Arizonans for healthcare freedom

the arizona strategy

 
 
July 10, 2009

Eric Novack

In a July 2 op-ed, "Finding What Works in Health Care," Johnson & Johnson chief executive William C. Weldon said that comparative effectiveness research (CER) is "essential to improving the value of health care." As an orthopedic surgeon who spends a great deal of his time with elderly patients, I am skeptical.

Whether such research is implemented through the Federal Coordinating Council for CER as created in the economic stimulus bill, or by way of an independent commission to which Mr. Weldon alluded, the endgame is the same: someone else controls whether you or your loved ones can get care when needed.

Last Thanksgiving, I had the honor of taking care of a 94-year-old woman who fell and broke her hip. All inclinations were that her chances of dying in surgery or in the few weeks following were great. However, the family felt strongly that the benefits outweighed the risks, and we proceeded.

She was present for Easter dinner.

If her surgery had to have been approved by a government panel, how many bureaucrats do you think would have supported spending the money on a 94-year-old with medical issues?

Our president understands this principle. He told the New York Times Magazine: "If somebody told me that my grandmother couldn't have a hip replacement and she had to lie there in misery in the waning days of her life -- that would be pretty upsetting."

Yes, it would be upsetting. And it would be wrong. Government-led comparative effectiveness research is about control and cost-cutting when it comes to our health -- not about improving it.

<- Go Back