NICE’s Empowering leads to Uncertainty

After the government decided the disempowering of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to decide about availability of drugs to their UK customers, health Minister Edwina Hart debates about replacement options.

Before the federal decision on Monday, NICE had the responsibility to scientifically scrutinize drugs and decide which ones are of good-value to be state financed in England and Wales, and available for the customers and which ones should be rejected as too pricy.

NICE critics highlighted the Institute’s tendency to choose cost-saving medication in favor of the patient’s well-being.

Hart underlines she has been a supporter of NICE and faces hard times to make a good replacement choice. She states: “I have always respected the [Nice] process because, at the end of the day, they had the wherewithal to do the proper assessments. I think all options must be on the table for us now. Nice might have seemed quite a blunt instrument but at least it was an instrument that had scientific back-up in terms of the decisions they made”.

NICE supporters point out that the system has been a role model to other Nations that balanced out the immense power of huge pharmacy Companies. NICE was supposed to create a medication system that guarantees value for money to the patients.