The Death Panel's First Murder

[WillowTree]

Last week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked its regulatory approval of the drug Avastin to treat late stage, metastatic breast cancer. Each year, the practicing oncologists chosen by 17,500 American women to save them from their life-threatening, heavily progressed cancer prescribe Avastin to treat them.

The FDA explained that it was revoking approval of the drug for that use because it decided that the drug does not provide "a sufficient benefit in slowing disease progression to outweigh the significant risk to patients." Risk? The drug is prescribed for women who are otherwise going to die from cancer unless the drug saves them at least for a time. The far greater risk to these women is from the FDA, not the drug.

As The Wall Street Journal said last Friday in response to the FDA's explanation:

Ponder that [word] "sufficient." The agency is substituting its own judgment about clinical meaningfulness for those of practicing oncologists and terminally ill cancer patients.


The American Spectator : The Death Panel's First Murder








way to go dems. some snatching victory,, reach around and give yourselves a good pat on the back.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Last week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked its regulatory approval of the drug Avastin to treat late stage, metastatic breast cancer. Each year, the practicing oncologists chosen by 17,500 American women to save them from their life-threatening, heavily progressed cancer prescribe Avastin to treat them.

The FDA explained that it was revoking approval of the drug for that use because it decided that the drug does not provide "a sufficient benefit in slowing disease progression to outweigh the significant risk to patients." Risk? The drug is prescribed for women who are otherwise going to die from cancer unless the drug saves them at least for a time. The far greater risk to these women is from the FDA, not the drug.

As The Wall Street Journal said last Friday in response to the FDA's explanation:

Ponder that [word] "sufficient." The agency is substituting its own judgment about clinical meaningfulness for those of practicing oncologists and terminally ill cancer patients.


The American Spectator : The Death Panel's First Murder








way to go dems. some snatching victory,, reach around and give yourselves a good pat on the back.

willow, that's a crock of shit. already tried to sell by boedicca.

 

[WillowTree]

Last week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked its regulatory approval of the drug Avastin to treat late stage, metastatic breast cancer. Each year, the practicing oncologists chosen by 17,500 American women to save them from their life-threatening, heavily progressed cancer prescribe Avastin to treat them.

The FDA explained that it was revoking approval of the drug for that use because it decided that the drug does not provide "a sufficient benefit in slowing disease progression to outweigh the significant risk to patients." Risk? The drug is prescribed for women who are otherwise going to die from cancer unless the drug saves them at least for a time. The far greater risk to these women is from the FDA, not the drug.

As The Wall Street Journal said last Friday in response to the FDA's explanation:

Ponder that [word] "sufficient." The agency is substituting its own judgment about clinical meaningfulness for those of practicing oncologists and terminally ill cancer patients.


The American Spectator : The Death Panel's First Murder








way to go dems. some snatching victory,, reach around and give yourselves a good pat on the back.

willow, that's a crock of shit. already tried to sell by boedicca.

Nope! Sorry, it's not. Save that money for demoRats care donchyaknow?

 

[L.K.Eder]

Last week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked its regulatory approval of the drug Avastin to treat late stage, metastatic breast cancer. Each year, the practicing oncologists chosen by 17,500 American women to save them from their life-threatening, heavily progressed cancer prescribe Avastin to treat them.

The FDA explained that it was revoking approval of the drug for that use because it decided that the drug does not provide "a sufficient benefit in slowing disease progression to outweigh the significant risk to patients." Risk? The drug is prescribed for women who are otherwise going to die from cancer unless the drug saves them at least for a time. The far greater risk to these women is from the FDA, not the drug.

As The Wall Street Journal said last Friday in response to the FDA's explanation:

Ponder that [word] "sufficient." The agency is substituting its own judgment about clinical meaningfulness for those of practicing oncologists and terminally ill cancer patients.


The American Spectator : The Death Panel's First Murder








way to go dems. some snatching victory,, reach around and give yourselves a good pat on the back.

willow, that's a crock of shit. already tried to sell by boedicca.

Nope! Sorry, it's not. Save that money for demoRats care donchyaknow?

the avastin story is very interesting, but not to sell the death panel narrative.

it shows how pharma companies try to make the most money in the most lucractive segments by getting their drugs FDA approved in those segments.

the initial approval has to be evaluated when new studies show that the drug is not effective.

avastin is not effective for breast cancer.

you could eat arugula instead.

and have the same chance of living 3 months longer.

now, avastin for treating age related macular degeneration, now that would get approval. if genentech would apply for the approval.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

willow, that's a crock of shit. already tried to sell by boedicca.

Agreed. Very weak.

 

[xotoxi]

Last week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revoked its regulatory approval of the drug Avastin to treat late stage, metastatic breast cancer. Each year, the practicing oncologists chosen by 17,500 American women to save them from their life-threatening, heavily progressed cancer prescribe Avastin to treat them.

The FDA explained that it was revoking approval of the drug for that use because it decided that the drug does not provide "a sufficient benefit in slowing disease progression to outweigh the significant risk to patients." Risk? The drug is prescribed for women who are otherwise going to die from cancer unless the drug saves them at least for a time. The far greater risk to these women is from the FDA, not the drug.

As The Wall Street Journal said last Friday in response to the FDA's explanation:

Ponder that [word] "sufficient." The agency is substituting its own judgment about clinical meaningfulness for those of practicing oncologists and terminally ill cancer patients.


The American Spectator : The Death Panel's First Murder








way to go dems. some snatching victory,, reach around and give yourselves a good pat on the back.

We've already covered this in depth.

You have proven yourself unqualified to discuss this topic as you have clearly been lead down the path of fear by a biased opinion blog that does not base their writing on facts.

 

[boedicca]

So true:

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.

 

[boedicca]

The Progressive-Totalitarians can't handle the truth.

But that isn't going to deter either Willow or me from speaking up.

 

[L.K.Eder]

The Progressive-Totalitarians can't handle the truth.

But that isn't going to deter either Willow or me from speaking up.

speak up, speak up, speak up.

it won't make it intelligent by repeating.

but please speak speak speak up.

 

[boedicca]

L.K. Eder must have run out of puppies to drown.

 

[L.K.Eder]

L.K. Eder must have run out of puppies to drown.

yes, indeed. that is true. and a good hit on me.

you are very clever.

please continue speaking up for the death panels.

 

[boedicca]

Oh, my mistake. You clearly prefer to drown kittens.

 

[rightwinger]

Willow

Didn't you already try to sell this Bull Shit thread and run away when asked to defend it?

 

[L.K.Eder]

Oh, my mistake. You clearly prefer to drown kittens.

yes, kittens. you are stalking me?

anything of substance to add, hookworm?

do you ever think before posting?

 

[Luissa]

Federal health authorities recommended Thursday that the blockbuster drug Avastin no longer be used to treat breast cancer, saying recent studies failed to show the drug's original promise to help slow the disease

The FDA approved Avastin for breast cancer in 2008 based on studies suggesting it halted the spread of breast cancer for more than five months. But follow-up studies showed that the delay lasted no more than three months, and patients suffered dangerous side effects.

"Given the number of serious and life-threatening side effects, the FDA does not believe there is a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio," said Dr. Richard Pazdur, FDA's chief of cancer drug review.

Cancer specialists said this week that Avastin never lived up to its initial promise.

FDA: Avastin should not be used for breast cancer - latimes.com
You will still be able to buy it off label.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Federal health authorities recommended Thursday that the blockbuster drug Avastin no longer be used to treat breast cancer, saying recent studies failed to show the drug's original promise to help slow the disease

The FDA approved Avastin for breast cancer in 2008 based on studies suggesting it halted the spread of breast cancer for more than five months. But follow-up studies showed that the delay lasted no more than three months, and patients suffered dangerous side effects.

"Given the number of serious and life-threatening side effects, the FDA does not believe there is a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio," said Dr. Richard Pazdur, FDA's chief of cancer drug review.

Cancer specialists said this week that Avastin never lived up to its initial promise.

FDA: Avastin should not be used for breast cancer - latimes.com
You will still be able to buy it off label.

yeah, a self-reliant fiscal conservative should applaud this decision.

 

[jillian]

We've already covered this in depth.

You have proven yourself unqualified to discuss this topic as you have clearly been lead down the path of fear by a biased opinion blog that does not base their writing on facts.

she thinks if she repeats the same trash often enough, that somehow makes it true.

 

[Greenbeard]

The FDA is the death panel? You know, the FDA isn't exactly new.

 

[xotoxi]

The Progressive-Totalitarians can't handle the truth.

But that isn't going to deter either Willow or me from speaking up.

What is the truth?

That the FDA removed the indication for Avastin for breast cancer because of the cost?

I've heard people mention that on here, but I have not seen any PROOF for that accusation.

 

[L.K.Eder]

The FDA is the death panel? You know, the FDA isn't exactly new.

yeah, there is that.

on top of all the other bullshit.