Dec 6, 2006
Este parece ser un libro interesante sobre el tema estado-salud. Acá el review de Stephen Moore en el WSJ:
- About 10 years ago, I broke my leg playing basketball. After I came out of surgery, with a cast stretching from my ankle to the top of my leg, an orderly asked me whether I had ever used crutches before. I hadn't, so he showed me what to do, swinging through them from one end of the room to the other. The whole lesson lasted about 90 seconds. When I got my hospital bill, I saw that I had been charged $150 for "gait training on crutches." I did what all insured Americans do: I forwarded the bill to my insurance company. Why should I care? I wasn't paying for it. One of the problems with American health care, as David Gratzer notes in "The Cure," is precisely a payment system that takes the patient out of the equation. In the early 1960s, the average American paid out of pocket one of every two dollars that he spent on health care; today the figure is one dollar in seven. The inevitable effect is hugely wasteful spending (and inflated hospital bills like mine).
- Dr. Gratzer, a physician from Canada and a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, is painfully aware, thanks to Canada's single-payer government system, of how inefficient and limited health care can be when the market is kept almost completely out of the calculation. He has seen the effects firsthand. In Canada, the average wait between a doctor visit and prescribed surgery is 17 weeks. American patients are twice as likely as Canadians to get life-saving treatments like dialysis, three times more likely to get a coronary bypass and four times more likely to get coronary angioplasty. The survival rate for leukemia, breast cancer, colon cancer and heart disease is much higher if you are treated in a U.S. hospital than in a Canadian one or, for that matter, in a European one.
- For some, including Dr. Gratzer, the costs are breathtaking, too, even when they are corrected for the payment dysfunctions that he analyzes so well. Are we suffering from a kind of runaway health-care inflation, as Dr. Gratzer at times suggests? Perhaps. But it can easily be argued that medicine, because it is subject to hyper-technological change, is hard to gauge by traditional inflation measures. The current treatments for disease aren't really comparable with those of a quarter-century ago. To complain about the cost of heart surgery or cancer treatment by comparing it to the inflation-adjusted price in the 1960s or '70s is to miss the point: You died 30 years ago, and you live today. The cost of my leg surgery would have been a lot cheaper in the 1960s, but I wouldn't be able to play tennis or even run after the surgical repair was done, as I can now. How much is it worth to a family with a child who has leukemia to be able to treat her and give her a full life? The families I know who have seen their children recover say that they would have given up everything they own for today's miracle cures. Yet it's become a great American pastime for patients and politicians to whine about the "high cost of drugs" and other treatments that save lives.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Luis, el primer parrafo me confunde comparado con los siguientes. El primero parece sugerir que hay un gran despilfarro de recursos en el sistema americano (US$150 por 90 segundos de "leccion"?). Pero a continuacion explicitamente argumenta en favor de este sistema, y en detrimento de los sistemas europeo y canadiense. No me queda claro cual es la bottomline.
ReplyDeleteUna póliza de salud ha aumentado desproporcionalmente en relación con otros bienes y servicios en los últimos años. Los críticos del sistema de libre mercado que rige en Estados Unidos se aferran a este dato para proponer un sistema de salud socializado al estilo canadiense. El autor dice (o parece decir, no he leído el libro aún, sólo este breve resumen de Steve Moore) que por un lado el aumento se debe que que el servicio de salud es mejor, más avanzado y más efectivo que nunca antes. Esto tiene un precio. Por otro lado, el aumento también encuentra explicación en el despilfarro de recursos que surge de la parte menos “liberal” del proceso. Esto se da porque para quienes tienen seguro no existe un verdadero incentivo en controlar los gastos que se hacen en su nombre. En fin, habría que leer el libro.
ReplyDeletePerdon Ramiro, asumi que era Luis sin leer quien firmaba.
ReplyDeleteAriel, Yo vengo comentando por acá hace rato sobre el sistema de salud socializado de Canadá. Si bien la gente no se muere por la calle, los problemas se agravan año a año. Y, lo que es realmente dramático, bajo el actual sistema, la cuestión va a seguir empeorando. Si te interesa, puedes hacer una búsqueda de “sistema de salud” en el blog. No te dejo un link porque son muchos posts.
ReplyDeleteCreo que es muy importante tener siempre en cuenta de que sólo existen dos maneras de asignar recursos: los precios y la escasez.