Quality Health Care

A recent blog conversation on the topic of health care prompted me to remember a basic. The basic is, whenever you start to look at something to assess, understand and/or change you should first start by defining what it is you are talking about. Your next step, especially if you are planning on making changes, is to decide how you will measure change. In the case of health care it has historically been defined, in a society, by measuring infant mortality, life expectancy, immunization status, incidence of preventable diseases and several other "health stats". Having already developed a way to measure improvement, success or failure (god forbid). At this time I urge you to visit the world health organization web site and compare our health stats to those of other countries. As you will see, more money spent does not mean better over all health for the populace, at least not by these measures. Of course this becomes a very difficult and complex topic, what is basic health care? Is it fair to use health care dollars to pay for heart bypass surgery and breast implants?? I suppose if you were deformed from breast surgery or a burn it would be reasonable, but for shear sense of self? Think about it, if you have an infection should you have access (financially that is) to the newest antibiotic, no matter what the expense is? If we, as a society were to decide that basic health care should be provided to all, who would decide what "basic" is?? It seems obvious that immunizations would be basic, physical exams, etc, what about, say, erectile dysfunction, should our health care dollar pay for local erections?? (or elections for that matter). What if the reason you have trouble getting an erection has to do with diabetes or hypertension? what if you just want an erection like when you were young, who decides???? Think about it, I am not saying I have the answers, but I do understand the complexity of the question.