doctormuse.com

If only it were as easy as heads or tails, black and white or yes and no.  This week Facebook subscribers inundated their walls with the statement “No one should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one should go broke because they get sick. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day.”  

Sounds great to me, noble, humane and magnanimous.  I stopped short of posting it when a trickle of doubt seeped to the fingertips controlling the keyboard of my computer.  Within minutes I was glad not to have posted it, my doubt blossoming into a full-fledged disdain and remorse for those supporting such a measure without adequately understanding its consequences. 

Putting my head on the guillotine, I’ll matter of fact say the statement is a meaningless hype for political reform, ill conceived, callous and subversive in its message.  The fact is no one dies because they can’t afford health care, they only "sort of "die.  And no one goes broke because they’re sick they only "sort of" go broke.  

I’ll even go so far as to say many people die because they can afford health care, paying for unnecessary medical procedures that go awry that lead to premature death.

On the surface equal access to health care is a subject we think of as being a right more than a privilege.  As noble as the thought may be the right to equal access health care is so intertwined with every aspect of our lives that unfortunately, putting it on such a pedestal will never work. 

Health care reform is not a battle for the poor nor is it a problem for the rich.  It is a middle class conundrum whose solution lies with regulating lifestyles and risks but not by increasing income tax.  Poor people will always have access to health care.  In times of dire need they can and will show up at emergency rooms across our nation and never be denied treatment.  This is an undeniable fact.  Wealthy people find ways to access the best medical treatment and procedures technology can offer.  Steve Jobs is living proof. 

The Health Care Debate Lies Within The Middle Class 

For those of us still working we feel blessed having an employer supplying health insurance even though the future of company supplied health insurance lies in jeopardy.  We all agree health care costs are running out of control, businesses can’t afford to offer blanket policies to their employees and still run profitable operations.  Employees can’t afford to absorb the cost of the policies as they struggle to make ends meet without added insurance costs. 

Who pays?

This is the same question we asked our government when unscrupulous bankers and lenders exercised poor judgment and unprecedented risk with our countries assets.  The solution to our economic meltdown appears to have been absorbed by we the taxpayers with few consequences being realized by the institutions responsible for mismanaging risk.  Why, because, the government had no choice.  The damage had been done and forcing the banks and lenders to compensate for their poor decisions would destroy the banking industry, the heart and soul of the world’s economy.  Changes may evolve in the future that identify and regulate risk in the financial system but this time around the taxpayers are footing the bill.

Health Care Reform Can And Should Be Different 

Medical science has evolved to a point where hereditary diseases are well differentiated from environmentally induced pathology and lifestyle induced pathology.  Insurance companies regulate premiums of policies based on actuarial statistics.  They assess lifestyle and are able to quantify it by charging risk premiums.  Universal health care should go one step further by instituting a “risk” consumption tax.  Lifestyle risks can be correlated to nutritional intake of certain types of food groups and behavioral patterns.  For example, if someone chooses to eat junk food they should be taxed a premium for that food or if someone chooses to drive a car fast they should be taxed a premium for violations and the proceeds can be used for universal health coverage.

Should a non-smoking 5’11” 170 lb middle class train conductor who exercises everyday and eats organic natural food products pay the same health care premium as his overweight, smoking and soft drink consuming colleague who has three speeding tickets on his driver’s license?  Most would say no, and if health care premiums were linked to lifestyle consumption taxes a rewards system would be in place that would level the playing field for people with different risk profiles.

We live in a society where an increasing number of consumers are being supported by a decreasing number of producers.  Rewarding a healthy lifestyle means paying less for universal health care.  Taxing unhealthy lifestyles will ultimately force people to change the way they live and support technologies and industries that improve the quality of life.

The statement on Facebook should read "No one living a healthy lifestyle should die because they cannot afford health care, and no one living a healthy lifestyle should go broke because they get sick.  If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day."