Spending on preventive treatments that help a few is unaffordable
- Nick Freemantle, professor of clinical epidemiology and biostatistics (N.Freemantle@bham.ac.uk),
- Suzanne Hill, senior lecturer in clinical pharmacology
- Department of Primary Care and General Practice, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT
- Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW 2300, Australia
Ivan Illich, in Limits to Medicine, commented: “The more time, toil and sacrifice spent by a population in producing medicine as a commodity, the larger will be the by product, namely the fallacy that society has a supply of health locked away which can be mined and marketed.”1 Rich Western societies are investing in preventive treatments that will benefit only a minority of those who take them for a long time, a situation well illustrated by the statins. Widespread use of statins is scarcely affordable in the developed world and unachievable in developing countries, although the drugs are still marketed heavily there. Using resources to purchase statins means other effective treatments may not be available.
From the perspective of the pharmaceutical industry, statins are an ideal group of drugs. They are, with one exception, safe and free from common side effects. They achieve a premium price and potentially have an increasingly wide market in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. About 11.5 million adults (5.4% of the adult population) in the United States are currently taking either atorvastatin, simvastatin, or pravastatin, all of which are in the top 40 most commonly prescribed pharmaceuticals in the United States.2 Indeed, atorvastatin (Lipitor) is now the biggest prescription-only drug in the world.
It is paradoxical that while achieving benefits in reducing mortality …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012