Comments on: British Columbia And Its ‘Bizarre’ Task Force Report

By: Jaynesday

Jaynesday — Sat, 24 May 2008 17:34:02 +0000

Paul
Thanks for the explanation.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 24 May 2008 17:15:54 +0000

Jaynesday,

Not really. First drugs are discovered, tested, developed and approved to be effective and safe (at least appropriately safe for the condition and alternatives), without regards to one state, one province or one managed care organization has as its methods to approve for reimbursement. Companies try to satisfy general requirements, but it would be impossible to meet every single requirement from every single place.

Then come places like BC, who rely on what seems to be a scientific, balances source of information to cherry pick it and use it as a crutch to only pay for the cheapest possible alternative.

Basically, they say that if a VW can get you from point a to point be, they will never pay for anything more even if the Volvo is safer, faster, more reliable, more consistent, and has a longer life. Bottom line, VW is cheaper to get you from point a to point be and that’s all we care.

Thus the conflict between wanting to be a province that encourages innovation and investment, and wanting to be a province that doesn’t care about innovation and the fruits of investment. They had to make the choice, one way or the other.

By: Jaynesday

Jaynesday — Sat, 24 May 2008 16:36:55 +0000

Paul,
I am not familiar with the Canadian system but I take it from your comments that this evaluation method determines the design of drugs?

By: Justice in Michigan

Justice in Michigan — Sat, 24 May 2008 01:59:44 +0000

TI is one of the most important sources of unbiased drug information we have. If it is killed, it will be a major victory for those who are threatened by the truth.

Single example of many. It was only through TI, working with Health Research Group, that we learned that the CLASS study published in JAMA left out half the data. Even Robert Temple was shocked.

This is a direct assault.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 23 May 2008 21:37:55 +0000

Problem had been that the BC system had as its only goal cost reductions and going for the lowest-cost alternative. This was a mixed message at the same time as the government wanted to invite and encourage innovation. You can’t have it both ways, so it had to choose one path or another.

By: in BC

in BC — Fri, 23 May 2008 20:45:02 +0000

I do not know enough detail to comment on the TI and the recommendations here however the characterization of LifeSciences BC as simply a lobbying group is perhaps somewhat poor. Although it does lobby and represent for industry concerns both locally, nationally and internationally its more of a Biotech/BioPharma Community collective and has other activities (Networking, Employment, Career Support, News). Most other areas that have concentration of industry (SD, Bay area, Seattle, DC, Boston, NC) have similar organizations that would not classify in that manner either.

Q: Do you know why the Setting Sun is on the BC Flag?
A: So that the people who live there can see the Sun during certain times of the year…