There was some information published in a story in Business Week (of all places) that really helped me solidify the need for strong public health influence in any health reformed system, such reform of some type we all agree is badly needed. However just giving everyone access to today's system with its perverse, caveat emptor incentives may do more harm than good.
I believe there is a major difference between public health thinking folks and private sector business thinking type folks in healthcare. Public health does not believe that those with less info or less I.Q., or less funds should be hurt by the system because of their disadvantages. Indeed, public health advocates believe it is within the regulatory sphere of society that nobody is hurt by such caveat emptor actions in healthcare. I would have also thought that the provider profession (do not harm) would see this as a basic tenant, but many evidentially may not or how did we get to where we are today?
Read More