Now, I'm a huge fan of the Newshour with Jim Lehrer on PBS, as you may have realized from the fact that I have it listed on my favorite sites tab on the right part of this page. Unlike the usual soundbite junk you find on the other network news, here you get true analysis from the experts. (I did like Peter Jennings, but have stopped watching all the major commercial networks' nightly news broadcasts after he left)
With that plug, on to
this discussion Margaret Warner had with Susan Dentzer on health care costs in America. I found myself learning several things I didn't know from watching this segment. Some tidbits ...
Overall health spending in the US doubled from 1993 to 2004.
In 2004, total health spending accounted for 16% of GDP!
New drugs are one of the big cost drivers. A cancer drug like Urbatux extends life for colon cancer patients by at least a few months but it costs $100,000 a year.
Considering that the average child growing up today has a 50% chance of diabetes, not to mention other obesity and lifestyle-related ailments, the future health costs are scary! (For more on this statistic, check out my post on Frontline's diet wars)
The $1.9 trillion spent on health care represents $6,000 per person (children included). That's 50% more than the next biggest spender, Switzerland. And yet, a National Health Quality report analyzes 44 measures of health quality and says that the quality of healthcare is actually deterioting!
We now have 46 million uninsured in the US.
These are really startling revelations, and are only the tip of the iceberg. Some will see the last bullet and proclaim support for a national health insurance plan. And yet even the current Medicare plan is infeasible, and unless dramatic cuts are made, could seriously endanger US economic prosperity. (All that talk of Social Security privatization, and sane minds were pointing that a Medicare crisis was much more immediate!)
1 comment:
Below are selected excerpts of my comment on Richard's blog, reproduced here so that my readers can chime in with their ideas.
The big question [in this debate] is what is the solution. Reasonable minds can agree there is a crisis on our hands, but how do we get out of this? I know [Richard is] seeking more activism from the affected masses, but what exactly will [he] be asking for?
More government support? Given the track record of our government, I can see a lot of money going into "a solution", but have little confidence it won't be siphoned away by a bulging bureaucracy.
Price controls? Do we really want to restrict the flow of private capital into pharma research - because that's what drug price controls will do.
I'd like to hear your ideas. I've given this issue some thought, and so far not come up with any convincing solutions.
Post a Comment