Comments on: Cost & Coverage on a Collision Course?

By: Kent Gardner

Kent Gardner — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:11:27 +0000

Thanks for commenting. I agree with you–in part. But our bodies are going to continue to wear out. A heart valve here, a bit of cancer there, some macular degeneration, etc. As we find new ways to fix the stuff that breaks (which is a good thing!), that’s going to drive new spending. Sure, we can prevent a lot of diabetes if we could reduce obesity, cut lung cancer by eliminating smoking, etc. But successful prevention allows us to live long enough to get something else. And, like my mom’s back, I’ll want to treat the stuff that goes bad!

By: CKChilds

CKChilds — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:28:57 +0000

Unless we, as a country, are willing to put more emphasis on PREVENTION rather than sick care, our medical costs will continue to rise.

By: Kent Gardner

Kent Gardner — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:45:11 +0000

Same here. My point is that we can’t control costs without someone being empowered to say “no.” For a period of time we had empowered HMOs to play this role–then our legislatures rallied around the horror stories of “drive by deliveries” etc and significantly limited the ability of the HMOs to control cost. But as medical science continues to find new ways to treat disease, we have to find a tool for managing care.

By: Laurel Schaap

Laurel Schaap — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:38:50 +0000

While I acknowledge the conflict, it scares me to think of Medicare making health decisions. “We’re the government and we’re here to help.” Yeah.