Amazing. Now Med Aid only concerned about the safety of a patient with a terminal diagnosis.

“Curiouser and curiouser!” Cried Alice in the book “Alice in Wonderland” and so did I when I read the response from Fedhealth to the website the Medical Aid Bible sent last night at 9:00pm. You can read the story that the Medical Aid Bible wrote here (http://medicalaidbible.co.za/scheme-pay-experimental-treatment/) and the response from Fedhealth is here (http://medicalaidbible.co.za/forums/?p=post%2Fshould-a-scheme-pay-for-experimental-treatment-8413848%3Fpid%3D1294823938). Let me quote the most significant paragraph in Fedhealth's response “Again, we emphasise, it is not about the money. It is about the unknowns of the experimental treatment and the risks it could pose.  Yes, the point has been made that perhaps this experimental treatment is cheaper than five rounds of chemotherapy, but with no scientific and medical proof and acknowledgment that the treatment is in fact safe and provides survival, we cannot knowingly put our members at risk” Fedhealth had previously said it was both the experimental nature of the treatment as well as the "high cost" that was the reason for not funding but have now revised that position and emphasised that it’s all about my safety. I quote further “and so us funding such experimental treatment for Mr. Pike or any other clients, would be putting their lives at risk. Yes, Mr. Pike has noted the “success” since his first treatment, but the effects after all four rounds of treatment are unknown and again, pose risk.” Interesting. Fedhealth maintain that there is no (zero) scientific or medical “proof” in spite of being in the possession of reports of such proof and the knowledge that the FDA is supporting the treatment in the USA and clinical motivation from a leading oncologist and the leading nuclear physicians in the country. (see link below) Fedhealth have taken responsibility for the risk of medical treatment - Think about it. Financial considerations are off the table. Metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is a terminal diagnosis. Life expectancy is only a couple of years at best. In the literature chemotherapy (which they will happily fund) for mCRPC does very little other than relieve symptoms, nothing for prognosis (or survival in their words). Fedhealth must be extremely concerned with side effects, a concern not borne out in the actual literature (nor my actual experience) to feel in a position that the risk of using Lu 177 - PSMA is so great as to trump the danger of the disease itself. The benefits described in the literature are huge with remission a possible outcome. Putting a terminal patient’s life at risk is an interesting concept I thought. Well Fedhealth have taken a position... The principal officer at Fedhealth is Jeremy Yatt and his email is jeremy@fedhealth.co.za maybe you would like to express your view? Here's to another day. #letwalterlive Read this https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170105123220.htm