Does preventive care save money?
The February 14, 2008 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine ran an article with the astonishing title "Does preventive care save money?" (1). That analysis was prompted, according to the authors, by the health care campaign promises made by various U.S. presidential candidates.
The very question - whether preventive care saves money - seems astonishing enough. But prevention surely isn't just about money. I'd rather not get sick in the first place, even if "curing" me wouldn't cost any more than preventing my disease. Medical treatment is one of the leading causes of death, and I'll take my chances with prevention.
The authors do concede that prevention might just do some good:
"Indeed, some evidence does suggest that there are opportunities to save money and improve health through prevention."
But then they go on to say:
"Although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not."
What on earth are these authors talking about? When one reads further one discovers that they aren't discussing what you or I would consider prevention at all. The article is primarily about early diagnosis to detect malignancies in their most treatable stages. In other words, the authors' interest is restricted to medical interventions. Only one sentence in the article pays lip service to genuine disease prevention, and then it's back to medicine:
"Preventable causes of death, such as tobacco smoking, poor diet and physical inactivity, and misuse of alcohol have been estimated to be responsible for 900,000 deaths annually - nearly 40% of total yearly mortality in the United States."
It turns out that the cost of preventive medical interventions actually isn't all that different from the cost of treating diseases. The reason for this, the authors point out, is that too many unnecessary diagnostic tests are performed. For screening to be cost-effective, it should only target populations at high risk for a given disease. The authors' prescription for achieving better health results:
"Conduct careful analysis to identify evidence-based opportunities for more efficient delivery of health care - whether prevention or treatment - and then restructure the system to create incentives that encourage the appropriate delivery of efficient intervention."
I can't help thinking that the authors of this paper are as naive as the presidential candidates with their proposed solutions to the "health" care crisis. What kinds of incentive can you create for service providers by cutting back on spending?
Why is U.S. "health" care so expensive? Because providing it is so lucrative. The more "services" can be provided, even if they are totally ineffective, the more enormous the profits for the service providers. Vested interests will fight any expenditure reductions on preventive interventions tooth and nail.
In fact, an enormous amount of money is spent by the "health" care industry on preventing prevention. Big Pharma has no intention of giving up their customers without a fight. They are spending huge sums of money to influence legislators, regulatory agencies, and medical professionals. Supplement manufacturers cannot make perfectly well-supported health claims, and compounding pharmacies are prevented from supplying bio-identical hormones, to give just two examples of the nefarious influence of the pharmaceutical industry. I would think that the providers of diagnostic services will also fight any cost-effectiveness measures, i.e. any reductions in their profits.
The solution to the "health" care crisis won't come from the medical establishment or from Big Pharma. Our best hope to be healthy is to be informed and proactive. We do need medical care for certain problems, but our health is our own responsibility.
Sources
- Cohen JT, Neumann PJ, Weinstein MC. Does preventive care save money? Health econmics and the presidential candidates. N Engl J Med 2008;358(7):661-663. [Full Text]
The very question - whether preventive care saves money - seems astonishing enough. - This is a good question! I think not, make the good decisions is, so dont put money in front of risks. Kind Regards, Aislin
Reply to this
HI
Never money can not buy the health, i have experience on this.
priyanka
Reply to this
Herbs-Wholesale
Health Experts Say "Your good health starts with you. Take steps to reduce your risk of disease and talk to your health care professional about your health concerns". The more you know about your health, the more likely you are to live a long and happy life!
Thx
herbs-wholesale.com
Reply to this
It is extremely important for a person to take control of their own health. Personally I eat lots of organic fruits and vegetables, drink lots of pure water with a squeeze of lemon in it to alkalize the water, cut out red meats, and only eat 3-4 oz. of chicken, turkey, or fish daily. I also eat garlic with everything I can including a huge salad with lots of vege's and I add cilantro to all my salads it's a very healthy thing to do.
Reply to this
Sometimes preventive care saves money. If we think about our future then we can see it saves money. But in a short term we see that there is no saving. If we eat good foods then it is good for our health and we can get rid of serious diseases. So its one kind of saving money.
Reply to this
It's common sense that preventive care saves money, and I am living proof. Preventive exams caught cancer twice in me that would have become much more expensive to treat in time, not to mention life-threatening.
Reply to this
I think most of us can agree that preventive health care saves money in long term health care costs, but part of the problem is the cost of preventive care itself!
Reply to this
In fact, an large turn of money is spent by the "health" tending business on preventing prevention. Big Pharma has no intention of gift up their customers without a fight. They are outlay Brobdingnagian sums of money to impact legislators, restrictive agencies, and scrutiny professionals. Supplement manufacturers cannot attain dead well-supported upbeat claims, and compounding pharmacies are prevented from supplying bio-identical hormones, to provide meet digit examples of the wicked impact of the caregiver industry. I would conceive that the providers of characteristic services be going to also fisticuffs travel clinic london some cost-effectiveness measures, i.e. some reductions in their profits.
Reply to this
Sometimes preventive care saves money. Sometimes if we have money also, we can't buy health.
Reply to this
I'm a big blog fan and with so many blogs on the internet now, not very many stand out like yours does. This blog caught my attention and I thought that I would comment to let you know.
Reply to this
Thanks for the compliment. Much appreciated.
Helmut
Reply to this
Hello! Remember that health is the most expensive thing in the world and never money can not buy the health
Reply to this
I am definitely tired of struggling to find relevant and intelligent commentary on this subject. Everyone now preventive care saves money.The more you know about your health, the more likely you are to live a long and happy life!
Reply to this
ya i think that this kind of posts will prove to very helpful
Reply to this