Problems with the Health Care Debate

After employing tried-and-failed tactics to deal with the economy and preserving the abysmal status quo in the realm of foreign policy, the folks in Washington are finally turning their attention to the issue of health care reform. Unfortunately, we have every reason to expect that the health care debate will be just as nonsensical as the discussions about Iraq and closing Gitmo. Plenty of misplaced pride will be revealed, "socialized medicine" will be ritualistically condemned, and the ultimate solution won't solve anything at all. Clearly, this conversation begs for a deeper analysis.

On the Democratic side, we can expect a plethora of anecdotal evidence about the plight of the uninsured. You know the type: "In my district of California, there was a man named Jimmy. Jimmy got in an unfortunate altercation with his lawn mower and the mower won. Jimmy didn't have health insurance. Now he's living in a van down by the river because the bills were too high..." and so on and so forth. Then we'll hear Pelosi or someone else talk about all the uninsured children and argue that America is just too good and too compassionate to let this situation stand. These emotional appeals, effective though they may be, have no place in a serious discussion about policy. I could come up with just as many isolated examples of people who are thrilled with the current system. "Fred went to the doctor the other day paid only 10% of the bill for his femur X-rays. It was exhilarating because he knew his premiums for the year were much less than the cost of this single visit." Admittedly, it isn't quite as powerful as a tragedy, but it's a perfect analogy-and it's perfectly irrelevant.

The Democrats' approach will be devious, but the Republican rhetoric promises to be equally ridiculous. The GOP will equate universal health insurance with "socialized medicine" and condemn it vehemently. They will describe a future that includes long waiting lists, higher taxes, and lower quality care. Americans will no longer have access to cutting-edge medical techniques because treatments will be standardized. They may not even get to choose their doctors. Then after making this pessimistic prediction, Republicans will take intellectual dishonesty to a whole new level by talking about fiscal irresponsibility. Universal health care will be denounced for its high price tag because the deficit is already so big. And then when the topic changes, the Republicans will continue to support expanding the Defense budget and preserving our military presence in such troubled nations as Germany and Japan. Strange, I thought World War II was over...

In their defense of the status quo, the Republicans seem to imply that the American health care system is the envy of the world. Indeed Sen. Richard Shelby stated this idea explicitly. But the facts just don't bear this out. As a percentage of GDP, the U.S. spends almost twice as much on health care as other industrialized countries. Yet in spite of this, the WHO did a formal assessment of world health care systems in 2000, and America came in 37th out of 191 countries. Moreover, the American Human Development Project reports that America ranks 24th in life expectancy among the 30 richest countries. In other words, that's like the Yankees missing the playoffs-by a long shot. Need more proof that American health care isn't all that it's cracked up to be? In 2000, the third leading cause of death in the U.S. wasn't drunk driving or diabetes, it was medical care. Only heart disease and cancer were more deadly. So what's really going on here?

Thus far, the debate I've depicted is surely disheartening, but we saved the worst for last. The greatest chicanery of all stems from a bipartisan effort. Democrats and Republicans alike will discuss the importance of prevention in improving American health and lowering health care costs. But make no mistake: this is strictly lip service. Preventive medicine in America means striving for earlier detection of breast cancer and taking cholesterol-lowering medication to stave off cardiovascular problems. Prevention is conflated with early treatment, and the success of preventive medicine is idiotically determined by how long the patient lives after the diagnosis. Thus, on paper, our prevention methods work very well, but these results are deceiving. For instance, breast cancer patients are surviving longer after the diagnosis, but this is a given since the diagnosis is occurring sooner. Shouldn't our true goal be to actually prevent Americans from contracting these deadly diseases in the first place? Shouldn't the goal be to make Americans more healthy now, not to simply prolong their life?

Logic dictates that a holistic goal of better health is superior to merely prolonging life. Best of all we don't even have to pick and choose between these priorities. Nutrition is the single most important component of real preventive medicine; a healthy diet is convincingly linked to better overall health and lower risks for the most common American diseases like heart disease, cancer, and obesity. It's an inexpensive and incredibly effective solution, but it won't even be considered in any meaningful way. That's because the healthy diet I speak of is a plant-based diet, one that utterly unrecognizable to the typical, meat-and-potatoes-meat-and-French fries American consumer. Many people-the meat, dairy, and pharmaceutical industries to be specific-have a vested interest in preserving the status quo. Others say that switching to a vegan diet is too radical, but the state of American health demands a radical solution. There's a reason that two-thirds of Americans are overweight. There's a reason that Americans are seventeen times more likely to experience heart disease than the rural, impoverished populations of China. And there's a reason that Americans spend almost twice as much on health care as the rest of the developed world. The reason is poor nutrition, and we ignore it at our own peril. (1)

The upcoming debate on health care will be disheartening to say the least. Anecdotes will be regarded as evidence and Republicans will pretend to care about fiscal responsibility while simultaneously praising the current War on Terror. But most troubling of all is the fact that the underlying problem, a very carnivorous diet, will be ignored and the status quo will be preserved. Health care reform might make someone else pay for the adverse health effects of the American diet. But that will be the only change, and frankly, that just isn't good enough.

1. The China Study by T. Colin Campbell