/
message/9187

ISN'T tHIS idiot A PIECE OF wORK???? -kILL THE BOOMERS!--

The idiot 'president' has been in Hawaii on boomers' and others' tax money, after working so hard to ruin America and kill Americans, but now he's back FOLLOWING ORDERS - he's disappointed that he failed ONLY on "DREAM"- let illegals invade and ruin America - act and "OMNIBUS" 'earmarks', which will still be a detriment to the new batch of republicans, diverting them, but he REFUSES to back off from the evil "OBAMACARE" and esp. the hidden things like killing off all Baby Boomers, now that they have sucked us dry with robbing our tax money for 44 years until the first of the boomers reached retirement and collection ages, and the AMERICAN OLDER WOMEN are considered the MOST expendable (murderable by neglect.)-"Cheyenne Cin"
-P.S. YES, OF COURSE Obama is under orders from the ones who put him in, the demonically controlled insiders, but that is no excuse.

Gloria Fontana| 12.26.10 @ 11:38PM

You are all missing the point. First, abolish the FDA. Second, if you have private insurance and are willing to pay the co-pay, then you should get any drug you and your doctor think is appropriate. Third, if the government is paying for it (that's you and me, taxpayers), then you shouldn't have it. Government healthcare is bankrupting us, not privately paid healthcare. Get it? If a private person would go bankrupt to live another month or two let them what do you think they would do? They should have the choice, but not out of my wallet.

Hazel O| 12.28.10 @ 7:34PM

Anecdotes can be bittersweet, but I, for one, believe in science. Clinical studies have shown that Avastin, despite its expense, does nothing to extend the life of breast cancer patients. It robs you of an opportunity to whine about Obama, of course, to face the truth: Avastin isn't effective against breast cancer, so it's not approved to treat it. This is terrible news for Genentech/Roche, Inc., and apparently the Tea Party idiots are jumping on board to support the interests of Big Pharma.

Jcar| 1.1.11 @ 8:30PM

I'm not sure what this has to do with Obama's healthcare plans, or "death panels" for that matter. This is just the FDA doing what the FDA was set up to do, and what they have always done in this country--that is weighing the potential dangers of a drug against its potential benefits. They've done the same thing under Reagan and both Bushes.

It's fine to quibble with the FDA over individual situations they make, but I for one am glad that they are there. More people would die each year from taking dangerous drugs if they weren't there than people will die from not taking Avastin. But if conservatives want to make the FDA into their next big government boogie man they aren't going to get very far. That might go well on the pages of the American Spectator, but most reasonable conservatives I know have no problem with the FDA.

Latest Headlines

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn|89 comments

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple|114 comments

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg|50 comments

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley|92 comments

Treasure State Treasury

Bill Croke|3 comments

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy|50 comments

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman|14 comments

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford|19 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Elijah Harper, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 1:07PM

If Only the Tsar Knew!

F.H. Buckley | 11:14AM

Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

UPDATED: IRS Acting Chief Apologizes, But Defends His Actions

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Voter Fraud Affected Election Results in Missouri

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Purple Privacy Push Persists in House Drone Hearing

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.17.13

IRS Director: ‘Some People Call Me Maurice’

Kyle Peterson | 5.17.13

Laughing to Keep From Crying

Ross Kaminsky | 5.17.13

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?