Fighting cancer is physically and mentally draining. Getting better should be the main focus of cancer patients, but often, it's not, because cancer can also be draining on your bank account. Even if you have health insurance, some drugs aren't covered, and they're not cheap.

I started thinking about this when I read this article on breast cancer patients in New Zealand who have gone to court to all but beg the local drug-governing body, Pharmac, to cover their treatment, Herceptin, in their fight against their aggressive cancer. A 12-month course costs upwards of $70,000, and they just can't afford it. Really, beyond the ridiculously wealthy, who can comfortably afford $70,000 a year? Certainly not I. Apparently the women don't meet certain criteria that would make them eligible for coverage, and I hope they can sort it out before it's too late for these women.

Since when did the right to live become a matter of money, an issue to be debated in court? It's heart-breaking to see money win out over the chance at life, but that's the reality of our world, it seems. It's a complicated issue that has no clear answer.

Health care is expensive, even for those with insurance. My treatment with the breast cancer drug Herceptin cost $5,000 every three weeks for 52 weeks. Insurance paid 80 percent; I was responsible for 20. That's $1,000 every three weeks. Not exactly affordable.

What many of us don't know is that we can play an active role in cutting our health care bills. We can shop around for everything, for example. Before filling a prescription, consider comparing prices offered at mail-order and online pharmacies with those of larger retailers. You may even find that mom and pop shops offer competitive rates since they can set their own pricing. Don't forget about generic drugs too. Ask your doctor if a generic version of your medication is just as good as a brand name drug. If so, go for the price break.

Did you know that lab work is more expensive if you get it at a hospital? Ask your doctor for other trustworthy locations and save a few bucks.

On July 23, a milestone in presidential campaign history was delivered when Democratic presidential candidates fielded questions sent in via YouTube, a popular video sharing website where users can upload, view, and share video clips. On September 17, Republican candidates will take part in the second CNN-YouTube debate.

Aired live on CNN, this unusual debate featured 39 serious questions -- about immigration, climate change, the voting system, even cancer.

Thirty-six-year-old Kim of Long Island, who pulls off her wig mid-question, asks in her video clip about the millions of uninsured Americans who don't have access to preventative medical care.

Fewer women are getting mammograms. Facilities offering mammograms are closing. Mammogram machine usage is declining. And we don't really know why.

"We're heading in the wrong direction," says Carol Lee, professor of radiology at Yale University School of Medicine and chair of the American College of Radiology's commission on breast imaging.

"If this decline holds up, it will be very worrisome," she says.

"We're looking at a possible increase in deaths if we see this continue," according to Diana Balma, vice president of public policy at Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

Studies don't show which women -- rich or poor, young or old, educated or uneducated -- are skipping these critical screenings, but there are a few possible reasons for this dangerous drop.

Think about this:

Perhaps there are fewer facilities, staffed by fewer radiologists and technologists due to high lawsuit rates and modest reimbursement. This is scary -- because the number of women old enough to get screened is increasing.

Women may be missing out on all sorts of necessary medical care because of inadequate health insurance or other access problems.

Women may be choosing, for whatever reasons, not to get mammograms, despite strong public urging that women age 40 and older get screened one time every year.

And now think about this:

Recent news about declining breast cancer rates may not be all that good. It may not be that fewer women are developing breast cancer. It may simply be that fewer women are getting early diagnoses because of irregular or nonexistent screening.

More than 47 percent of people view their pets as family members, according to a 2002 American Veterinary Medical Association survey. It makes sense then that people are routinely treating their pets for ailments that might strike a family member -- like arthritis, heart disease, diabetes, allergies, dementia, obesity, and yes, cancer.

New studies show that Americans are stuffing their pets with more drugs than ever before. They are medicating their dogs, cats, and sometimes other pets as much as they medicate themselves -- and they are doing it with many of the same human drugs they use for themselves, like steroids for inflammation, antibiotics for infection, anti-depressants for anxiety, and even new slendering drugs for obesity.

It's a big market -- pharmaceuticals for pets -- and for those who love their pets so much they can't let go, going to extremes is worth every penny.

Think about this:

• For dogs and cats alone, Americans spent $2.9 billion on pet drugs in 2005. While this is equal to only one percent of human drug sales, the market has grown by half since 2000.

• The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved more than 40 new pet drugs in the past five years.

• A single three-month course of pet chemotherapy can cost $3,000 -- and chemotherapy doesn't typically extend the life of an animal as much as it soothes symptoms of the disease.

• Health insurance for pets was nearly invisible in 2002 but has gained popularity over the past few years. Premiums can cost $30 per month, and the total market is expected to climb to $500 million in the next five years.

• Some human drugs leave pets with unexpected, sometimes deadly, side effects. The drug Rimadyl, made by Pfizer and used as a treatment for dogs with arthritis, has been shown to cause kidney and liver damage in some animals. More than 3,000 pet deaths have been attributed to this drug.

• Some question the priorities of a society that allows for medically treating pets like they are humans. Dianne Dunning, an ethicist at N.C. State's vet school is concerned that millions of animals are lost, unwanted, and euthanized while millions are spent on pet medicines. David Rothman, an expert in medicine's role in society from Columbia University, says, "If you can't get malaria drugs in some Third World countries, what are we doing with chemotherapy for cats?"

• Others don't flinch at the expense it requires to keep their pets alive. One man, whose dog was expected to die of lymphoma within weeks, still enjoys the company of his pet some two years later. Chemotherapy saved the dog's life and when asked if he thinks the drugs are too expensive, this man says NO -- because his dog is still here.
  

Vincent Rennich, veteran casino worker and non-smoker, is suing the Atlantic City Tropicana Casino and Resort because he claims a quarter-century of inhaling secondhand smoke gave him lung cancer. And if that's not enough to make this man upset, getting fired seals the deal.

"They threw me under the bus," Rennich said yesterday, the day after a supervisor told him he was terminated from his job. "How can you fire a guy with lung cancer who's suing you? Maybe they don't realize the ramifications. Or maybe they're heartless. Or maybe all of the above."

Tropicana officials say that Rennich was not singled out in any way, that he was just one of many let go due to a restructuring of the company. Since last January, more than 200 people have been laid off.

Rennich, 49 and a table games supervisor, has been a vocal advocate of a total smoking ban in Altantic City's 11 casinos. He has been speaking out on behalf of everyone working on the casino floors, and for himself personally.

Rennich had a third of his right lung removed in September 2005 and sees a doctor every three months to ensure his cancer does not reappear. Now that he's been fired, his health insurance will lapse in 30 days, leaving him with a monthly payment of $800 in medical bills.

Atlantic City was slated to ban all casino smoking this past January. But fierce opposition from the casino industry, predicting an estimated revenue loss of 20 percent and job losses of more than 3,400, led to a compromise. And now, effective April 15, smoking will be restricted to no more than 25 percent of the gambling floor.

Rennich is not happy about this -- or his cancer or his termination. And while he is not sure what his next step will be, he says he is definitely not backing down from his anti-smoking platform.

After a leave of absence due to family medical issues and moving back home, it is good to be back blogging here on a daily basis and I look forward to resuming where I left off at the end of October. I have personally stayed up to date reading the daily posts by the bloggers on this site when I had access to the Internet and I feel that this staff of writers are dedicated and very thorough in what they do. I hope I contribute as much as they do in the days to come.

With all of that in mind, I want to make a brief input on making a move when family medical issues make it necessary. It ways heavy on your mind and can be very stressful. Employment issues, time that you personally can donate, uprooting your own household, and the needs of parents, all can put a heavy burden on your mind. Staying destressed as much as you can for your own personal health is a must. I personally found prayer, lots of conversations with my friends and family, making a list of important issues to consider on both sides of the fence, and taking personal down time to be alone and unwind to be very helpful.

Many people have to make the decision on when is the time to be more involved in their parents lives, exactly what is best for everyone, and how you can accomplish what is needed. Health insurance or the lack of cuts down on a lot of options and medicare and medicaid sometimes do not take care of all the needs. You are not alone and reaching out to friends, pastors, doctors, and support groups can be the best thing that you can do for yourselves. Find out all of the benefits that medicaid and medicare offer in assistance for stay at home patients and use them.

I'm sending off my wig to a new friend tomorrow. It's all wrapped and boxed and packaged and ready to travel from Gainesville, Florida to the east coast of the sunshine state where it will land in the hands of a young women newly diagnosed with breast cancer.

This new friend found me here -- on The Cancer Blog -- and we have been corresponding back and forth via e-mail about all sorts of cancer topics -- like surgery and pathology and chemotherapy and most recently, wigs. She asked me just the other day what type of wig I wore after I lost my hair to chemotherapy. I told her I didn't like full wigs, that they felt too unnatural, that I feared my little boys would rip them off my head in the middle of the grocery store. I told her I opted for underhair -- a hairfall of sorts made of plain, white, soft cotton on the top with hair hanging only from the sides and back. It is worn with hats, to cover the cotton part, and it feels quite secure -- although it did sail off my head at the beach one day, compliments of a strong breeze.

I told my new friend that I was completely happy with my choice. I told her the underhair is made of human hair and that customers get to choose the color, texture, length, and size. The wig can be washed, dried, curled, styled, and cut. It looks so real that some people didn't even know chemotherapy took my hair. It was the perfect disguise for me.

I led my new friend in the direction of this wig -- www.hiphat.com -- where she could order her very own handmade underhair. I told her to ask her doctor for a prescription for a cranial prothesis and to see if her insurance company would reimburse her some of the cost of this fairly expensive wig option. And then I realized it would be silly for her to do all this work and spend so much money when my wig is tucked away in my closet, sitting pretty on a nice styrofoam head, doing nothing more than collecting dust.

I don't need my wig anymore. But my new friend does. So tomorrow, it begins traveling her way. And she can keep it for as long as she needs it, for as long as I don't need it. Which I hope is forever.

Pink Pony is the catch phrase for Ralph Lauren's initiative in the fight against breast cancer. Not only does Ralph Lauren support the fight by donating 10 percent of the proceeds from Pink Pony products to charity, but he has his own charity -- The Pink Pony Fund for Cancer Care and Prevention.

The Pink Pony Fund is a worldwide philanthropic effort. In the United States alone, Pink Pony recipients include Women's Cancer Research Institute at Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Breast Cancer Research Foundation in New York City, Prevención, Inc., and Nina Hyde Center, both in Washington, D.C.

One of the premiere services provided by the Ralph Lauren Center for Cancer Care and Prevention is the patient navigator -- a concept created by Dr. Harold Freeman, medical director of the Center. Navigators assist patients and family members with access to health-care services and help them move with ease through the medical system. Navigators help patients with communication barriers, financial concerns, insurance difficulties, emotional issues, and more.

There is more than meets the eye when it comes to the pink pony. It is not merely a fashion statement that happens to kick a few dollars toward breast cancer research. It is a statement of true compassion and concern and commitment. It is a symbol of one man's hard work over the past 15 years to make a difference in the lives of women everywhere.

Singer and songwriter Jewel sat down with ABC News This Week's George Stephanopoulos to discuss her support of a bill that will allow women to stay in the hospital at least 48 hours after a mastectomy. Called drive-thru mastectomies, the current practice of discharging women hours after surgery does not allow women sufficient time to heal before being released from the hospital.

During the interview Jewel placed the blame on insurance companies and HMOs who have decided that a mastectomy is not major surgery but an outpatient procedure. You have got to be kidding me, what an absurdity.

As Jewel stated, "This certainly isn't a merely feminist issue. This is about the care of our loved ones."

I don't see it as much a feminist issue as simply a matter of compassionate, and in this case, safe health care of mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters. The obnoxious practice of bean counters to decide that any major surgery is an outpatient procedure to save on health care expenses has been going on far too long.

Jewel will travel to Washington to help deliver 12 million signatures to Congress to support a health care bill that requires insurance companies and HMOs to cover the cost of proper care for women undergoing mastectomy. The VOICES: Jewel Lobbies for Breast Cancer Bill interview is available as video for viewing online.

The CyberKnife -- a powerful new weapon in the war on cancer -- involves no cutting, like the name implies. This robotic system instead uses hundreds of focused radiation beams to destroy a tumor. A robotic arm moves around the patient and an image-guided system tracks the targeted tumor. CyberKnife delivers small blasts of radiation from up to 200 angles and keeps the tumor in its sights at all times. CyberKnife treatments are completed in one to five days which is just one of the benefits of this therapy compared to traditional radiation therapy.

With traditional radiation, patients often endure treatment for five to eight weeks. And healthy tissue can be destroyed every time the patient shifts or breathes. The CyberKnife attacks the cancerous tumor only -- even while the patient breathes. CyberKnife therapy, available in only 50 hospitals in the United States, requires no mold to position patients, can treat anywhere in the body, and can help patients who no longer respond to traditional treatments.

CyberKnife is covered by insurance and approved by Medicare.

Chloe is a little girl conceived through in vitro fertilization -- not because her parents could not conceive in the traditional manner but because they wanted to make sure Chloe had no predisposition to cancer in her genetic makeup. And in vitro fertilization is one method of almost ensuring this. There is still a three percent chance of failure but Chloe's parents felt confident in the elective process that would mostly prevent her from inheriting a genetic mutation for colon cancer that has devastated her family -- Chloe's father carries this mutation, and his mother, grandfather, and two uncles have all died from colon cancer.

A growing number of couples are using preimplantation genetic makeup to detect a predisposition to cancers that may or may not develop later in life. Using this procedure, parents subject their tiny embryos to genetic tests to determine whether or not they harbor defective genes. Essentially, parents get to pick and choose from embryos in a petri dish which one they want. Since the embryo that became Chloe did not test positive for any defective genes, she was the chosen one. And she is now a healthy two-year-old girl.

It's an ethical minefield -- this scientific creation of human life and the picking and choosing of which embryos will survive and which ones will not. One expert says the issue centers around what is considered serious enough to warrant such testing -- and who gets to make this decision. Ethical dilemmas surrounding this issue will only continue to grow as more and more options become available. Already embryos are tested for predisposition for obesity and deafness and a mild skin condition. Some clinics even screen for gender. Some fear this practice may lead to a genetic class divide where the wealthy will become more genetically pure than the poor -- because this process is difficult and expensive, costing tens of thousands of dollars without insurance coverage.

Chloe's parents are happy they made the choice they did. Her father says he doesn't know if he could handle being told his daughter has cancer -- especially with the knowledge that he could have prevented it.

Health care coverage for working Americans is like a brittle tree in a hard wind -- and the larger limbs are beginning to snap. Between the years 2000 to 2005, 6.8 million more people became uninsured according to the latest report from the U.S. Census Bureau's Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division. Current data estimates 46.6 million people are without health insurance coverage. As employer-based health insurance continues to fade, government programs are taking up the slack -- up to a point. But given the lack of funding, there is only so much that can be offered.

In a statement issued by the Center for American Progress, "These problems did not just happen: they resulted from flawed economic and health policies which force Americans to work more for less. When it returns after Labor Day, this Congress should act to mitigate these problems by passing a straightforward minimum wage increase and extend health funding for programs like the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Moreover, policy makers should recognize the need for major change, such as providing affordable health care to all Americans and taking action to address growing income inequality."

Some are calling for a government-based universal health care system that guarantees health care coverage for all Americans. Others are suggesting a mix of private and public health care coverage. What ever the solution, there certainly needs to be one.

We can start with a shift in perspective and change in expectation. If you are working full-time for a company, presumably your efforts are helping that company make a profit. Health insurance coverage should not be viewed as a luxury benefit, nor should the largest burden of health insurance premiums be shouldered by the employee whose earnings just meet living expenses. Yet, this is happening every day in this country. The hard wind continues to batter the brittle tree.

Personally, I am not sold on a government-run, government-backed universal health plan simply because I have covered too many horror stories about rationed care in other industrialized countries. It seems a combination of programs might be the solution but the government and our elected officials certainly need to be held accountable for implementing programs that insure all Americans.

American Public Health Association Georges Benjamin is quoted by United Press International as saying, ""This is the worst news we've had all year. Our nation is not secure if we're not healthy."

Just before my chemotherapy for breast cancer started -- when I was fantastically frightened by the toxic drugs that were about to drip into my veins -- I was told by doctors, nurses, survivors, friends that I would be just fine. I was young and strong and tough. I would easily tolerate the beating my body was about to take. This is what I was told and actually came to believe myself. I had no other choice really than to approach chemotherapy with a fighter mentality. And so I did. And I did pretty well for my first three doses of Adriamycin and Cytoxan -- given every two weeks instead of three in a dose-dense fashion -- followed by one injection of Neulasta 24 hours later to maintain normal blood counts. And then something happened. And I did not end up tolerating the chemotherapy my gut told me was a scary endeavor.