FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2003403455> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2003403455 endingPage "17" @default.
• W2003403455 startingPage "13" @default.
• W2003403455 abstract "The Costs of Caring:Who Pays? Who Profits? Who Panders? Leonard M. Fleck (bio) Avastin, a widely used colon cancer drug manufactured by San Francisco-based biotech company Genentech, has proven a somewhat effective treatment for lung and breast cancer when administered at twice the normal dose. In February, the New York Times carried a story about Avastin's extraordinarily high price when used in this alternative way: $100,000 for one year's treatment—a figure fully twice the price of the normal dose, even though producing the higher dose costs the company little additional money. And the treatment yields only an average gain in life expectancy of five months—very modest relative to the cost. What garnered media attention, however, was Genentech's novel justification for the price: the inherent value of these life-sustaining technologies.1 Rather than making the usual appeal to high research costs, the company cited the pricelessness of human life, implying a moral reason for the pricing decision. I will pass in silence over the obviously self-serving disingenuousness of this appeal. The fact is that many in our society—and perhaps a substantial majority—think human life should be thought of as priceless. That assertion can be taken in three very different ways. We can take the pricelessness of human life to mean that the social worth of an individual (their social status or contribution to the national economy) should be completely irrelevant when it comes to determining how much society should spend to save or prolong that individual's life in the face of a life-threatening illness or accident—a worthy moral principle. Likewise, we should affirm the nonutilitarian view that the cost of saving either a life or a life-year should not determine by itself what will count as a just allocation of limited health resources when we cannot afford to save all the life-years medical technology may salvage. But we need to reject the view that we have a moral obligation to spend any amount of money to save all lives and life-years that medical technology permits. The result of adopting this view would be a gross distortion in our society's health care priorities that would not be just, compassionate, or prudent. To see why this is true, let us look at some facts and reasonable projections. Health spending in the United States topped $1.8 trillion in 2004, roughly 16.3 percent of our gross domestic product (GDP), compared to 5.2 percent in 1960. Projections to 2015 show us spending more than $4 trillion on health care then—almost 20 percent of expected GDP.2 Medicare spending in 2005 was about $330 billion. With deployment of the prescription drug benefit in 2006, spending will be about $424 billion—a price tag expected to rise by 2014 to $747 billion. Over the ten-year period ending in 2015, Medicare spending will exceed $4 trillion.3 These figures are socially and politically problematic, especially in light of growing federal deficits. Health policy analysts generally agree that emerging medical technologies drive escalating health costs.4 Yet they and the public feel medical innovation should not be slowed or stopped—a conclusion I endorse as well. However, if we couple this belief with that third sense of the pricelessness of human life, the results are morally and economically disastrous. The problems posed by pricey medical innovation combined with a belief in the pricelessness of human life began with the passage of the 1972 End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) amendments to the [End Page 13] Medicare program. Those amendments created a program that would pay for renal dialysis or transplant for virtually any U.S. citizen in kidney failure. The program was motivated by the fact that thousands of patients died every year in the late 1960s because they could not afford the cost of dialysis (roughly $90,000 a year per patient in 2005 dollars). The rhetoric at the time was that no one should be denied access to effective, life-sustaining medical technology simply because they could not afford it, and society pressured Congress to pass the program quickly.5 Further, Congress believed that this..." @default.
• W2003403455 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2003403455 creator A5003188670 @default.
• W2003403455 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W2003403455 modified "2023-10-04" @default.
• W2003403455 title "The Costs of Caring: Who Pays? Who Profits? Who Panders?" @default.
• W2003403455 cites W1488243661 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W1559012658 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W1983774456 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2032584629 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2053321676 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2075175982 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W207550474 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2077343443 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2079340443 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2087228910 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2097325636 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2106145570 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2134891317 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2146384083 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2148199952 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2149908785 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2161564543 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2162718501 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2166525646 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W2241493738 @default.
• W2003403455 cites W647487628 @default.
• W2003403455 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/hcr.2006.0040" @default.
• W2003403455 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16776017" @default.
• W2003403455 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2003403455 type Work @default.
• W2003403455 sameAs 2003403455 @default.
• W2003403455 citedByCount "52" @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552012 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552013 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552014 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552015 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552016 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552017 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552018 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552019 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552020 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552021 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552022 @default.
• W2003403455 countsByYear W20034034552023 @default.
• W2003403455 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2003403455 hasAuthorship W2003403455A5003188670 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C119857082 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C133925201 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C2778449503 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C2781115785 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C40422974 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C107038049 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C119857082 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C133925201 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C138885662 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C144133560 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C162324750 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C17744445 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C199360897 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C199539241 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C2776291640 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C2778449503 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C2781115785 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C2908647359 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C40422974 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C41008148 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C71924100 @default.
• W2003403455 hasConceptScore W2003403455C99454951 @default.
• W2003403455 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2003403455 hasLocation W20034034551 @default.
• W2003403455 hasLocation W20034034552 @default.
• W2003403455 hasOpenAccess W2003403455 @default.
• W2003403455 hasPrimaryLocation W20034034551 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W1483859820 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W1577606206 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W1983852336 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W1994192134 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W2025168780 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W2136283328 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W274271084 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W2884197816 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W2993163441 @default.
• W2003403455 hasRelatedWork W627230168 @default.
• W2003403455 hasVolume "36" @default.
• W2003403455 isParatext "false" @default.

• next