How Government Health Care Lowers Costs

This example from Great Britain’s Orwellian-named NICE provides a good example of how government-run health-care reduces costs… they ban effective treatments:

Thousands of patients with terminal cancer were dealt a blow last night after a decision was made to deny them life prolonging drugs.

The Government’s rationing body said two drugs for advanced breast cancer and a rare form of stomach cancer were too expensive for the NHS.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence is expected to confirm guidance in the next few weeks that will effectively ban their use.

<snip>

One drug, Lapatinib, can halve the speed of growth of breast cancer in one in five women with an aggressive form of the disease.

<snip>

Up to 1,500 stomach cancer patients also face a ban on Sutent – the only drug that can extend their lives.

Just what we need here in the US… a government bureaucracy dedicated to nothing more than saying “no” to effective treatments.

Now, let me anticipate a lefty response: “But insurance companies do that all the time!” There’s two big differences, tho. First, under private insurers, patients have the ability to go to another insurer that will cover the medication. If the government is the only insurer, that option won’t exist. Second, some government-run systems, notably Sweden’s (link in .pdf format), make it illegal for patients to purchase such treatments, even with their own money. That is a virtual death sentence for many people.

This is “progress”? I don’t think so.