Anyone who was awake this past weekend knows that the U.S. House passed its version of the health care reform bill (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/07/AR2009110701504.html?referrer=emailarticle). The bill narrowly passed on a 220-215 vote, which included near unanimous opposition from Republican members. This is hardly what I would call bipartisan action. Only time will tell how this schism will play out in Congress.
Some have called the bill socialist. Some call it a punishment of those who already have health insurance (http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=G44NCvNDLfc). I think a bit differently. It appears our legislators are looking for a monetary answer to problems of health.
First, I cannot support this bill because I cannot support anything that would add layers of bureaucracy to our government. As readers of this blog know, I think government is far too big as it is. Second, I cannot support it because it completely misses the point of health care.
The bill simply perpetuates the current medical paradigm of disease management. Please see my previous comments about just one aspect of health care that bothers me: http://fantomeshadow.blogspot.com/2009/10/naturalia-non-sunt-turpia.html. My issue with the current medical system is that it always looks for cures in pill form or after-the-fact fixes for acute problems. I think what we need are more prevention rather than cures, but worrying about insurance does none of that. If we could cut down on disease, we would not need so much much insurance or high-priced drugs.
Just think of the price of drugs for a moment. Pharmaceuticals spend $30 billion per year on advertising alone (http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/357/7/673). Considering there are just over 800,000 doctors in the US (http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0156.pdf), that works out to over $37000 per year for every doctor. Or more personally, that would be just shy of $100 for each an every American. This is what we are paying for in every prescription.
I think there is a better way. This is definitely a topic for another post, but I personally believe that the food we consume is responsible for at least 80% of the chronic illness in this country. Most of us eat so much imitation food. Do we really believe science can outperform nature? We sacrifice good health for cheap food. But this is a case of pay now or pay later. Processed foods mean we have higher medical bills. maybe we would not have such a health care crisis if we simply had a better food supply.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Charles Krauthammer wrote an interesting piece called "The Prevention Myth", worth reading. He points out that preventative care on an individual basis cuts costs but then shows how it actually costs more (in money, not human lives) on a large scale. I guess this all depends on what one deems "preventative care", but what about diagnostic tests in advanced countries with socialized medicine? They find it cheaper to make people wait in line for diagnostics and even cancer treatment.
ReplyDeleteIt is estimated that 50% of children will be on foodstamps at one point in their lives. A much larger percentage of Hawaiian are on assistance (curious when you consider the low cost of living on another Pacific Island paradise, The Philippines.) Americans don't grow their own food anymore. A generation or two ago, the poor figured out that if they didn't grow something to eat they'd starve. Hawaiians don't even bother with dairy cows, why when your foodstamps will pay for $8/ gal. milk to be shipped from the mainland? Hawaii, as of 2008, shuttered its last pineapple plantation. Nowadays we have fat poor people, something that the truly destitute in other countries cannot fathom. I'm not in favor of any child starving but isn't it obvious just how extinct is self sufficiency has become? If people care little about what they eat when someone else pays for it, how much will they care about their good health when someone else pays the doctor bill?