My Wife has recently being diagnosed with Posterior Cortical Atrophy. Now I know and can look back at letters she wrote several years ago the illness has clearly started some time ago. Like Terry Pratchett we can see that there is a process that we can address, and we do want to take whatever hope may be on offer. The anticholinesterase treatments are explained by a causal hypothesis. The benefits may be so small that the crude mental tests which are available to statisticians do not show much improvement. The improvement that has been quantified does not balance the cost in the judgement who do not have to experience the disease. However any perceived comfort like the pleasure derived from coffee, tea, icecream, travel, or even aricept is worth exchanging for some money. If the benefits from the treatments on offer are very small and the side affects are also negligible why do we have to wait for a prescription to buy the relief that we can get from trying some form of treatment. I believe even acupuncture can be offered by the NHS. The Bureaucracy of the NHS surrounds treatments that are perceived as not worth the cost. We are not able even to know what it might cost. We are certainly not allowed to make the choice as to whether we would like to buy this comfort. We cannot obtain it without declaring that our NHS health insurance was a confidence trick of the worst kind and will not disgorge £1000 per year to 1% of the population.
I have found out that a 5 mg tablet of Aricept costs about £00.80 to me and that 2 x 5 mg are needed per day. Say £500 pa. It is absolutely disgracefull that the cost is given as a reason to avoid the comfort of this possibly innefective treatment. Oh by the way some improvements have been detected by the crudest tests. What is wrong/ Is this a line of reasoning that is being applied accross awide variety of NHS treatments?
Max Fordham
I have found out that a 5 mg tablet of Aricept costs about £00.80 to me and that 2 x 5 mg are needed per day. Say £500 pa. It is absolutely disgracefull that the cost is given as a reason to avoid the comfort of this possibly innefective treatment. Oh by the way some improvements have been detected by the crudest tests. What is wrong/ Is this a line of reasoning that is being applied accross awide variety of NHS treatments?
Max Fordham
