Documentary looking at three
state-of-the-art interventions for aggressive cancers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sB2G4vm1uk
state-of-the-art interventions for aggressive cancers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sB2G4vm1uk
At present, Provenge- for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer - is the only cancer vaccine on the market and is only available in the United States. However, healthcare business analysts, Global Data, predict that over the next six years there will be a significant increase in cancer vaccines. Although there are interesting developments in both the prophylactic* and the therapeutic sectors of the cancer vaccine market, the developments in the therapeutic sector offer the most inspiring innovations. "Prophylactic" means for prevention, such as Gardasil, a vaccine which protects from HPV infection, and its most common complication, cervical cancer. "Therapeutic" means for treatment (the person already has the disease). According to Global Data, a series of first-in-class treatments have shown to be safe and well tolerated in clinical trials.
These vaccines include: GV1001 for advanced pancreatic cancer Biovaxld (Idiotype vaccine therapy) for follicular non-Hodgkin lymphoma Allovectin-7 and OncoVEX for the treatment of melanoma Currently, there are several adverse effects in treatments used to help individuals suffering from these cancers, ranging from high toxicity, to short-term or unpredictable efficacy. The medical community hope that advances in the cancer vaccine industry can resolve these issues and change the way future cancer treatments are developed. Cancer vaccines can also be used in conjunction with treatments, such as surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. In addition, numerous pharmaceutical companies, including Vical, Biovest International, NewLink Genetics Corporation and NovaRx Corporation, are focusing more attention on cancer vaccines. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/247060.php Women who exercise may cut their risk of breast cancer by as much as 30 percent, a new study suggests. "Our study showed that moderate recreational physical activity may reduce breast cancer risk," said lead researcher Lauren McCullough, from the University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, in Chapel Hill, N.C. "Importantly, we found reduced risk of breast cancer for women who engaged in exercise after menopause," she said. "This is particularly encouraging given the late age of onset for breast cancer." For the study, McCullough's team collected data on more than 1,500 women with breast cancer and a similar number of women without the disease. They found women who exercised before or after menopause had a reduced risk of breast cancer. Women who exercised 10 to 19 hours a week had the largest benefit -- about a 30 percent reduced risk. The risk of breast cancer was cut with any amount of exercise, the study found. The risk reduction was seen mostly for hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, which is the most commonly diagnosed type among American women.
Even among active women, however, gaining a significant amount of weight, particularly after menopause, increased the risk of breast cancer, negating the beneficial effect of exercise, the researchers found. McCullough said the reasons that exercise is linked with a reduced risk of breast cancer aren't known. Yet it is known that maintaining a normal body weight is associated with reduced breast cancer risk. One expert believes reducing the risk for breast cancer means living a healthy lifestyle overall. http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/article/41209.htm?c=NL20120627 There is now an unanswerable case for the legalisation of assisted dying for those who are terminally ill. The tragic case of Tony Nicklinson has highlighted how as a society we have yet to resolve one of the most important ethical issues of our time: under what circumstances should the law allow medical assistance to enable somebody to die? Nicklinson, severely disabled as a result of locked-in syndrome, is challenging the existing application of murder law. Since he is asking for someone to directly end his life, what he is seeking is voluntary euthanasia (legal in the Benelux countries), not assisted dying (legal in the US states of Oregon, Montana and
Washington). Others, like myself, would like to see the law on assisted suicide amended to allow doctors to provide the choice of an assisted death only to those who are terminally ill, mentally competent and have expressed "a clear and settled wish to die". A vocal minority would prefer to see no change at all. This year has been an important one for those fighting for a resolution more appropriate to the 21st century, which reflects the views of the majority of the public. In January the Commission on Assisted Dying, headed by Lord Falconer, published its 400-page report. On the basis of a scrupulous weighing of a multitude of facts, an examination of ethical and legal principles, and, most important, the safeguards to protect people perceived as vulnerable, it established an unanswerable case for legalisation of assisted dying. In March, the Commons unanimously endorsed the director of public prosecutions' policy of not prosecuting in cases of compassionate assistance to die. Unfortunately, the DPP's guidelines do not allow healthcare professionals to be involved in assisted dying. They make it very clear that doctors and nurses who help patients to die will be prosecuted. Assistance is therefore delegated to amateurs, who have to assume a huge responsibility at a time when they are already greatly distressed and may well botch the job. This morally repugnant situation, imposing a final cruelty on those who are seeing their loved ones suffer an appalling death, seems inexplicable. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/24/terminally-ill-assisted-suicide-law-change Benelux countries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_euthanasia Quebec Government Favours Euthanasia http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/247096.php Lawyers who sue the NHS in medical negligence cases are earning from the state up to 30 times the amount their clients win in damages, it can be disclosed. Personal injury lawyers who bring actions under no-win no-fee agreements can claim many tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money in fees while their clients gain far smaller sums. The costs that the winning team of lawyers claim are also frequently many times higher than those the defence lawyers say they incurred when working on the same case.
In one case, revealed through a Freedom of Information request, the family of a dead patient, who had acquired an infection in hospital while being treated for advanced stage cancer, received £2,000 in damages. Their solicitors were paid £61,268 in legal fees by the NHS. The cost to the health service in defending the claim came to£31,541, bringing the total legal bill to more than £92,000. In another case, medical negligence lawyers billed the NHS litigation authority for £208,636 in legal costs after their client’s family was awarded £5,000 compensation. It was negotiated to £145,000. The defence’s costs were £32,700. In a third case, the NHS paid damages of £1,000, but the claimant lawyers’ costs came to £21,500. The original bill from the lawyers, before negotiation, was £31,300. In a fourth case, damages came to £3,750, defence costs came to £10,665 but the claimant’s lawyers’ costs came to £76,000. They originally submitted a bill of £96,200. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9352397/Lawyers-seizing-lions-share-of-payouts-in-NHS-negligence-cases.html The Department of Health has failed to stem the soaring cost to the NHS of no-win no-fee lawyers, writes Steve Barclay MP. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9353443/Comment-The-spiralling-cost-of-no-win-no-fee-lawyers.html A new study that examines how the jobs of British workers affects their risk of
cancer, concludes that over 8,000 cancer deaths a year in Britain, that is 5% of all cancer deaths, are linked to occupations, especially those involving shift work or exposure to carcinogens like asbestos and diesel engine fumes. Over half of the work-related cancer deaths are in male construction workers, say the researchers. They calculate that about 13,600 new cancer cases in 2004 and over 8,000 cancer deaths in 2005 in Britain every year were linked to work-related risk factors. The best way to beat lung cancer is prevention: smoking is by far the biggest risk factor, but workplace risks are also having an impact. (To put these figures in perspective, about 43,000 cancer deaths in the UKevery year are smoking-related). The biggest impact on these figures is from asbestos, which the researchers link to over 4,200 cancer cases in 2004, and other carcinogens such as diesel engine oil and silica that construction workers are exposed to. After asbestos, the main work-related risk factors are: Night shift: tied to around 1,960 cases of breast cancer in female night-shift workers. Exposure to mineral oil: tied to around 1,730 cases of bladder, lung and non-melanoma skin cancers among workers in the metal and printing industries. Sun exposure: linked to around 1,540 cases of skin cancer. Exposure to silica: tied to 910 cancer cases. Diesel engine exhaust exposure: tied to 800 cases. The study was funded by the Health and Safety Executive. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/246857.php More than 4,300 whistleblowers have come forward in the past 16 months to complain about the treatment of elderly and disabled people in care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) - which regulates care homes and hospitals in England
said some of the complaints concerned care home residents being physically assaulted. Complaints rose from 22 a month in December 2010 to 556 in March 2012. The CQC said whistleblowers included relatives and staff. The commission said that among the issues raised were members of staff assaulting residents, refusing to take residents to the toilet, shouting at elderly and disabled patients and failing to respond to call bells. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18563885 How do they compare with the private sector? They will tend to be bigger because doctors earn more. Also they will probably draw their pensions for much longer. "Somebody earning £50,000 or more might be expected to live an average of five or six years longer than your average worker," says Wright. "Typically someone leaving work today at 65 will live to age 83, but people on a bigger salary will live longer."
Laith Khalaf, pension expert with Hargreaves Lansdown, says you would need a pension pot of £1.5m to buy an index linked pension income equivalent to the sum doctors can expect to retire on at the age of 65. He adds that we should all be aiming to contribute 14.5% (9% plus tax relief for a higher rate taxpayer) of our pensionable earnings from the age of 25 if we want to achieve a good pension income in retirement. "If you asked me was I prepared to pay 14.5% of my salary to get a defined benefit pension like this, then I would be prepared to pay that. Quite frankly I would bite your hand off for it," he says. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/jun/21/are-doctors-pensions-too-generous Channel 4 documentary series.
Love Productions is making a primetime Channel 4 series about people who are on a final journey as a consequence of a terminal illness. The aim of this series is to present the subject of death to a mainstream audience in an open and honest way; thereby adding to the wider debate about how we approach it culturally, practically, and spiritually. We are looking for people to take part in the series from a range of backgrounds and life experience who have been told that they have a terminal illness and are presently undergoing treatment. We’re keen to hear from people who are going through this journey - what’s it really like? What becomes important? What becomes insignificant? Do people treat you differently? In what ways does life change? If you, or someone close to you, are in this situation, we would really like to have a confidential chat with you on the phone. If you’re keen to find out more, we’d perhaps arrange to visit you to discuss the project and discover whether you would be interested in taking part. It wouldn’t commit you to anything at this stage. If you would like to speak to one of our small and friendly team confidentially about the series further, please call us on 0207 067 2463 [email protected]. If you do not get through to someone, please do leave a message and one of our team will call you back as soon as possible. Many thanks Jessica Carey-Bates Love Productions 43 Eagle St, WC1R 4AT General: 0207 067 4820 DL: 0207 067 4830 Mobile: 07867 556100 Support for the doctors strike was crumbling on Wednesday night after a public backlash caused many who voted for action to have second thoughts.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9345634/Doctors-strike-two-thirds-of-doctors-in-retreat.html |
RSS Feed