Cancer docs and drugs » The traditional separation between doctors who prescribe drugs and pharmacists who sell them serves two primary purposes. Doctors have no incentive to prescribe unnecessary medicines because they aren’t making any money. And a pharmacist provides another pair of expert eyes to be sure that one drug, or a mixture, does not pose a danger to the patient. But those worthy goals are not enough to overcome a good idea from some Utah cancer specialists, supported by the Utah Medical Association, to allow cancer clinics to dispense certain rare varieties of cancer-fighting drugs, as well as preparations designed to fight the many horrific side-effects of those drugs. These expensive, and rarely stocked, medicines are part of a closely controlled regimen. And the bill in the Utah Legislature that would allow cancer specialists to dispense them, SB161, removes the profit motive from the equation. The bill should be approved.

Photos

• 
• 

	Join the Discussion
	Post a Comment

The right call in California » Let Sen. Orrin Hatch and others rant on about judicial activism and the overreach of the traditionally liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That panel’s decision to overturn California’s Proposition 8, the popular vote that took away the right of same-sex couples to marry after that state’s Supreme Court had installed it, was narrow and restrained. As the court carefully pointed out, a right once granted to any group can only be taken away — by a court, a legislature or a referendum — when there is a compelling state interest in doing so. The court was, correctly, unable to find any such interest in Prop 8. The ruling says not one thing about the overall issue of same-sex marriage, and does not impose it on any state other than California. The ruling is so narrow, in fact, that the U.S. Supreme Court may not even have cause to review it. Which would be good news for equality in America.

Signs of the times » A bill to pre-empt Salt Lake City from imposing certain restrictions on electronic billboards is working its way through the Utah Senate. The bill would prevent cities from forcing billboard companies to surrender one sign in order to convert another to a garish, Las Vegas-style LED light display. The bill’s effort to protect the property interests is understandable, but it runs roughshod over local planning. Besides, what of the community interest? Billboard companies should not be allowed to pollute everyone’s views with dazzling, and thus distracting, signs.