How investing in public health could cure many health care problems

http://theconversation.com/how-investing-in-public-health-could-cure-many-health-care-problems-84256?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20October%201%202017%20-%2084576980&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20October%201%202017%20-%2084576980+CID_49b12b4a2a39e7f173235a40290664ab&utm_source=campaign_monitor_us&utm_term=How%20investing%20in%20public%20health%20could%20cure%20many%20health%20care%20problems

Now that the Cassidy-Graham bill has been pulled, it’s a good time to think about concrete ways to improve health and health care in our country. Despite advances in medicine, U.S. health care spending grew to US$3.2 trillion in 2015, or 17.8 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. To contain health care costs, the U.S. needs to invest in strengthening the public health system and reconsider approaches to making all Americans healthier.

Making Americans healthier should not be a partisan issue. Conservatives and progressives alike should agree on the importance of keeping Americans healthy – both on principled and financial grounds. The sicker the American people, the more expensive their care, and much of that cost will inevitably be borne by Medicare and Medicaid. Yet major challenges loom.

As the Dean of Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, I have dedicated my career to the health of populations, using science and evidence to transition to a world where health and health care are collective priorities for all. My research and that of others suggests that this situation can be improved, but it will require a major national strategy and commitment to invest in public health – one that can be highly cost-effective.

Just the facts

Take, for example, the toll of chronic disease in the U.S. As of 2012, about half of adult Americans were living with one or more chronic health conditions, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and one in four adults had two or more. Treating people with chronic diseases accounts for most of our nation’s health care costs. Eighty-six percent of the nation’s annual health care expenditures are for people with chronic and mental health conditions.

This problem will only grow as the U.S. population increases. And the census projects that the population will increase by 98 million between 2014 and 2060.

At the same time, America’s crumbling infrastructure is putting many Americans’ health at risk. The country’s drinking water systems, which are foundational to health, received a D grade on the 2017 Infrastructure Report Card of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Hazardous waste management and wastewater treatment earned only D+ grades.

The connection between health and infrastructure is strong: Infrastructure greatly affects access to healthy lifestyles. While access to clean drinking water and waste treatment are paramount, there are other examples, too.

Sidewalks and bike lanes encourage physical activity; public parks provide space for exercise and rejuvenation; and public transit is crucial to getting people out of cars, encouraging walking and, of course, reducing pollution and congestion. Subways and buses also enable older adults to reach needed services and remain in their homes longer.

Improvements to infrastructure are typically one-time expenses with recurring benefits. For example, one new sidewalk benefits an entire generation of walkers and runners. Research shows that every $1,300 New York City invested in building bike lanes in 2015 provided benefits equivalent to one additional year of life at full health over the lifetime of all city residents.

Other studies also have shown that preventing illness is far less expensive than paying for treatment. Trust for America’s Health estimates that “an investment of $10 per person per year in proven community-based programs to increase physical activity, improve nutrition, and prevent smoking and other tobacco use could save the country more than $16 billion annually within five years. This is a return of $5.60 for every $1.” With ever-rising health care costs, how can we overlook such opportunities?

Prevention policies and cessation help

The focus of American health care and health-related research needs to be shifted to include prevention, not just treatment. The “Cancer Moonshot,” which has strong bipartisan support, is a vital step in this direction, providing $1.8 billion in funding over seven years.

Cancer prevention must be a high priority, and the success of this effort could inspire a national consensus around future commitments to tackle other diseases and conditions.

Another prevention priority should be healthy aging. Today there are more than 46 million Americans aged 65 years or older; and by 2060, the number of seniors is expected to more than double, according to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Census Bureau. Promoting healthy aging for older Americans should, therefore, be paramount.

And healthy aging begins far earlier than 65 or 70. Obesity, in particular, may be determined in early childhood, even before. According to research by my Mailman School colleague Andrew Rundle, prenatal exposure to air pollution raises risk for obesity in childhood. His research shows that children who are overweight or obese at age five are more likely to be overweight or obese by age 50. We also know that these adults, and increasingly children too, will be more likely to have diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol.

Efforts at smoking cessation should also be increased. The total economic cost of smoking in the United States is more than $300 billion a year in direct medical care and lost productivity, according to the CDC.

That’s more than we’re spending on the Cancer Moonshot annually.

Thinking big

America has extraordinary research capability. The NIH invests nearly $32.3 billion annually in medical research for the American people. Targeted cancer therapies, for instance, are the focus of much anticancer drug development, according to the National Cancer Institute. Precision Medicine is a top priority at the NIH and other research agencies. Even at $32 billion, Americans are investing in the NIH only 1 percent of what we spend on health care annually. The U.S. should build its advantage by increasing research funding to enhance the potential of breakthroughs in preventing known diseases as well as future threats.

There is reason for optimism. The good news stems in large part from the fact that chronic diseases and conditions – such as heart disease, stroke, cancer, Type 2 diabetes, obesity and arthritis – are among the most preventable of all health problems. At least half of these diseases could be prevented, and we are making strides. Death rates from heart disease, the No. 1 cause of death in America, have been reduced by nearly half, for instance, since 1990, according to the American Heart Association.

The growth and aging of the U.S. population and the epidemic of chronic diseases and conditions pose major challenges for America’s health care costs, no matter how health care is constructed. But a relentless focus on public health – and disease prevention in all its dimensions – is the best way to reduce pressure on costs.

Beyond Healthcare CRM

Click to access BeyondHealthcareCRM.pdf

Image result for Beyond Healthcare CRM

 

Population Health Advisors

Click to access Translating_Data_Analytics_into_Population_Health_Insights_BSW.pdf

Related image

 

Five questions on healthcare following Price’s resignation

Five questions on healthcare following Price’s resignation

Five questions on healthcare following Price's resignation

Tom Price’s resignation as Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary creates a big leadership void at the top of the department tasked with administering a health law Republicans hate.

President Trump accepted the embattled secretary’s resignation Friday on the heels of Politico reports detailing how Price’s travel on military and charter jet flights had cost taxpayers more than $1 million since May.

“I have spent forty years both as a doctor and public servant putting people first,” Price said in his resignation letter. “I regret that the recent events have created a distraction from these important objectives.”

Price’s resignation also follows the GOP’s latest failure to repeal and replace ObamaCare, which Trump had wanted accomplished quickly earlier in the year.

Here are five questions about what comes next:

Who is taking over?

Dr. Don Wright, a career official at HHS,  will serve as acting HHS secretary effective Saturday. Wright has served as the acting assistant secretary for health at HHS since February after joining the agency in 2007, according to HHS’s website.

He’s held a number of positions during his tenure at HHS, including deputy assistant secretary for health and director of the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

During his time at HHS, Wright oversaw the national dietary guidelines and the department’s health literacy agenda.

He also represented the U.S. at the World Health Organization executive board.

Prior to joining HHS, Wright worked for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Before he started working for the government, he worked for 15 years in the private sector at a clinic and consulting practice in Texas.

What comes next on ObamaCare?

Congressional Republicans won’t be voting to repeal ObamaCare anytime soon. That’s because the vehicle they were using to repeal President Obama’s signature health law without requiring a single Democratic vote expires Saturday.

The focus will now be on how HHS implements the health law.

ObamaCare supporters and local groups tasked with enrolling consumers in the exchanges, known as navigators, are openly frustrated with the administration.

Democrats are arguing that the White House is blatantly sabotaging the law. They point to the administration’s decision to shorten the open enrollment window by half. In late August, HHS announced it was slashing advertising funding by 90 percent and cutting funding for navigator groups by 41 percent.

Open enrollment begins Nov. 1.

Who could replace Price permanently?

Several names have been reported as possibilities for taking over Price’s job.

One is Seema Verma, who heads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. She was an architect of several state-tailored Medicaid waivers, notably Indiana’s Medicaid expansion program when Vice President Pence was governor. Several Democrats joined Republicans to confirm Verma in a 55 to 43 Senate vote.

Verma was also dispatched to the Hill during the Senate’s ObamaCare repeal bill effort in attempts to smooth over intra-party divisions over how to tackle Medicaid.

Another name being floated is Scott Gottlieb, the Food and Drug Administration commissioner. A handful of Democrats also supported Gottlieb’s nomination.

Politico also noted that Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin was rumored to be a possible replacement, but Shullkin has had questionable travel expense of his own.

Before Trump nominated Price, a short-list of candidates for the HHS job included Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson, former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) and former New Jersey state Sen. Rich Bagger, according to a list obtained by Buzzfeed.

What will the confirmation process be like?

It’s unclear when Trump plans to nominate Price’s replacement. But Price’s resignation is setting up a potentially nasty confirmation process in the Senate.

Democrats have accused the Trump administration of trying to sabotage ObamaCare and whomever is nominated will likely be asked about how they would handle the law.

“Throughout his brief time leading the Department of Health and Human Services, Tom Price has repeatedly abused the public trust and betrayed the agency’s mission to improve Americans’ health care,” Sen. Ron Wyden, ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a statement Friday.

“I hope that his resignation will mark the beginning of a new chapter for the Trump administration’s health care agenda. Tom Price’s replacement needs to be focused on implementing the law as written by Congress and keeping the president’s promise to bring down the high cost of prescription drugs.”

Democrats were opposed to Price’s confirmation, mostly because of questions about his stock trades and investments, which they said were a conflict of interest.

In protest, Democrats didn’t show up to the Finance Committee’s confirmation hearing, and Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) used a procedural maneuver to push through the nomination. He could likely do that again if Democrats don’t show up.

The whole process took a little less than three months, and it’s unlikely this one will move any faster.

That means HHS is unlikely to have a permanent health secretary in time for ObamaCare’s fifth open enrollment season.

Will Price still pay for his charter seats?

Price said he would pay $52,000 to the U.S. Treasury for the cost of his seats on the private charter planes. That’s a small amount compared to the more than $1 million he reportedly racked up.

But there are also questions about whether he still plans to pay that money back.

“Wait… did we get our money back first?” asked Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.)

Price, who was worth more than $8 million in January according to his nomination disclosure forms, didn’t mention the money in his resignation letter.