Latest posts by Social Science and Medicine (see all)
- Income inequality, welfare, class and health: A comment on Pickett and Wilkinson, 2015 - Nov. 24, 2015
- Associations between parental hearing impairment and children’s mental health: Results from the… - Nov. 22, 2015
- How shall we examine and learn about public-private partnerships (PPPs) in the health sector?… - Nov. 22, 2015
- Could strength of exposure to the residential neighbourhood modify associations between… - Nov. 21, 2015
December 2012 Publication year: 2012Source:Social Science & Medicine, Volume 75, Issue 12 In December 2008 the newly elected Prime Minister of New Zealand bypassed the agency that negotiates with manufacturers about the cost of medicines and agreed to fund Herceptin for women with early stage breast cancer for a twelve months course of treatment. This paper describes the unfolding of this decision and seeks to explain it in terms of the theory of countervailing powers, which has recently been applied to understand the rapid growth of medicines and the governance of the pharmaceutical industry. We explore the role of various actors in this debate about Herceptin funding, drawing on documentary analysis based on a systematic search of journals, websites and media databases. The case of Herceptin both confirms and questions the propositions of countervailing powers theory.
See original article here: