Oh Those Death Panels

When critics of health care reform created the “death panel” label to describe  the unelected and unaccountable boards that would decide what potentially life-saving procedures would be worth funding, “hyperbole” was among the nicest accusations lobbed in their direction.  We were assured that the whole idea of “death panels” or anything that would deny care because of its cost was pure fiction invented by evil Republicans to scare people.  Bad Republicans!  Bad, bad Republicans!!!  (Cue the usual one-sided litany of partisan evils.)

Just like the claims of cost savings, however, it is becoming apparent that the truth is exactly as scary as the fiction.  The FDA is considering denying Medicare funding for the anti-cancer drug Avastin because it deems the cost to be more than the worth of the number and length of lives saved.

Yep.  Read it again, if you want.  The FDA is considering an arbitrary dollar value beyond which it will refuse to allow government funds to be spent to even try a treatment that has known curative effects (just not as much as they think would make it worthwhile).  Also, since insurance companies routinely mirror Medicare guidelines (not to mention the incentives in health care reform for companies to dump their health care benefits and force employees on to the government program), the extended effect would be to deny Avastin to everyone, not just Medicare patients.  It also represents a very dangerous shift in the scope of the FDA, where an unelected administrative agency tasked only with ensuring safety and effectiveness is now being used in the politically dicey area of calculating which lives are worth saving and which ones should be written off.

I have a close family member who has had breast cancer and received treatment with Avastin — the exact same scenario the FDA is considering prohibiting.  How much of her continuing cancer-free status can be attributed to Avastin is unknowable.  But I sure don’t want others who are just entering this scary process to have that option placed off the table just because some bureaucrat thinks it isn’t worth it.

When the “death panels” accusation first came out, I accepted the response that it was hyperbolic and excessive. Now, I’m not sure at all.  The pure number of lies that get exposed about health care reform as we move closer to its actual implementation is scary.  We already know that Congressional leaders and other proponents of health care reform lied about the cost, the ability of individuals to keep their own coverage, and the willingness of the government to interfere with individual lifestyle decisions.  Now, we learn that the “death panels” bit might have a grain of truth as well.