Posted on 08/31/2006 8:37:30 AM PDT by phantomworker
Despite exploding costs, most Americans got sizable life-extending bang for their medical bucks over recent decades, says one of the most sweeping studies ever of health care value.
AMERICAN LIFE EXPECTANCY 1960 -- 69.9 1970 -- 70.8 1980 -- 73.9 1990 -- 75.4 2000 -- 76.9 Source: National Vital Statistics System
That might come as a surprise to anyone who has ever shuddered over a medical bill, and the report itself raises doubts over how quickly costs have escalated.
However, the study calculated that Americans of all ages spent an average of $19,900 on medical care for each extra year of life expectancy gained over the last four decades of the 20th century. And that cost is worth it, the study authors say.
"On average, the return is very high," concludes study leader David Cutler, a Harvard University health economist. "But it's getting worse for ... in particular, the elderly."
"The rising cost of health care has been the source of a lot of saber rattling in the media and the public square, without anyone seriously analyzing the benefits gained," Cutler said. "But the dramatic increase in life expectancy that we've seen over the last decades shows that rising medical costs have been largely justified."
The analysis was supported by a grant from the National Institute on Aging and the Lasker Foundation and was published in today's New England Journal of Medicine.
Patrick Boyle, 74, is a prime example of what good medical care and intervention can do.
The Shoreline resident climbed Mount Si when he was 57 years old. When he reached the top, he was in the midst of a heart attack, but it wasn't diagnosed until later that day.
"When I got to the top, I was sweating profusely. We thought it was heat exhaustion....
(Excerpt) Read more at seattlepi.nwsource.com ...
You could make the cost of a life saving operation $10 or $10 million and it would still be worth it. That doesn't mean that everything is hunky-dorry. It just means that the guys who study these things don't get it. The idea is to provide good health care efficiently--not to provide good service at any cost.
That is correct, Brilliant! They can charge us anything because no one questions the cost.
You're right.
Life expectancy is not a perfect statistic to evaluate health care. If a crack-head shhots you in the face and kills you instantly when you are 17 years old, does that reflect poorly on the health care system? A better measure might exclude certain deaths (violent, accidental, etc.) where the health care system had no ability to play a role pro or con.
Based on increase violent crime in this country over the past couple of generations, the healthcare system may be doing an even better job than is suspected.
Blame lawyers for it all.
I'd like to see a study explaining the return we're getting from exploding college costs. Strange silence on that one.
Was it decorative or have rhinestones attached? Did Dr. Dreamy apply it? :-)
That is outrageous. I remember something similar for a couple of tissues from a Kleenex box.
To a point, that might be true, but our society doesn't have unlimited resources, and there are only so many $10 million surgeries (or more likely for that much money, extensive treatment plans) people can have without decimating other parts of the economy. Obviously, if someone has that much money and is willing to pay for such a surgery, it's great that he has that opportunity, but most people don't and there's not much that can be done about it.
If, however, you mean a checkout by a nurse who then applies the Band-Aid, that's another story.
It wasn't even a Disney band-aid.
And don't ask how much we paid for the two Tylenol.
On average, the return is very high," concludes study leader David Cutler, a Harvard University health economist. "But it's getting worse for ... in particular, the elderly."
But are we living longer in a reduced state of physical capacity so that we can spend all of our money on a low quality of life due to a healthcare racket. Call Elliot Spitzer.
No, I'm talking about a line on the itemized bill for an ER visit.
If they want to charge beaucoup dollars for the nurse, fine. But make it "Nurse, $900 an hour." Don't try to "hide" it in $47 Tylenols and $24 Band-Aids.
The article conveniently sidesteps the fact that the people getting the benefit are largely not the ones paying for it. In many cases, hardworking people are shelling out huge amounts in taxes and in insurance premiums which have been artificially inflated by socialist government regulations, to extend the lives of people who have never made any net contribution to the economy in spite of being quite able to do so.
Depends on the timeframe, right? Didn't it peak sometime maybe in the 80's? Lower now than then, but higher now than, say, the 1950's?
I started seeing a chiropractor over 2 years ago - nothing has been better for improving my health, strengthening my immune system, and reducing stress.
It's not anything that the medical doctors, hospitals, insurance nor drug industries would like you to know though. Check your search engines for 'AMA vs Taylor' back in 1973 I think - typical response from the MSM to follow the money. Even though Taylor - a chiropractor - won the case the MSM played it up that they are/were 'quacks.'
Look for a chiropractor who takes x-rays first too - preferrably a Palmer graduate.
"You could make the cost of a life saving operation $10 or $10 million and it would still be worth it. That doesn't mean that everything is hunky-dorry. It just means that the guys who study these things don't get it. The idea is to provide good health care efficiently--not to provide good service at any cost."
Exactly.
I took my bleeding 2 yr. old son to the ER and instead of stitches, they put a few drops of that new glue into his head wound to bind him up.
I would guess it too 4-5 drops of the stuff to do the job.
What was my insurance company billed for?
$980.00.
started seeing a chiropractor over 2 years ago - nothing has been better for improving my health
I've heard the same thing. good friend of ours is a chiropractor. But what would happen to the pain management drug companies (Lortab Inc.)?
Unfortunately, it's stuck on the wrong end.
You should have chosen the bandaid; they're only $24.00.
Sure it's based on the time frame, but violent crime deaths are actually statistically insignificant...We're both off base to even consider them.
Just look up some famous names from history. You'll find that they lived as long as anyone today. Benjamin Franklin in his seventies was in better shape than most men in their fifties are today...he died at 84. Statistics are useless in determining lifespan.
.
This is exactly the problem with third-party payments for routine expenses. You don't care because your insurance pays it. The insurance company doesn't care because they can distribute the cost among all their customers. We've reinvented socialism inside an ostensibly capitalist system.
Oil changes would cost $100 if auto insurance paid for them.
Heh, quite true. I maintain that serious anti-aging research would pay for itself many times over.
Who cares... I mean for crying out loud.. how much money are we are going to spend on keeping people alive forever? Isn't the point of life to eventually die?
And no I'm not being sarcastic.
People are so involved in doing whatever it takes to stay alive as long as possible. If you are believer then what's the fear? The greatest sacrifice of all is giving your life so you don't bankrupt your loved ones.
I do care because I think it's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever seen - but I don't know what to do about it.
The only answer seems to do away with health insurance all together...but that would leave people with catastrophic injuries and illnesses hanging.
"Oil changes would cost $100 if auto insurance paid for them."
That's exactly right.
Keep the catastrophic parts, dump the parts that pay for 15 minute doctor visits when you have a cold. High-deductible plans with HSAs are a good step in that direction.
Also, we need to get rid of employer-provided insurance. Your employer doesn't buy your car or your house, why should they pay for your health insurnce? All it does is add yet another layer between the consumers of health care and those who actually pay. Of course, I don't know how to get there from here, since we'd need a reliable system of individual insurance plans, and that won't happen as long as almost everyone gets coverage through their jobs.
"Also, we need to get rid of employer-provided insurance"
agreed...but I can't imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth. Politically...how does that get sold?
Yea , $3 per aspirin is justified , so is $2 per Q Tip.
Incedible improvements in workplace, travel,home, food safety conditions,etc are probably responsible for most of these improved statistics and their costs have declined.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.