Chemotherapy drugs – a major gain for oncologists

Like many cancer survivors who have undergone chemotherapy treatments, I have often said, “The treatment was worse than the disease.” Why is it that, despite the very dangerous side effects of chemotherapy, it still seems to be the treatment of choice for many oncologists? Do you think it is because administering chemotherapy is very profitable for the oncologists?

Did you know that cancer doctors are allowed to profit from the sale of chemotherapy drugs? It is completely restricted and exclusive to oncologists. I don’t know of any other group of doctors who are allowed to profit from drug sales.

Think about this. A significant portion of oncologists’ income comes from the profit they make from the sale of chemotherapy drugs. Do you think that’s why chemotherapy is so widely used by oncologists? Is it “All about the money?”

Do you think oncologists might be tempted to give you the drug that will benefit them the most? I like to have the confidence that my doctor has my best interests at heart. Unfortunately, the money incentives do something to destroy my faith.

Here’s what I think is a perfect example of that. Trisha Torrey, was told by her doctor, “You have a very rare cancer – a lymphoma – called subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma.” Her GP referred her to an oncologist. The news from the oncologist was very disheartening. She was told that without chemo she would be dead before Christmas. She asked about the possibility that the lab results were wrong. She was told, “No – no chance. Two labs have independently confirmed the results.” She said the pressure was mounting to start chemotherapy.

Terry sought the opinion of another oncologist. Three weeks later, at the end of September, she received confirmation that she indeed did not have cancer. Is it possible that her first oncologist pressured her to undergo chemotherapy because of the money he would make? I don’t know, but it’s a scary thought.

Oncologists are a lot like store owners. According to a recent NBC News Report, oncologists earn most of their income by buying products (drugs) wholesale and selling them to patients at retail.

Like any business owner, the oncologists in private practice are entitled and deserve to earn a living. My question is; should they make their money by treating patients or by SELLING the drugs? Other types of doctors don’t have that option.

And where do you think the oncologists get their information about the drugs they sell? It comes from the pharmaceutical vendor. Do you think information can be biased?

How did this practice start? It started because Medicare and the insurance companies wanted to save money by shifting cancer treatments out of the hospital to oncologists in private practice. Again, it’s all about the money. Unfortunately, that greed backfired and we, the patients, pay the price. Since that policy was introduced, prices for many cancer drugs have risen to tens of thousands of dollars a year.

All chemotherapy drugs used in the United States are FDA approved. Does that make them safe? Do you think drug companies influence the FDA to approve dangerous drugs the way they influence private cancer doctors? I do.

See also  Cost of medical treatment, drugs and pharmaceutical industry - secret search

I think the drug companies, and their lobbyists, have too much influence on the decision-making and policy of oncologists and the FDA.

It is well known that the FDA has allowed many drugs, including chemotherapy, to remain on the market despite serious risk factors. How did dangerous drugs get FDA approval and oncologists make significant profits selling them? Meet the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the drug industry trade group

PhRMA lobbied for the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) of 1992. The drug industry agreed to help fund the approval process — in return for a promise from the FDA to speed up its deliberations. Does this make the FDA financially obligated to the industry it is supposed to regulate? I think so.

There are many natural non-toxic chemotherapies that kill malignancies. Laetrile, which is actually vitamin B17, selectively seeks out and destroys cancer cells and is available in many plant foods. It does that without harming healthy cells. Perhaps the farmers who grow those plants should give the oncologists a commission for the sale of their crops.

Despite the tone of this article, I AM NOT AGAINST going to an oncologist for cancer treatment. I am not against all chemotherapy treatments. I suggest you do what Trisha Torrey did; get a second opinion.

I almost died from my first two rounds of chemotherapy. I also thought the oncologists were arrogant and selfish. I didn’t feel comfortable with them at all. I then returned to the cape where I live and started my treatment all over again. My doctor on the cape, Dr. Victor Aviles, did indeed treat me with chemotherapy. It wasn’t the same drug the Boston doctors used. I do not believe that he chose this means for the profit motive. It was the drug best suited for my specific cancer. I always felt very comfortable with him.

My closing thought. If you are not completely comfortable with your doctor, find another one. There are wonderful, dedicated and honest oncologists out there. You may have to visit several to find the right one for you.