OBJECTIVES: To explore the attitudes of the general public towards the principle of QALY maximization in pricing and reimbursement decision-making process in Poland. METHODS: Cross sectional survey of a random representative sample of 1000 residents was preformed.  Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a structured questionnaire. The final format of the questionnaire included refinements based on a pilot survey.  Respondents rated statements concerning attitudes to equity on a Likert scale. Two hypothetical experiments were designed to elicit preferences for QALY maximization. In the first experiment, responders had to allocate a given limited budget to 400 patients with non-fatal disease, 100 patients with fatal disease, or a combination of patients with fatal and non-fatal disease. The QALY gain per patient was assumed the same for both groups. In the second experiment, responders prioritized a given treatment to either 100 patients with eight years or 100 patients with two years of baseline life expectancy. The survival gain per patient resulting from the new treatment was eight years for first group and varied from two to eight years for the second group. RESULTS: The study indicated strong support for the statements about equity (42% agreed and 44% strongly agreed).  In the first experiment, 75% chose to allocate budget to both groups of which 50% preferred equal distribution. In the second experiment, if survival gain per patient was equal for both groups, 57% chose treatment for group with shorter baseline life expectancy. If survival gain per patient was larger for group with longer baseline life expectancy, 49% still chose treatment for group with shorter life expectancy. CONCLUSIONS: General support for statements expressing equity was confirmed by two experiments. Instead of QALY maximization, a significant group of responders took into consideration needs of both patients’ groups irrespective of costs and disease severity irrespective of QALY gain.