Congress attempts to rewrite preventive care study

The September 1, 2009 issue of the Washington Post reports a study of the cost effectiveness of preventive care is not going to generate the savings that have been promised by advocates of Obamacare. Entitled "Using clinical information to project health care spending," the study was published on the website of the journal of health policy research "Health Affairs." Michael J. O'Grady , one of 4 authors of the study, had this to say about the study. "There's no free lunch here. Prevention will not pay for everything. But it's not as expensive as it looks at first blush"

How did Obamacare supporters in Congress react to this. They have already requested the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan agency established by Congress to provide impartial evaluations of the cost effects of proposed legislation, to revise their studies to support their position. Donna Christensen, (D-US Virgin Islands) introduced a bill which would allow congressional leaders to request the CBO to alter their research methodology to a longer time period in hopes it would show more beneficial cost savings. I wonder what the Obamacare fans would say if the 25 year time frame still did not generate the savings they say preventive care will cause.

I say preventive care should be a major part of any health care reform. It doesn't matter to me if it generates savings or not, it will improve the quality of life for the chronically ill. The Hippocratic Oath requires Medical Doctors to do no harm or injustice to their patients. This is what preventive care is all about, providing the best care possible for the ill. The Obamacare fans seem to want their cake, eat it and lose weight at the same time.