The July/August 2009 issue of Technology Review is especially good. In it there are articles on Wolfram Alpha, cap and trade, Obama’s technology stimulus, and nuclear fusion. It also contains an entire section on cloud computing and a thought-provoking essay on privacy in the age of Facebook.

A Pound of Cure (subscription required)
Andy Kessler, Technology Review, July/August 2009, pg. 75

The health-care industry’s reluctance to digitize its records is rooted in a desire to keep medicine’s lucrative business model hidden. Dangling $19 billion in front of a $2.4 trillion industry is not nearly enough to get it to reveal the financial secrets that electronic health records are likely to uncover–and upon which its huge profits depend. In those medical records lie the ugly truth about the business of medicine: sickness is profitable. The greater the number of treatments, procedures, and hospital stays, the larger the profit. There is little incentive for doctors and hospitals to identify or reduce wasteful spending in medicine.

According to a 2003 article by Dr. Steffie Woolhandler in the New England Journal of Medicine, administration accounts for 31 percent of expenses in the U.S. health-care industry, or more than $500 billion per year. (To put that in perspective, Google has spent well under 10 percent of that on all its R&D.)

I always laugh when people argue that a government health care system would be inefficient. I think they must never have visited a doctor’s office or dealt with their own health insurance company.

government · health · health care · insurance · policy · technology review · united states · usa

HIT or miss
The Economist, A special report on health care and technology, April 18, 2009, pg. 4

Why don’t we in the United States have digitized medical records? I’ll spare you the diatribe. This article makes a great case for why now is a great time to do what we should have done long ago. Digitizing medical records will go a long way towards modernizing our atrocious health care “system”.

The RAND Corporation, an American think-tank, examined the potential benefits of digitising health systems in a 2005 report. It estimated that, if 90% of hospitals and doctors in America were to adopt HIT over 15 years, the health system could save some $77 billion a year from efficiency gains (see chart 1). If health-and-safety benefits are taken into account, the gains could double, saving about 6% of the $2.6 trillion that will be spent on health care in America this year.

Cost savings is a good enough reason.

A study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine in January compared a group of hospitals in Texas that has adopted advanced HIT systems with a group that has not. It found that the first group suffered 15% fewer deaths and 16% fewer complications, as well as enjoying lower costs.

Fewer deaths and complications makes this a no-brainer.

In March Kaiser Permanente published evidence in Health Affairs showing that its digital efforts have cut visits per patient by an average of 26%, thanks to more e-mail and telephone consultations. That saves money and increases efficiency, but patients seem to like it too.

Telephone and email consultations in lieu of expensive doctor visits sounds good to me.

The giant fiscal-stimulus package passed earlier this year by Congress includes nearly $20 billion to create a national health-information network, including incentives for hospitals and doctors to adopt EHRs. But various obstacles could yet get in the way.

Thank god those damn Republicans were voted out of power!

ehr · health · hit · insurance · technology · the economist

The road not taken
The Economist, March 21, 2009, pg31

I recently wrote about home ownership and how the recession has the power to change America’s landscape. These changes should be encouraged and accelerated.

Recession and Geography
Brent Danley, The Rhetoric, February 22, 2009

The essay I read today in The Economist magazine only strengthened my opinions about both home ownership and health care. Both issues are devastating our economy and weakening our chances to grow and lead.

“Mobility is part of the American dream”, the author writes. And I agree. People should move to where the work is and where they will be able to find employment that will best utilize their talents and skills. Unfortunately, policies of past administrators have succeeded in promoting home ownership as the new American Dream. The consequences of this short-sighted idealism should be obvious to even the casual observer.

(more…)

america · economy · government · health care · home ownership · insurance · mobility · policy · united states · worker