Representatives of Australia’s medical community say they want a renewed, mature debate over the cost and benefit of prolonging the life of terminal patients.

Reports say the Australian Medical Association (AMA) has called for maturity in the debate about death, saying some patients are prescribed costly drugs that can only extend life by days or weeks, but which leave patients suffering serious side-effects.

AMA president Steve Hambleton says clearly the debate should be about benefits to the patient and not about money, though he admits there are clear savings available if palliative care (which typically includes pain medication) became a more common choice.

“Individuals need to know and better understand what the realistic outcomes of treatment are,” Dr Hambleton said

“Instead of saying the drugs have a 10 per cent chance of benefit... patients should know that there is a 90 per cent chance of more harm than good.

“Information presented in this way helps people to make better and more informed choices, such as going home and have two more weeks with family rather than spending three months in a hospital bed vomiting.”

Queensland Health Minister Lawrence Springborg and health economist Stephen Duckett have picked up and backed the AMA president’s suggestion.

“I think it's certainly time we had a mature debate about whether providing medical intervention in these circumstances actually improves quality of life,” Springborg said.

“It's really not about cost. Providing the best quality of life should be the number one priority and sometimes this will be achieved without the use of medical intervention.”

Figures show over $1 billion spent on 65 to 74-year-olds with cancer each year - though experts say side-effects of drugs can include blindness, nausea, seizures or strokes.