In the USA, about 192,000 men are diagnosed with prostate cancer annually, and 27,000 people die of the chronic disease annually (Stein, 2010). Consequently, Provenge is the new expensive prostate cancer treatment that can extend life for about four months. Provenge costs about $93,000 annually, which some people consider costly especially after considering that it adds an average of four months of survival (Marchione, 2010). Regardless of the cost, human life is worth living, even if it is for one more day.
Cost should not be the main determining factor if the government on the government’s decision to pay for the new vaccine for treating prostate cancer. On average, the cost of treating any form of cancer is $100,000, which is an indication that the vaccine is relatively cheaper (Marchione, 2010). At the same time, many cancer drugs and treatment procedures have not proved that they can prolong the life of patients despite their high costs. On the contrary, the prostate cancer vaccine has scientifically been proven to add four more months for cancer patients. Ethically, the vaccine will only benefit the affluent members of the society if it not paid by the government through. Prostate cancer is more prevalent among African Americans men than in their white counterparts, which is another reason why it should be funded by the government, mainly based on the principles of distributive justice ( Dickerson, 2011) .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Therefore, the tension between cost and care occurs when people feel that a certain healthcare expenditure is unnecessary when they do not have significant health outcome or impact. For instance, in the case of Provenge, some people feel that it is not worthy to spend $93,000 annually to add four more months in life (Stein, 2010). People consider costs and benefits when making health decisions. However, human life is more crucial than economic cost.
References
Dickerson, J. B. (2011). Provenge: revolutionary technology or ethical bust? Human vaccines , 7 (4), 477-480.
Marchione, M. (2010, September 27). $93K for cancer drug raises new ethics question. Desert News . Retrieved from https://www.deseretnews.com/article/700068909/93K-for-cancer-drug-raises-new-ethics-question.html
Stein, R. (2010, November 8). Review of prostate cancer drug Provenge renews the medical cost-benefit debate. Washington Post . Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/07/AR2010110705205.html
