http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/research/29cancer.html?pagewanted=all
From the above article:
“The people who are successful become vested in their ideas,” Dr. Bissell said. “It becomes extraordinarily difficult for new ideas to find their way.”
Our current medical development model, even before Obamacare, is extremely socialistic. A narrow elite can block or control or limit research as well as implementation. If American medicine is to continue to thrive Obamacare must not only be turned back, but the entire system brought into accord with economic liberty.
We’ll leave the West behind - without any apologies to the Beatles.
The inertia, entrenched vested special interests and inevitable corruption are the natural legacies of bad ideas from politicians, governments and bureaucracy.
The "celebration" of the NHS at the London Olympics' opening ceremony and the fawning coverage of it by the American media reporters ("... and it's free!") were - for those familiar with the system's gross deficiencies and failures, such as chronic lack of timely resources and services - grotesque.
Our current medical development model, even before Obamacare, is extremely socialistic. A narrow elite can block or control or limit research as well as implementation. If American medicine is to continue to thrive Obamacare must not only be turned back, but the entire system brought into accord with economic liberty.
Similar points and the need for A Supply-Side Solution for Health Care - (B, 2012 June 21) were made recently by H. Woody Brock, president and founder of Strategic Economic Decisions, while he made a strong effort to be diplomatically kind to "both sides" of the debate:
The Supreme Court has upheld most of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — otherwise known as Obamacare — but the new law isn't the right solution. In spite of its laudable objectives, the administration's health-care initiative most likely will make the problem even worse. Obamacare addresses only two of the three key elements of the health-care problem: It attempts to expand access to medical treatment by increasing coverage under private insurance and Medicaid; it attempts to control the costs of medical treatment, which have been growing at very high rates. While these two goals sound reasonable, they are in fact contradictory. ..... < snip > ..... The combination of increased demand and restricted supply can only result in a new wave of rising prices or a rationing of available care — or both. It's a fundamental law of economics. What Obamacare failed to include — and what most other recent legislative debate between the right and left has ignored — is the third element essential to any successful reform of America's health-care system. We need a radical increase in the overall supply of medical services — one sufficient to meet higher demand and provide services at lower costs without rationing. What is needed to stabilize the longer-term economics of America's health-care system is such an expansion in the rate of growth in overall medical services that it exceeds the rate of increase in demand, thereby resulting in a drop in total health-care expenditures as a percentage of gross domestic product (not merely cuts in the price of individual doctor fees and procedures). ..... < snip > ..... Sadly, no one is currently looking at all three sides of the health-care problem. The left wants greater access and more insurance coverage for everyone, the right wants better health care but at a significantly lower cost — and neither side will yet listen to the other. It's a dialogue of the deaf, with both sides ignoring the all-important supply side of the equation. ..... < snip > America's biggest economic problem today is health care. Health care is consuming more than 18% of GDP and, if unchecked, that number could grow to 35% by midcentury. It could bankrupt the government and lead to economic collapse.