Cancer victim forced to sell home to buy life-extending drug (From Dorset Echo)

Very sad indeed.

If she sold the drawing for £40,000, and has paid £6,000, she still has £34,000 to spend.
Just bear in mind if the NHS pays for her treatment, there will be less money to pay for treatment for people who have paid in to the system all thir lives.
I thikn there is more to this story than we are being told!

Swerving wrote:
If she sold the drawing for £40,000, and has paid £6,000, she still has £34,000 to spend.
Just bear in mind if the NHS pays for her treatment, there will be less money to pay for treatment for people who have paid in to the system all thir lives.
I thikn there is more to this story than we are being told!

well said

Swerving wrote:
If she sold the drawing for £40,000, and has paid £6,000, she still has £34,000 to spend.
Just bear in mind if the NHS pays for her treatment, there will be less money to pay for treatment for people who have paid in to the system all thir lives.
I thikn there is more to this story than we are being told!

The NHS delivers treatment to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay, and I hope it remains that way. If there is more to this story why don't you tell us instead of alluding to something that may not even exist.

We need a better method of buying these medicines. Pharmaceutical companies do spend a lot on research, but also make a lot of money. This drug is expensive and could bankrupt the NHS. Pharma companies often pitch their prices to what they think the people in the country will tolerate - a bit like price matching on a global scale. Its a pity they cant be more affordable. A terrible story - right now I am consciously valuing my reasonable health after reading this.

Sidney Hall wrote:
We need a better method of buying these medicines. Pharmaceutical companies do spend a lot on research, but also make a lot of money. This drug is expensive and could bankrupt the NHS. Pharma companies often pitch their prices to what they think the people in the country will tolerate - a bit like price matching on a global scale. Its a pity they cant be more affordable. A terrible story - right now I am consciously valuing my reasonable health after reading this.

Then there is the issue of how the results are measured. A well known Australian study found that across all cancers, less than 2.5% of patients benefited from chemotherapy. And even this figure is skewed by the benefit for a small number of cancers - chemo for breast cancer apparently offers only 1.5% of people a chance to live five years (important: this doesn't mean that only 1.5% of breast cancer patients will survive 5 years, it means that only 1.5% of survivors will survive that long because of chemo treatment. It also doesn't include patients who have chemo to treat symptoms rather than to prolong life).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pubmed/15630
849

Yet we all believe chemotherapy is an unpleasant life saver, rather than a convenient money spinner peddled on false hope.

And then there's the millions that drugs companies get fined every year for falsifying results.

patience567 wrote:

Swerving wrote:
If she sold the drawing for £40,000, and has paid £6,000, she still has £34,000 to spend.
Just bear in mind if the NHS pays for her treatment, there will be less money to pay for treatment for people who have paid in to the system all thir lives.
I thikn there is more to this story than we are being told!

The NHS delivers treatment to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay, and I hope it remains that way. If there is more to this story why don't you tell us instead of alluding to something that may not even exist.

I'm not sure that there is more to the story in relation to this lady, and she has my best wishes.

However, the keen eyed will have noticed the words "in England".

The Barnett Formula, which distributes public spending across England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland, means that the latter three groups receive more per capita than England does.

This means that a Scot gets £1500 more spent on him per year and a Welshman, £1000.

As a consequence, more drugs are available in Scotland and Wales, Scottish students get free tuition fees and you don't have to sell your house when you go into care.

Swerving wrote:
If she sold the drawing for £40,000, and has paid £6,000, she still has £34,000 to spend.
Just bear in mind if the NHS pays for her treatment, there will be less money to pay for treatment for people who have paid in to the system all thir lives.
I thikn there is more to this story than we are being told!

I hope you and Louise 744, when in need of help, are in receipt of less callous and ignorant comments. Ms Savrasova has worked in this country for some time and has contributed towards the NHS just like the rest of us and deserves treatment just like us. Her story is a timely reminder of the failings of our society and, if you are healthy, just be grateful. Do you seriously believe the lady in question doesn't have other demands on her finances? What she does with her money is her affair especially when she is having to pay for her own treatment and I'm sure she can do without your insensitive and, quite frankly, stupid comments.

Well said.

monkeydog wrote:

Swerving wrote:
If she sold the drawing for £40,000, and has paid £6,000, she still has £34,000 to spend.
Just bear in mind if the NHS pays for her treatment, there will be less money to pay for treatment for people who have paid in to the system all thir lives.
I thikn there is more to this story than we are being told!

I hope you and Louise 744, when in need of help, are in receipt of less callous and ignorant comments. Ms Savrasova has worked in this country for some time and has contributed towards the NHS just like the rest of us and deserves treatment just like us. Her story is a timely reminder of the failings of our society and, if you are healthy, just be grateful. Do you seriously believe the lady in question doesn't have other demands on her finances? What she does with her money is her affair especially when she is having to pay for her own treatment and I'm sure she can do without your insensitive and, quite frankly, stupid comments.

Welcome to the real Weymouth, if the comments on these pages concerning other people suffering are anything to go by then they are selfish arrogant and uncaring with huge holier than thou attitudes.

As a cancer patient myself I wish this lady all the best ...BUT I am confused by something in this story.... shes selling a flat in Hanover st and living in rented place on the esplanade...surely this is wasting money she could be using..ie...shes either paying rent and mortgage or she owns flat outright and so is paying rent when she doesnt need too.
Unfortunatly this story is not a one off and I can only hope my treatment contiues to work

While I really feel for this woman and, in an ideal world, the drugs should be available to her the NHS is not infinite pot of money.

When weighing up paying for life prolonging treatment for one person and life SAVING treatment for another the best option is the life SAVING treatment. I know that is cold and callous and, as I said, in an ideal world there would be drugs available for both treatments whilst pharmaceutical companies charge high prices for drugs not everyone can have what they would like.

I wish Ms. Savrasova all the best for the future.

im sorry i do really wish her well, but you can not expect the nhs to pay for her,the echo published the story cyril and all insensitive comments as you put it will only be online she does not have to read it and this is a discussion and free speech has not been totally banned yet, life is not all daisy,s and daffodills.i expect to get cancer in my life like most people and will have to deal with it in my own way.

rozmister wrote:
While I really feel for this woman and, in an ideal world, the drugs should be available to her the NHS is not infinite pot of money.

When weighing up paying for life prolonging treatment for one person and life SAVING treatment for another the best option is the life SAVING treatment. I know that is cold and callous and, as I said, in an ideal world there would be drugs available for both treatments whilst pharmaceutical companies charge high prices for drugs not everyone can have what they would like.

I wish Ms. Savrasova all the best for the future.

Everybody dies. People cost one or two thousand pounds per week in nursing homes or in end of life care.

rozmister wrote:
While I really feel for this woman and, in an ideal world, the drugs should be available to her the NHS is not infinite pot of money.

When weighing up paying for life prolonging treatment for one person and life SAVING treatment for another the best option is the life SAVING treatment. I know that is cold and callous and, as I said, in an ideal world there would be drugs available for both treatments whilst pharmaceutical companies charge high prices for drugs not everyone can have what they would like.

I wish Ms. Savrasova all the best for the future.

Everybody dies. People cost one or two thousand pounds per week in nursing homes or in end of life care.

There always seems to be enough money to pay the chief executive and his paladins.

Yeh.. much nice count others people money than to ask yourself:
from April 2011 ROCHE gives drug for free, but Paul Sly decided to charge this woman 6k+. Why? How come it possible? Will they take my money also if I goes cancer? BTW - Dorset PTC far from debts. They will finish fin-year in April with hefty surplus. What they do with money?

Perhaps the NHS should stop doing things like tattoo removals and fertility treatment? And what about closing the door to the rest of the world who use the NHS on a flyover visit without paying into the system? At least this lady has worked and payed taxes here!

Wonder what our MP Draxy will say bout this all. It was his party screamed out loud for all drugs to all cancer sufferers during elections. They pushed for the CDF. Let 'em see how it works.

patience567 wrote:
There always seems to be enough money to pay the chief executive and his paladins.

Exactly!! It gross mis-appropriation of funds by these over payed zealots which has help create terrible situations like this. I wish Ms Savrasova the very best of fortune.

patience567 wrote:

rozmister wrote:
While I really feel for this woman and, in an ideal world, the drugs should be available to her the NHS is not infinite pot of money.

When weighing up paying for life prolonging treatment for one person and life SAVING treatment for another the best option is the life SAVING treatment. I know that is cold and callous and, as I said, in an ideal world there would be drugs available for both treatments whilst pharmaceutical companies charge high prices for drugs not everyone can have what they would like.

I wish Ms. Savrasova all the best for the future.

Everybody dies. People cost one or two thousand pounds per week in nursing homes or in end of life care.

Which is why when some older people are in the last stages of life food and water are withdrawn to allow them to die. Because keeping them alive at all costs isn't cost effective.

We may all die eventually but there's a difference between helping someone to survive for another 20 - 30 years and helping them live for another year.

Just done some digging on-line. NHS officers that run Cancer Fund enjoy salary around 100k per year. I wonder - do they have bonuses like bankers if fund saved some money? If bank or factory saves some money that's ok. If hospital saves some money = they didn't give enough care for sick. If they in red = they gave more care than they planned to. Opposite to business. But if they saved money by charging cancer patient, that's gross, stinks a mile.

It must be terrible for the NHS staff who have to refuse her treatment. I wish Ms Savrasova well and I hope she finds some peace. Be it financial or physical.

Her work with Dorset Police may well have saved this country 'a large amount of money'. Of course thats a matter of confidentiality.

Dear all, thank you for your kind and not so kind comments. Let me clarify few aspects of the story - it's long and complex like my illness, so few facts went foggy. 1. I have paid for the first two drips of Avastin - in November 2011. Then Dr. Osborne managed to secure the drug directly from Roche.
2. As of April 2011 Avastine started to be available to cancer patients from Roche via CAncer Drug Fund. I was defected the drug by NHS in November 2011 because as Dr Flubacher said in 2010 (I've begged for Avastine from day one) "it's economically not viable; it will give you only 4 months more to live and it is very expensive drug". 3. The flat that I have to sell is not my home, but the property I by to let after divorce. 4. I am not poor as such. Especially as I don't need to safe for old age. I'll never be old. I am just very scared that Roche compaction will come to end. There is life support treatment in China - it cost around 35k for 6 months. i want this 6 months if i can have it. Also I have paid privately for scans, USG, surgeon consultation - just to jump waiting lists. Note that in Australia eg 42,5% of women with my diagnosis survive more than 5 years. In UK only 35%. What happens to 7.5% British women? NHS kills them. Kills us. By waiting. Before I became diagnosed I worked a lot and duly paid 45% taxes. They where spent against my wish for
Afghan and Iraqi wars... All money I receive as disability allowance I give to Cancer Research - as there is no any progress in ovarian cancer for 20 years! And oncologists do not expect any cure for next 15 years. Just life prolonging measures
I was singled out by NHS: I was the only Top-up cancer patient in 2011 who was asked to pay for the drug while Drug Fund finished financial year with surplus. Why? I want my money back. Even if want to blow them.

PS please excuse typing errors, my hands are shaking.

Also: many thanks for Roche, Dr Richard Osborne, nurses in Dorchester chemotherapy unit and staff in Poole Day Cancer Centre - these are whom I owe last 3 years of life apart from my very friends and loving family.

Dear Miss Savrasova, I wish you the very best in your fight for the treatment that you need. Unfortunately as you've found out, the system stinks in this country as to how money is allocated on funding for the NHS,etc. As many of us comment on these sites we find out the hard way that after working and paying taxes when we actually need something back we don't get the help from the system we paid into! I hope we can hear some good news about this soon! Regards and Best Wishes to you!

Von Karajan wrote:
Dear Miss Savrasova, I wish you the very best in your fight for the treatment that you need. Unfortunately as you've found out, the system stinks in this country as to how money is allocated on funding for the NHS,etc. As many of us comment on these sites we find out the hard way that after working and paying taxes when we actually need something back we don't get the help from the system we paid into! I hope we can hear some good news about this soon! Regards and Best Wishes to you!

Hear hear.
NHS spending allocation is a travesty.

Why Paul Sly or our MP are not commenting on this page? Too posh to talk to people they apparently care about?

I am somewhat dubious about this story especially when puked from a censoring feminist agenda rag such as this. While I have no personal issue towards this woman, I ask that women reflect on Race4life and cancer research's misandry, the man hate that is undertaken in cancer funding by deliberate political agenda. How women get 60% more funding for most cancer than men and nobody gives a ****.

Now you can experience what it has been like for men for decades...don't blame the comment..look at where it comes from and why. It always comes around.

I sympathise with you as a human being, but as a woman, in tune with the attitudes of women today

..WOMAN UP..STOP WHINING YOU CAN TAKE IT..YOUR NOT IMPORTANT !

http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
2299233/I-got-4-800-
boob-job-NHS-Boast-K
atie-Price-wannabe-2
2-breasts-enlarged-m
odel--YOU-paid-them.
html?ITO=1490&ns_mch
annel=rss&ns_campaig
n=1490

BTW, lets embrace liberated women and 50 years of feminist product. The money for your cancer is being spent on this "liberated woman"



Congratulations ladies.

What disgraceful comments there are on this subject. I am always angered when some people make comment on when treatment should and shouldn't be given on the NHS. Who are we to judge whether someone is 'worth' the cost of an expensive drug? There but for the grace of God go I ..is never a truer sentiment in this case. Good luck to you Miss Savrasova, you must be feeling pretty desperate and miserable as it is, and I only hope those who don't think you should be given this drug (for whatever reason) are never in your position. The medical 'ethics' in this country are hypocritical, on the one hand people are denied treatment due to cost, and on the other sick/elderly people are not allowed to die with dignity when they so chose, in the way they chose.

P.S. I really am sorry about your cancer, but I know 10 men to every woman like you that is ignored..don't blame me, blame your fellow misandrist women.

JACKC wrote:
What disgraceful comments there are on this subject. I am always angered when some people make comment on when treatment should and shouldn't be given on the NHS. Who are we to judge whether someone is 'worth' the cost of an expensive drug? There but for the grace of God go I ..is never a truer sentiment in this case. Good luck to you Miss Savrasova, you must be feeling pretty desperate and miserable as it is, and I only hope those who don't think you should be given this drug (for whatever reason) are never in your position. The medical 'ethics' in this country are hypocritical, on the one hand people are denied treatment due to cost, and on the other sick/elderly people are not allowed to die with dignity when they so chose, in the way they chose.

Of course I am sure you are not angered when women are given it and men ignored..show me the last time you vented your anger at men being treated this way please? No,...thought not.

RACE4LIFE - your bitterness is awesome, poor tormented soul you are.
But we are here discussing NHS politics towards the patient that has cancer, mate. It happened to be a woman with ovarian cancer in this case, but it could be man with testicle tumor. All the same.

LennoxStreet wrote:
RACE4LIFE - your bitterness is awesome, poor tormented soul you are.
But we are here discussing NHS politics towards the patient that has cancer, mate. It happened to be a woman with ovarian cancer in this case, but it could be man with testicle tumor. All the same.

I am also talking about NHS policies towards cancer, as well as race4life, cancer research and most things like this subject. Look at the facts. Then you might understand my point.

It is unfortunate that one has to make a point on the back of such an unfortunate subject, but it is relevant, even if seeming uncomfortable i'm afraid.

I am not tortured or bittered, trust me...I just push a true point that is otherwise suppressed when the moment presents itself. so name calling don't work, some here have learnt that much already.

If it was a male with testicular cancer, be assured that under the same set of circumstances it would never have been published in this nasty little paper.

No offense intended,RACE4LIFE. You are not bitter, you are sweet, here. This "nasty little paper" is currently used by you as a tribune to voice your issue: "to push a true point that is otherwise suppressed", btw. No one will delete your post, relax. But why you need to shower around your bitter **** I am not sure. As for the woman in this article - she puts her house on the market to cover holes of NHS she supported by her taxes for some years. See the point? Calm yourself down, mate. If you see the bigger picture and wanna present it here, maybe try to do so with some respect to people you are talking to.

It's funny how you confuse bitter, with stead-fast and not giving in on a principal. There is a difference and your attempts to tune it your way in the eyes of others don't make any difference to the point being made.

I am calm thanks. When this "nasty little rag" stops it's "dirty little agenda" and tactics, maybe it will be treated with some respect. Some of us know the game in hand.

Excuse me while I repeat my lack of concern for this women's plight politically in the face of what has been done to men for decades that nobody cares about.

Do I give a sh** if you don't like that..take a guess.

..and don't be such a g*t to think I feel comfortable about making such a proclamation and stand on such an article.

I am not entirely without feeling and I honestly did not like to do it. I had too because of the Echo's behaviour that has been well documented and repeated over the last few years especially. They have deleted and censored hundreds of comments on male cancer issues and D.V victims, not just from me but others also.

If they don't like it then they should stop publishing lies and stop working on false statistics and pushing women's groups who have been well proven to spread misandry and the demonising of men, or undermining male needs to support their own want.

You get back what you put out. that's the deal.

JACKC wrote:
What disgraceful comments there are on this subject. I am always angered when some people make comment on when treatment should and shouldn't be given on the NHS. Who are we to judge whether someone is 'worth' the cost of an expensive drug? There but for the grace of God go I ..is never a truer sentiment in this case. Good luck to you Miss Savrasova, you must be feeling pretty desperate and miserable as it is, and I only hope those who don't think you should be given this drug (for whatever reason) are never in your position. The medical 'ethics' in this country are hypocritical, on the one hand people are denied treatment due to cost, and on the other sick/elderly people are not allowed to die with dignity when they so chose, in the way they chose.

This is a very valid point. When my time comes, i would like the option of an easy way out. Millions must be wasted on people who wish for nothing more than a peaceful passing. If this were to be rectified then there would be more available for those that wish to fight on.

JamesYoung wrote:

JACKC wrote:
What disgraceful comments there are on this subject. I am always angered when some people make comment on when treatment should and shouldn't be given on the NHS. Who are we to judge whether someone is 'worth' the cost of an expensive drug? There but for the grace of God go I ..is never a truer sentiment in this case. Good luck to you Miss Savrasova, you must be feeling pretty desperate and miserable as it is, and I only hope those who don't think you should be given this drug (for whatever reason) are never in your position. The medical 'ethics' in this country are hypocritical, on the one hand people are denied treatment due to cost, and on the other sick/elderly people are not allowed to die with dignity when they so chose, in the way they chose.

This is a very valid point. When my time comes, i would like the option of an easy way out. Millions must be wasted on people who wish for nothing more than a peaceful passing. If this were to be rectified then there would be more available for those that wish to fight on.

A good point.

I still find it strange that we have so many people raising funds for cancer charities, etc, yet our Government seems quite content to give billions of pounds of OUR money each year to the EU, Foreign Aid,etc?

And let us not forget wars that produce armies of injured and shell shocked men, fast abandoned by NHS. Perhaps to give us a chance to buy Help for Heroes bracelets and feel a bit heroic ourselves.
As for Sevtalana Savrasova, if Dorset Cancer Drug Fund doesn't want to swallow the pride by changing wrong decision then let officials collect money in a hat as their personal charity for this patient. I understand she cheated on them being still alive against statistic. Avasting had helped after all.

RACE4LIFE wrote:
It's funny how you confuse bitter, with stead-fast and not giving in on a principal. There is a difference and your attempts to tune it your way in the eyes of others don't make any difference to the point being made.

I am calm thanks. When this "nasty little rag" stops it's "dirty little agenda" and tactics, maybe it will be treated with some respect. Some of us know the game in hand.

Excuse me while I repeat my lack of concern for this women's plight politically in the face of what has been done to men for decades that nobody cares about.

Do I give a sh** if you don't like that..take a guess.

I think you have a valid point that men sometimes get unequal treatments in regard to cancer treatment but I don't think you are going to persuade many people going about it the way you are. I see you have the name RACE4LIFE which is an event open to female runners only. I can see why this is upsetting because it omits men whose relatives get cancer too....