Funding a Cure for Alzhiemer's: How It Could Save America Billions

[johnd83]

While the congressional super committee meets in Washington in the hopes of lowering spending by about $1.4 trillion over the next 10 years, here's one of the sobering realities they must face: In that same decade, the nation will spend an additional $2 trillion caring for Americans with Alzheimer's.

The cost of this care -- primarily in Medicare and Medicaid payments -- will negate virtually all of the gains made from the Budget Control Act of 2011. For the health of our nation's economy and seniors, we cannot accept this two-steps-forward, two-steps-back approach.

To achieve real and lasting savings, the super committee must recommend more funding for Alzheimer's research for the new treatments that will produce massive savings to the Federal government in the next 10 years.

more

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-vradenburg/cure-for-alzheimers_b_987931.html?ir=Politics

If we were to cure the big diseases that are chronic and expensive to treat

1. Alzhiemer's
2. Vascular diseases (heart attack, stroke)
3. Cancer
4. Osteoporosis

the cost of medicare would drop significantly because a huge number of hospitalizations could be avoided, and hopefully seniors could stay independent longer. What we need is more research, but instead we are starving research in the name of an abstract "national debt". There may be an initial increase in cost to pay for the development of new treatments but long term it is far more sustainable.

[valerief]

1. Are the recipients of those billions willing to give it up? I don't mean the patients.

I mean the businesses.

[TexasProgresive]

2. It seems to me that before the war on smoking

We had fewer people end their lives with dementia. And people weren't on Social Security and Medicare as long-in fact some never used it.
--just saying.