General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Medicare for all would cost more than what we are paying now. We need to stop avoiding this fact. [View all]eridani
(51,907 posts)My own family, with heritable insulin resistance, demonstrates this perfectly. My grandmother died at age 53, and my father at age 59. I've made it to 69 (next month) because preventive care has improved so dramatically. That, and the class privilege to work at a company that provided fitness centers to its employees. From accurate measurements of glycemic index (making dietary choices more informed), to cheap glucose meters, to accurate and cheap assays for hemoglobin A1c (in 1985 I was told that these tests were too expensive to be widespread), to aggressive use of metformin and similar drugs during the prediabetic phase, I have successfully fought my genome.
Of the three of us, who will have the highest lifetime medical expenses? Obviously me. That's why the Republican health plan is Die Quickly. Dead people don't use expensive medical care.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html
Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it does not save money, according to a new report.
It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars.
"It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more."
In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers.
Van Baal and colleagues create Preventing obesity and smoking can save lives, but it does not save money, according to a new report.