Saturday, April 01, 2006

Here's your Avistan prescription. By the way, how much *free* screwing would you like with that?

From the Sacramento Bee comes the evolving story of promising cancer drug Avistan, tested, approved and marketed to fight colon cancer. Well, it seems Avistan may also be useful in prolonging the lives of those suffering from late-stage breast and lung cancers.

The drug is manufactured by Genentech. As a treatment for colon cancer, Avistan's cost is set at $50,000 per year. But as a drug to fight breast and lung cancer, the same medicine is expected to be $100,000/year!

Why the difference? The reason it's gonna cost you, your insurance company, and anyone with health insurance double what it costs to treat colon cancer? Well, as the article in the Bee reveals, "Genentech is signaling that the higher cost to treat breast cancer, for example, reflects the higher value society places on fighting that disease"!

So if you have to contract cancer, try for one of the higher valued ones as determined by society. It's treatment will cost you a little more but, trust Genentech, society cares more about you. Oh, and by the way, while you may be paying double for the same drug if you have breast or lung cancer, take comfort in knowing the extra $50,000/yr. you're being charged includes a lot of free screwing. Be consoled knowing, as badly as you may be feeling as a result of the cancer ravaging your body, you're getting fucked for free! Many times over! This is capitalism du jour. Capitalism at its finest, shortly before it gets sucked back into the black void of another failed ideology that millions have died for or because of.

As the Sacramento Bee ultimately asks, "What would a drug company try to charge if it had a drug that actually cured cancer?"

Well, Dada has the answer: "Don't worry about it, you couldn't afford it. That would be a drug for the Cheneys, the Bushes, and the Clintons. You're best hope is to opt for the $100,000/year inferior drug with the free screwings."

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

"society places a higher value on fighting" breast cancer than colon cancer? Well, now dada has finally provided proof of exactly how breast-obsessed Americans are. Sorry, but if I had to make that hard choice, if I had to lose one or the other: goodbye boobs, it's been fun, butt (sic) ... D.K.

dada said...

D.K., I think I can appreciate your preference here. But I'm kinda ambivalent with the choices.

Just thank god cancer of the butt is extremely uncommon.

dada said...

ah, can I take that back?

Oh hell, the delete button's not working. Okay, everyone just disregard that previous comment I made.

Thanx.

Anonymous said...

and I was just going to apologize for being so flippant about a very serious subject. I realize there really isn't a choice, is there? Well, other than can you afford an extra $50K for things "society places a higher value on". And to be totally accurate, I guess the butt is not part of the colon, so it was a terminally bad joke. D.K.

dada said...

No, the butt is DEFINITELY not part of the colon. I can attest with all honesty, I've never been sitting in the mall and remarked to myself of a passerby, "Wow, great colon."

(I'm being way, way to flippant here, aren't I?)

some_maineiac said...

hey, check out left of center's post last week on RNAi reserach...the absolute scariest thing about the research is that it hints at the existence of an immortality drug as well as cures for various genetic maladies...

I wonder what the going rate for immortality will be???

Anonymous said...

thanks for the link maineiac. If the lowly petunia can offer such marvels, just think what the endangered spotted owl might portend. Strange comments on that post though (3/29), huh? D.K.

some_maineiac said...

hmmm, didn't notice those, DK...i don't know what pussyleniency is supposed to mean? i can only guess that pusillanimity was the intended word? (far be it from me to offer a direct correction on diction to an angry lady)

Anonymous said...

thank god you didn't understand either, maineiac. I was totally confounded, thought maybe I had misunderstood the entire post or something. ever read any of Heinlein's immortality-themed SF? seems it gets kinda boring after the first few hundred years. D.K.

some_maineiac said...

actually, DK, that's a deliberate misspelling above...

the word appears to be a made-up one which means essentially the same thing as my "correction"...i'm all for new words, but only when the old ones won't do...and I see nothing of value to the made-up word except the shock value of its resemblance to my misspelling...so consider the source when you see it in heavy usage...

I can't recall any Heinlein besides "stranger in a strange land"...but I imagine that immortality would get very tiring...there would be no opportunities for re-birth...

Anonymous said...

http://mellingerman.net/2006/03/12/genentechs-blood-money/

I wrote about Genentech's cancer gouge too. I was surprised by the amount the DNA guys who attacked me about it.

Mel

dada said...

Anonymous: Hey, I went to your blog and read the comments. Man, it looks like you're under some orchestrated attack from pharma industry shills.

I wanted badly to offer a word of support, but that might have drawn some of them over here and I really don't want to have to mess with slime mold.

Keep up the good fight!