Is preventive care the silver bullet?

[maxiep]

Charles Krauthammer has been absolutely devastating on health care legislation. Since he brings a Harvard MD along with his understanding of politics, he has been more insightful than most opinion writers on exactly what the effect of these health care bills will be.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...AR2009081302898.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&sub=AR

 

[blazerboy30]

Thanks for posting.

I thought this was interesting:

we pour money into primary care for diabetics instead of giving surgeons "$30,000, $40,000, $50,000" for a later amputation -- a whopper that misrepresents the surgeon's fee by a factor of at least 30 -- "that will save us money." Back on Earth, a rigorous study in the journal Circulation found that for cardiovascular diseases and diabetes, "if all the recommended prevention activities were applied with 100 percent success," the prevention would cost almost 10 times as much as the savings, increasing the country's total medical bill by 162 percent

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I disagree with him on a moral level.

If we use good preventitive care to catch the one in 1,000 or even 1 in 5,000 then we have done a great service to all of them. First, a life was saved- and that is priceless. Second, many others who received a clean bill of health also reduce worry and that is a healthy measure that can prevent other maladies which can actually save money beyond what he suggests. Now, if they are screening for the 1-in-a-million, then that's over the top. But, no, there's a darn good reason for preventitive medicine and in the end it isn't always about $$, it's about human life and the quality thereof.

 

[blazerboy30]

I disagree with him on a moral level.

If we use good preventitive care to catch the one in 1,000 or even 1 in 5,000 then we have done a great service to all of them. First, a life was saved- and that is priceless. Second, many others who received a clean bill of health also reduce worry and that is a healthy measure that can prevent other maladies which can actually save money beyond what he suggests. Now, if they are screening for the 1-in-a-million, then that's over the top. But, no, there's a darn good reason for preventitive medicine and in the end it isn't always about $$, it's about human life and the quality thereof.

It sounds like you didn't read the entire article.

He said almost exactly what you are saying. That it is great to save lives, and that if it costs more money, that is fine. He is arguing that Obama and his supporters need stop using the argument that preventative care will save money, because it is a false statement, just being used to push through legislation.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

It sounds like you didn't read the entire article.

He said almost exactly what you are saying. That it is great to save lives, and that if it costs more money, that is fine. He is arguing that Obama and his supporters need stop using the argument that preventative care will save money, because it is a false statement, just being used to push through legislation.

Did I miss that?

Oops. I have to admit I just skimmed it as I'm working.