 |
 |
Hi I think this is quite interesting. We have Alan telling us that cost-effectiveness analysis is the only way to go, and Calum telling us that if we (or rather you, Americans) go that route then the spectre of 'rationing' will undermine major reform effort. Perhaps we should worry about value for money only when everyone is covered? But, then, neither Congress nor the CBO would allow that, would they? I think I would say focus on comparative effectiveness for the time being, and remove from the system (if you can, and if there are any) any ineffective interventions. It would be a start. Best, Adam -----Original Message----- From: Anglo-American Health Policy Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alan Maynard Sent: 11 July 2009 09:16 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: WSJ attacks NICE again - but 62 US Medical Societies speak out in favor of CER As ever necessary but not sufficient Simon! EBM stands for economics based medicine, not mere evidence based medicine! But gather the CBO interprets comparative effectiveness as cost effectiveness Alan On Jul 10 2009, Stevens, Simon L wrote: >In case you didn't see it, attached is a constructive intervention in >the comparative effectiveness debate from 62 medical societies. They've >apparently now written to the Senate in defense of the idea... > > > >Simon > > > > > >Simon Stevens > >UnitedHealth Center for Health Reform > >www.unitedhealthgroup.com/reform > > > >________________________________ > > >>From: Anglo-American Health Policy Network [mailto:[log in to unmask] ><mailto:[log in to unmask]> ] >>On Behalf Of Jost, Timothy >>Sent: July-08-09 8:45 AM >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: WSJ attacks NICE again > > > > >This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or >proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity >to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended >recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified >that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is >prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the >sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. > Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/secretariat/legal/disclaimer.htm