Another Way to Think About Health Care Reform

[Guest]

WASHINGTON — It’s become popular to pick your own personal litmus test for health care reform.

For some liberals, reform will be a success only if it includes a new government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers. For many conservatives, a bill must exclude such a public plan. For others, the crucial issue is how much money Congress spends covering the uninsured.

My litmus test is different. It’s the prostate cancer test.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/business/economy/08leonhardt.html?_r=1&ref=us

[Guest]

WASHINGTON — It’s become popular to pick your own personal litmus test for health care reform.

For some liberals, reform will be a success only if it includes a new government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers. For many conservatives, a bill must exclude such a public plan. For others, the crucial issue is how much money Congress spends covering the uninsured.

My litmus test is different. It’s the prostate cancer test.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/business/economy/08leonhardt.html?_r=1&ref=us

Would that is could be that simple. While over ten years old now, Andy Grove did the most exhaustive study of treatments for Prostate Cancer to date in the mid 90's. For those who are not familiar with Andy Grove, he was one of the founders of Intel and its lead scientist for many years. You may be more familiar with the name of one of the other founders - Gordan Moore, the author of Moore's law relating to computer memory and capability.

When Andy Grove was first diagnosed with Prostate Cancer, he explored the different options for treatment with the analytical depth that only a first rate scientist could bring together with the resources available only to those with multi-Billion dollar fortunes. I encourage anyone to read his paper. It is written in plain English, not medical jargon. http://www.usrf.org/news/010815-Andy_Grove_CaP.html

In short, he concluded two things. There was no single proper treatment. The treatment needed to vary depending upon the age and health of the individual together with carefully determining whether or not the tumor had been contained within the prostate. The second thing he concluded is that Medical Studies are, as a whole, seriously deficient since the people involved analyze only their study data and conclusions and are not required to compare and contrast the results of their study to previous studies. This is a requirement in virtually every other scientific discipline.

While I am opposed to Government control of health care, this response is written neither to oppose or support the programs being considered. It is a plea that we not accept a single treatment protocol, since each patient is an individual and all should not be treated alike. The idea of Government bureaucrats making health care decisions based upon rigid 'best practice' standards scares the s*** out of me. I know from personal experience that this occurs within Medicare and more rigidly in the Veterans Administration. I will not go into details here, but will respond to any PM's or e-mails.

I also believe that Government funded medical research should require the same disciplines as those imposed on Physicists, Chemists and Engineers.

[Guest]

[B]
...pick your own personal litmus test for health care reform...Here are my litmus tests for changes to the healthcare system in the U.S....

Produce legislation that will slow or stop the runaway increases in the cost of healthcare in this country.
Assure that all Americans are given access to affordable healthcare. (By saying "Americans" I am specifically eliminating any requirement that free healthcare be provided to anyone who is residding in the U.S. illegally. That includes children, unless they were born here and are American citizens.)
Create such legislation so that whatever costs associated with it's provisions are deficit neutral and do not add to the national debt.

Just a few simple litmus tests. Now, let's see what happens.