Amazing Medical Breakthroughs: Why Are They Kept Out Of Our Reach?

According to a July 8th 2010 article by Aaron Saenz titled "With Mystery Solved, Promising Treatment for Parkinson’s Disease May Return," research into the controversial yet promising fetal cell transplant treatment for Parkinson's will once again resume in 2012. In an August 19th Associated Press article "N.S. premier supports clinical trial of controversial MS treatment," it was reported that the premier added his voice today to a "growing chorus pushing for a national clinical trial for a medically controversial treatment for people suffering from multiple schlerosis." The treatment, which is based on a theory that "narrowed neck veins cause blood-borne iron deposits to build up and damage brain cells," suggests that "unblocking the veins" will help people with MS. Finally, a July 2010 UK report "Extent and causes of international variations" indicated that Canada uses fewer new cancer drugs than any other country in the study, with the exception of New Zealand. Canada’s low performance prompted Canadian cancer groups to reissue a call for better funding, and in the process improve access to the latest medicines. In examples such as the ones cited above, the question of access to treatment and individual patient rights are often at odds with societal mores and political interests. This begs the question, at what point does individual rights in terms of treatment options supersede what Saenz referred to in his July 8th article as moral/political interests? Joining me today from Saskatchewan to talk about her experiences with MS and how it has affected her life and what the new treatment represents is Lori Lumax.