Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Half Price Tapas with Scotland on Sunday

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Lyndsay Moss: Alzheimer's 'wonder drug' fuels funds debate



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 31 July 2008
THE arrival of the latest "wonder drug" is always keenly welcomed by the public and doctors alike. But with each new discovery, those who deal with financial matters in the NHS must feel a little more anxious about where the money is going to come from to pay for it.
In the latest example – a drug called rember to treat Alzheimer's – campaigners are clear the health service must start planning now to make sure funding is available in future.

One charity insider said: "The NHS should be looking ahead at this
kind of development and making sure they will be able to have the levels of provision to ensure people who have the chance to benefit from this drug can receive it.

"In the long run, from what we understand of how (rember] is performing, it would prove cost-effective."

The particular problem with Alzheimer's is that there is still debate about currently available drugs – let alone ones yet to make it on to the market.

The treatments, which include donepezil and rivastigmine, were initially recommended by health watchdogs for use in patients at all stages of the disease.

But, in 2006, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) said the drugs should only be prescribed to people with moderate-stage disease. The body said the drugs, which cost about £2.50 a day per patient, did not make enough of a difference to recommend them for all patients.

Campaigners and drugs firms lost a High Court battle to make the NHS prescribe the drugs in the early stages of Alzheimer's, though Nice was told to rewrite guidance on how the disease is assessed.

In Scotland, NHS official guidance has followed the lead of Nice in not recommending the drugs in the early stages. But in practice, whether or not the drugs are prescribed has been left down to individual doctors.

Alzheimer Scotland said it had not heard of any patients being denied the treatments at an early stage although it has happened in England.

The charity source said: "We don't think that is happening in Scotland, but because that is what the official guidance says we are not totally confident it could not happen in the future.

"

As for rember, which is said to slow down the progression of Alzheimer's by more than 80 per cent – the future looks promising.

"I can't believe the Scottish Medicines Consortium would turn it down," the source said. "But the NHS does need to start planning for this as early as possible."





The full article contains 429 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 31 July 2008 1:23 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Sandra Shulman,

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada 31/07/2008 01:02:26
This is absolutely the greatest news I have heard in a very long time. My mother is suffering right now from Alzheimers, she is at the moderate stage but if there is some way and some how we can be part of the trial which Rebecca Wood, chief executive of Alzheimer's Research Trust had mentioned that would mean the world to us. If anyone knows of how I can reach her please help me and my sister live a longer life with our mother.
2

Neil,

Glasgow 31/07/2008 11:48:28
The horrible thing is that it will take many years of government testing before this, or many other lifesaving drugs, are available on the market. This will almost certainly be to late to save anybody in Sandra's mother's position.

While testing for side effects is very important surely adult humans should be allowed to take the risk. I strongly suspect most people feeling it coming on would happily take that risk.

The Scottish Parliament should change our law to allow people the freedom to choose. That people should lose their minds, purely because government will not let them be cured is obscene.
3

G,

dundy 31/07/2008 12:40:27
Neil

If the drug eased an Alzheimer's patients symptoms only to give them liver failure then I reckon you'd change your mind...
In any case the results are preliminary...they will not be cured their symptoms will be eased....we know so little about this drug and its metabolism or mechansim of action that allowing free access to desperate people would be immoral and criminal....
4

Neil,

Glasgow 31/07/2008 15:04:54
No G. I have known someone with Alzheimers. If the choice was an increased chance of premature death, in say 5 to 15 years, or living my full span as a vegetable I have no doubt I would wish to take the chance.

In any case I am not demanding that everybody should be forced to do the same but that nobody should be prevented from doing so, which is not the same thing. If you consider allowing people freedom of choice "immoral & criminal" we must disagree.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.