Impact of Free Preventive Healthcare
Filed under: Obama Administration, Private Insurance, preventive care

This color sketch, which was drawn in 1962, showed the CDC’s national symbol of public health, the "Wellbee," and was created by CDC’s staff artist Harold M. Walker, who had previously worked as an animator in Hollywood, California. CDC used the Wellbee in its comprehensive marketing campaign that used newspapers, posters, leaflets, radio and television, as well as personal appearances at public health events. Wellbee’s first assignment was to sponsor Sabin Type-II oral polio vaccine campaigns across the United States. Later, Wellbee’s character was incorporated into other health promotion campaigns including diphtheria and tetanus immunizations, hand-washing, physical fitness, and injury prevention. This artifact can be found in the Global Health Odyssey, which is the CDC’s museum featuring many various public health-related artifacts. Date 1962, http://phil.cdc.gov/phil/home.asp
Benjamin Franklin famously once said, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” The statement has that ring of truth– especially when it comes to American healthcare. Numerous studies have shown that early detection of diseases as well as interventions for bad habits (e.g. overeating and smoking) can potentially avert thousands of deaths each year. Additionally, reported by Reuters, these preventative cares can lead to massive health care savings because preventable diseases such as heart diseases, cancer, and diabetes account for 75% of the national health care spending.
Considering the potential of prevention, just last week, the White House laid out rules requiring health insurance companies to provide many preventative medical services at no cost to the consumer. The NY Times reports,
The rules will eliminate co-payments, deductibles and other charges for blood pressure, diabetes and cholesterol tests; many cancer screenings; routine vaccinations; prenatal care; and regular wellness visits for infants and children.
Other services that must be offered at no charge include counseling to help people stop smoking; screening and counseling for obesity; and tests for infection with the virus that causes AIDS.
The rules stipulate that no co-payments can be charged for tests and screenings recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of scientific experts. The rules apply to new health plans that begin coverage after Sept. 23 and to existing health plans that make significant changes after that date. The administration said the requirements could increase premiums by 1.5 percent, on average.
Currently, the government reports that Americans use preventive services at about half the rate recommended by doctors and public health experts. The Obama Administration, including many experts and consumers groups, is hoping that these new changes will eventually have a huge impact and Americans will take advantage of the free preventative care.
But, how much impact would it really have?
While costs have deterred some consumers from preventive care, others have avoided doctors’ offices for other reasons. For example, people with unhealthy lifestyles avoid checkups, not because of cost, but out of fear. According to the NY Times,
Recent studies have shown that people who know they have health-endangering vices (like smoking or drinking) put off appointments because they do not want a healthy-living lecture. Others do not go because they feel doomed despite medical treatment. At the other extreme are the overly optimistic who are convinced they will get better no matter what. And then there are those who are embarrassed to discuss their symptoms, such as incontinence or impotence.
The bottom line for many people is fear: fear of bad news, fear of an uncomfortable test, fear of discussing something intimate.
And other people, namely men, do not regularly see their primary care physician because men generally tend to overestimate their health. According to a survey by the American Academy of Family Physicians:
● Almost one in five men (18%) 55 years and older have never received the recommended screening for colon cancer.
● More than half (55%) of all men surveyed have not seen their primary care physician for a physical exam within the past year.
● Four in 10 (42%) men have been diagnosed with at least one of the following chronic conditions: high blood pressure (28%), heart disease (8%), arthritis (13%), cancer (8%) or diabetes (10%).
● More than one out of four men (29%) say they wait “as long as possible” before seeking help when they feel sick or are in pain or are concerned about their health.
● Despite this, almost 8 in 10 (79%) men describe themselves as in “Excellent,” “Very Good,” or “Good” health.
The “missing” men in these statistics would seem to be among those who would benefit, arguably most, from regular checkups and screenings; unfortunately, it would seem that free preventive care will not drive these groups running to the doctor. While the new rules will undoubtedly increase the number of people receiving preventive care, it is uncertain how much impact it will actually have as some groups will continue to avoid doctors regardless of costs.
A Trip to the Cardiologist, A Lipitor Future, and “Why Doesn’t My Health Insurer Want Me to Know if I’m Likely To Have a Heart Attack?”
Filed under: Chronic Conditions, Prescription Drugs
I visited with a cardiologist last week. My inadvertent but no less harmful dalliance with two different kinds of drain cleaner having set off an entire chain of long past due check-ups. A little more than two years shy of fifty, I listened intently as I was told that although I had had a good run, a diet composed of grease, chocolate, quick carbs, coffee and unfiltereds was simply not going to cut it as I ventured into the last half of life (last third is more likely, but also more painful to consider– and I suppose for the doctor, harder to say).
I now look forward to a battery of tests. The first, done today, is designed to detect artery calcification: “Coronary calcium is specific for atherosclerotic plaque and can be detected with high sensitivity and accurately quantified by computed tomography (CT) to help predict future cardiac events related to coronary artery disease.” I had to pay for the test out of pocket as it seems my insurance company deems such screening unworthy of coverage– despite the tests highly vaunted predictive power. Quite a few people in this country die each year from heart disease–hard to understand how it wouldn’t be worth the $318 to know who was vulnerable–and if unchecked, destined for the very expensive Intensive Care Unit.
Tomorrow brings an echocardiogram and my first ever stress test. I readily assented to the tests as it is good, I suppose, to know where one stands. But in addition to testing and making dietary changes, the doctor also wants me to start taking Lipitor. A statin prescribed to lower cholesterol. I did not react well. The prescription it seems is, in more than one sense, a life sentence.
And I am generally suspicious of the pharma zeitgeist. And terribly so as it concerns myself.
The prescription is not, in this instance, a treatment for an acute condition, it treats the endemic. If one has risk factors, it is prophylactic and is prescribed to reduce the risk of heart attack, stroke and other heart diseases. It is doubtful whether once I start taking this drug I will ever stop. There is no foreseeable time (while alive) that I will wish to stop reducing the risk of heart attack or stroke. And that I suppose is the essence of the onset of age– piling up prescriptions. A daily regimen that will follow one to the grave–only the dosages or the brand names changing as each day welcomes a regimen of pills. In short, this prescription feels like the onset of dependence. The forward guard, if you will. A harbinger of a pharmaceutical future.
Seeing my, shall we say, chagrin, the cardiologist told me that, like over 50% of the cardiologists he knows, he takes a statin. “We’ve seen the data.” Another recently told me “Yeah, I take it. They should put it in the water.”
And so I will take this drug. But I am not happy. I am loath to think of myself in these terms. Only 12 or so years ago I played starting defensive tackle on a semi-pro football team. Soon I will be discussing my cholesterol numbers and God only knows what other numerical health indicators at cocktail parties.
The essence of good health is simply not having to think about it. It is not an issue. I have to think about it now. And I have a sneaking suspicion, that like when I first became a parent, the terms of my existence have just changed.



Posts from Health Reform Watch have been cited by media sources throughout the country, including The New York Times, Washington Post, L.A. Times, Kaiser Health News, The Health Care Blog, NPR's Planet Money Blog, Duke Univ. Med. Center News, American Health Line Alerts, BusinessWeek.com, Concurring Opinions, Balkinization, The New England Journal of Medicine, Harvard's Nieman Foundation for Journalism, Las Vegas Sun, Maggie Mahar, Ezra Klein, Tom Geoghegan, and the official homepage of the Office of the Democratic Majority Leader of the House of Representatives, Steny Hoyer.