Personal tools

Live Longer, But Cost The System More Money

— filed under: ,
by Fard Johnmar last modified Mar 05, 2008 05:57 PM

A surprising study published in February indicates that healthy people cost the health system more money. Will this finding damage efforts to get people to engage in healthy behaviors and take control of their own care?

Early last month, media around the world reported on an intriguing study published in the journal PLoS Medicine.  The study, conducted by Dutch researchers, indicates two things:

o    People who are obese and smoke die sooner, thus saving the health system money

o    Healthy people live longer and cost the system more cash

The study authors noted that their research “counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.”  This is because common wisdom holds that healthier people are less likely to use expensive medical resources. 

This is a curious study that has received lots of attention – mainly because it goes against conventional wisdom.  But, does this mean we should give up on efforts to encourage people to engage in healthy behaviors?  Or dissuade them from playing a more active role in how their care is financed and administered? 

I think the answers to these questions is no. But, I’d love to hear what you think about this study and what it means for the consumerism movement.

Image: www.gluttonsess.com

Trackbacks

Trackback this post

del.icio.us!
Document Actions

Living longer

Posted by at Jun 20, 2008 09:58 PM
 Having recently lost my mother-in-law, mother and father I make this recommendation with a heavy heart. End of life healthcare costs are astronomical-- many times these end of life measures are not even supported by the patient. And, adding to that emotional and troubling situation are adult children intending to make decisons that prolong life regardless of the patient's quality of life because that is what is expected today. What family member is going to step up and say-- no I don't think we should try that experimental treatment? Not many. My recommendation is to create a medicare co-pay of 50% after the age of 80 years old and a quality of life that is undesirable. Undesirable quality of life would have to be defined and it may be something as simple as: incapable of performing 3 of the 6 activites of daily living. Please know the numbers (50% and 80 years old) are somewhat arbitrary-- pick different numbers. The point is, there would be tremendously different decisions and perhaps more patient/family focused decisions made if this co-pay situation were in place. The end of life should be dignified with as much patient control as possible.
You are correct in thinking that the rich will be the only ones that will be able to afford medical treatments beyond that defined perameter. Okay. That does not mean that the end of life for those not rich will be compromised it can be and should be a beautiful experience.

Thank You For Your Comment

Posted by Fard Johnmar at Jun 27, 2008 02:58 PM
I'm sorry to hear about your losses. End-of-life costs are incredibly expensive and some have provided solutions that would help to ensure people are more aware of the risks/benefits of using extraordinary measures.
Contact    Site map    Privacy Policy
© 2008 Developed by Humana to create an ongoing dialogue to reform health care.