Yeah right. Of a population of 7 million, 4.6 million have a chronic disease.
I'd be interested to know how they define "chronic disease."
This is a classic case of “you get more of what you subsidize”. If the state would stop paying for treatment of self-inflicted ailments, and stop forcing “private” insurers tp pay for it, the incidence would plummet.
((((Thundering sound of Big Pharma moving into NJ.......))))
Yea, we’ve got chronic disease alright. In Trenton. It’s called our state gubmint. Sigh. Still, it’s lovely in Sussex Cty.
“Chronic disease” is defined by whatever they have treatment for.
We are either cursed or blessed with treatments for cholestorol, diabetes, copd, e.d., depression, hypertension, and a thousand other chronic diseases that people just wouldn’t have bothered to go to the doctor-or at least not nearly as often- in decades past.
All of these treatments cost time , money and discomfort- but since its covered by insurance why not? even though people lived long productive lives without going to the doctor incessantly in decades past. People have been convinced of the efficacy of the treatments being offered.
This is the biggest problem that the liberals are going to have with their socialized medicine schemes- millions have been sold on proactive medical regimens and that is totally unsustainable if the price goes to zero for the consumer and medical advances are still being made.
N.J. must address chronic disease problem...and by addressing it, we mean, increasing the Obama budget by half again.
I am disgusted by this BS.
Until those talking about healthcare and funding healthcare and research acknowledge that a huge percent share of funding and spending is going to the most preventable disease of all, AIDS/HIV, they should shut up.
NIH Funding 2007
HIV 2,906 million
Infectious Disease (most goes to AIDS) 3,433
Iin contrast MS 149 million
http://report.nih.gov/rcdc/categories/
,