HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Another confusing news report on Cancer Costs, what are they really trying to say?

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 5/10/2010 5:42 PM (GMT 0)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100510/ap_on_he_me/us_med_cancer_costs

Another mixed message in disguise?

Posted 5/10/2010 6:08 PM (GMT 0)

Purgatory said...

Another mixed message in disguise?

Is that another off-balanced swipe at the American Cancer Society?

Prostate cancer is certainly making it's contribution to the article's statement in the 2nd paragraph: "the researchers conclude that rising costs were mainly driven by the growing number of cancer patients."  The PC data reflects that men are being identified earlier and earlier—a growing trend in the mid- and late-2000's—with tiny, microscopic strands of PC and are being increasingly rushed to unnecessary aggressive treatments.  This increased rate of treating the anxiety, rather than the disease, is driving up spending of our limited medical financial resources which would be better spent elsewhere. 

I thought the message was clear:  things have to change...

 

Posted 5/10/2010 6:16 PM (GMT 0)
You are being paranoid again about the ACS, I didn't give a single thought to the ACS in posting this link, wasn't even in the back of my mind. Wasn't even thinking of PC in particular, though obviously, our cancer type adds to the total costs as well, and with early detection and rapid decisions for treatments regardless of the outcomes, it certainly doesn't help matters.

You forget ,I was a fan of the ACS most of my adult life, its only been in the last year or so that my opinion has been turned off of them. I still think their mission is good on paper, but their politics have changed. With all my cancer bouts in the past, I have done my share of Relays for Life with them, have personally helped to raised thousands of dollars in my part of the country, and use to praise them at every corner.

But this article posting had nothing to do with the ACS, even though they were mentioned.
Posted 5/10/2010 7:39 PM (GMT 0)
What a ridiculous article. Too much information is missing to get anything out of it.
Were all the numbers standardized to exclude inflation.
I just did the conversion from 1987 to 2005 dollars and the factor is 2.00542 according to US CPI figures. That means if you bought a soda for $1.00 in 1987, that same soda would cost $2.005 in 2005. Double - due to inflation alone.
They excluded diagnostics and high priced drugs. There are more patients.
There simply is not enough info to draw any conclusions except the conclusion that anyone can grab any headline they like.
Goes in the delete file.
J
Posted 5/10/2010 9:52 PM (GMT 0)
As I read it, it says that the costs of medical care has doubled since 1987, and the percentage going to cancer has remained the same. As Jeff points out, no big surprise here,
Posted 5/10/2010 9:53 PM (GMT 0)
Worried Jeff, that was my whole point of posting a silly article, it was just a headline grabber, with data that really doesn't mean a thing other than the obvious.
Posted 5/10/2010 11:03 PM (GMT 0)

Worried Guy said...
...
There simply is not enough info to draw any conclusions except the conclusion that anyone can grab any headline they like.
Goes in the delete file.

So did costs double?  Did they triple?  I really is hard to compare...we'll have to leave that calcualtion to others.  The rest of us are left to the obvious reality (in Mel's words, "intuitively obvious to the casual observer), that costs of health care (in the widest scope), and costs of treating cancer (scope of the article), and costs of treating prostate cancer (scope that we are all intimiate with) have skyrocketed out of control. 

Jeff, not meaning to put words in your mouth, but I think you also understand this statement (about skyrocketing costs) when you wrote today (in another thread, less than 2 hours after your posting above):  "It would be interesting to see how much you were charged for the baby aspirin, Pepcid and rejected BP meds.  I'll bet we would be shocked."  I took that to mean that you felt that health care costs were out of control. 

So, maybe we've all got some question about the details of this article, but the big picture of what it's saying is already well understood and acknowledged. 

Bottom line:  things need to change...

I don't personally think this belongs in the "delete file" because that would be ignoring the elephant in the room.  This is a time for leadership to stand up against the drug companies and others who are reaping the skyrocketing profits while constraining the true benefits to those who are sick.

Posted 5/11/2010 4:00 AM (GMT 0)
I couldn't determine if or how the 1987 dollars were adjusted for 2007 dollars.

However, $1.00 in 1987 had about the same buying power as $1.95 in 2010.

So in this sense, all costs have almost doubled just because of inflation.

Barry
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply