Sunday, March 13, 2005
The Claim:
Cutler says, medical spending isn't increasing because of inflation so much as because of people consuming more ''good stuff.''
from the Sunday Times Magazine: The Quality Cure?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it seems like a big part of the reason people need more of the "good stuff" (health care) is because the focus in both industry and research is on cures rather than prevention. possibly because the profit in privately sponsored medical research (by, say, pharmaceutical companies) comes from people being sick and needing to spend money to treat it, rather than in making people stay healthy without drugs.
one way to keep costs down would be to focus on education and maintenance of health, rather than "miracles" and heroic attempts to put the pieces back together once they have already broken. such an approach offers incentives not just to patients, employers (those who pay for health plans) but also insurance providers. nor are providers unaware of these possibilities: many Blue Cross plans, for example, offer to subsidize gym memberships, and send out newsletters encouraging people to take better care of their health, whether by eating better or exercising more. also, the efficacy of treatments, no matter how advanced, is improved when the patient is generally healthy to begin with.
combining a strategy of prevention with the doctor incentives focusing on results rather than treatments (as discussed in the article) could do more to increase both the quality and efficiency of care while controlling costs.
Cutler says, medical spending isn't increasing because of inflation so much as because of people consuming more ''good stuff.''
from the Sunday Times Magazine: The Quality Cure?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it seems like a big part of the reason people need more of the "good stuff" (health care) is because the focus in both industry and research is on cures rather than prevention. possibly because the profit in privately sponsored medical research (by, say, pharmaceutical companies) comes from people being sick and needing to spend money to treat it, rather than in making people stay healthy without drugs.
one way to keep costs down would be to focus on education and maintenance of health, rather than "miracles" and heroic attempts to put the pieces back together once they have already broken. such an approach offers incentives not just to patients, employers (those who pay for health plans) but also insurance providers. nor are providers unaware of these possibilities: many Blue Cross plans, for example, offer to subsidize gym memberships, and send out newsletters encouraging people to take better care of their health, whether by eating better or exercising more. also, the efficacy of treatments, no matter how advanced, is improved when the patient is generally healthy to begin with.
combining a strategy of prevention with the doctor incentives focusing on results rather than treatments (as discussed in the article) could do more to increase both the quality and efficiency of care while controlling costs.
niall ferguson on the new imperial tribute
