How to Manufacture a Stupid Controversy
Published February 10, 2009 @ 03:19PM PT
Apparently, it's as easy as it ever was. First, potentially threaten the profits of multi-million and -billion dollar manufacturers of pharmaceuticals and medical device companies. They, in turn, spring their lobbyists on Washington and meet with Republicans who are already looking for a reason to denounce the stimulus package. They in turn, unleash Rush and the noise machine. Pretty soon, one of the smartest elements in the plan - comparative effectiveness research on what works and doesn't in medicine - is being demagogued as a threat to all liberty. And all because we want to know if the wonderful toys those guys sell us actually do anything to make us healthier.
Man, those guys really like their profits.
Deep breath, folks. We're talking about accumulating data on how effective the treatments paid for by Medicare actually are. The stimulus benefits are pretty clear - as Jonathan Cohn puts it, "You have to hire researchers, plus support staff, to collect and analyze data; you have to purchase equipment and build infrastructure for their operations. All of that creates jobs." The principle is also pretty clear - as my dad used to instruct me, you "measure twice, cut once" (nor surgical pun intended.) When it comes to measuring whether the treatments we undergo make us healthier or not, we're not even measuring once. The single biggest source of information on new drugs, less newer drugs and medical devices are the studies that are sponsored by the makers of those drugs and devices.
That's not research. That's advertising.
However, a study by a neutral party like the National Institute of Health (intended recipient of most of the $1.1 billion for the study) will be testing the science more than the marketing sizzle. We know there's a problem here, with a Dartmouth College study approximating at least $700 billion is spent each year on treatments that don't lead to better health. But we don't know the specifics until we analyze the data. If I was a responsible steward of taxpayer's money, I'd want to know what we're spending money on that doesn't work. If I was someone like, oh, I don't, Sen. Ben Nelson, and I was making an argument that we had to make sure the stimulus package wasn't too big for the sake of fiscal responsibility, I'd also want to know if we were losing the equivalent of an entire stimulus package every year on care that doesn't make you better... and in some cases, makes you worse... and in all cases, makes the federal budget worse.
Nope. My dreams of consistency on fiscal responsibility are dashed. Sen. Ben Nelson led the charge in cutting that provision - a cut that drug and medical device companies are taking credit for. Now, we're hearing all the old bogeymen in the noise machine dedicated to keeping the research out of the bill: how this is the first in many steps leading to "rationing of care" (like me learning how many calories are in a Big Mac is the first in many steps of me forbidding everyone in my family from eating Big Macs... wait, that doesn't follow, does it? Because even I still eat Big Macs -- just not as often); that doctors may stop prescribing "necessary" care (despite "necessary" being the exact quality the research is supposed to study). What's next - "this is socialized research?" There is not a doctor or patient on the planet who benefits from being denied data on the treatments they prescribe and undergo. Who's afraid of the Big, Bad Data on Health Outcomes? 'Tis not the freedom of man that's threatened by reality - only the profits of those who have something to hide.
Let us not forget that medicine is real science. You learn in science by collecting data and using it to test your assumptions and hypotheses. There's hope that we've moved past the knee jerk hatred of science and expertise fostered by the previous 8 years, but clearly old habits die hard.
(Photo credit: alexeo10 on Flickr.)
Related Posts
-
Public Spending Enemy No. 1: Your Health Care
-
What Gregg and the Stimulus Debate Foretell for Health Care Reform
-
Betsy McCaughey's Scary Stories About Health Care: What Needs to Be Done
Comments (6)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Tim has been an online organizer and blogger on health care policy for the Obama for America campaign (during the primaries) and currently for the Committee of Interns and Residents/SEIU Healthcare, a labor union for intern and resident doctors. Views expressed here are Tim's, and don't represent the positions of CIR or SEIU.

Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Email

As a physician, I am totally against any and ALL advertising to the public or to physicians by/for prescriptions drugs. PERIOD.It is immoral and very unhealthy to be doing this, in addition it is a large part of the 30% wasted health care costs of our country.
Posted by Lee Dorsey on 02/10/2009 @ 03:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Wow. The extent of corporate irresponsibility has never been more clear than in this example.
Posted by Greg Plotkin on 02/10/2009 @ 07:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Maybe off the subject, and nothing personal...
My school, a private university, just received $14 million grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to help reduce the burden of tobacco use in China, according to their news letter.
Wow, money is somewhere out there...
Just wonder, can the Foundation give us some money to give health care to nearly, probably lot more now, 50 million uninsured Americans?
Posted by Yuriko Lee on 02/10/2009 @ 08:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
OK Tim, I am going out of character and out on a limb here. I support the scientific gathering of data by impartial sources whenever it is the choice. I'm 100% behind You, for what thats' worth. I also would like to agree with Dr. Dorsey, and add that maybe if pharmaceutical companys did not advertise the prices of their products would be a lot lower. One little reservation with that thought though, with an all powerful leftist govt. in power, news of certain developments may be kept from the public without advertisement. The older I get the more complicated life gets!
Posted by Charlie Reed on 02/11/2009 @ 05:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
While it is a good thing to voice our opinions and petition our representatives for progressive change, we are fighting a losing battle here. Public opinion, driven in large part by conservative talk radio ("Rush and the noise machine" to quote Tim) I believe more emphasis needs to be given to the "fundamentals" of communications.
Every progressive proposal discussed on this site finds itself in the cross-hairs of talk radio, where, it is demonized.
If we are going to move forward, then we must have an opportunity to challange the lies and disinformation, the propaganda if you will, which is constantly being blasted, unopposed, to the public.
A reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine by the FCC would go a long way to remedy this situation.
Unfortunately, Obama does not support returning to a policy, where public airwaves must cary a balance of opinion.
Bob
Posted by Bob Richards on 02/12/2009 @ 11:01AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
P.S.
Some links relevent to this issue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/06/AR2009020602511.html
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-preps-for-talk-radio-confrontation-2007-06-27.html
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/12/static-over-right-wing-radio/?ref=opinion
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/Sen_Harkin_We_need_the_Fairness_Doctrine_back_.html
Posted by Bob Richards on 02/12/2009 @ 11:07AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.