Last night, lawmakers in the House and Senate announced an agreement on the stimulus bill that includes $1.1 billion for research comparing the effectiveness of different treatments for disease. Although this investment in science represented only about a tenth of one percent of the $789 billion dollar package, it generated a disproportionate share of the complaints over the past few days. Opponents, initially the prescription drug industry and later some of our more vociferous pundits, raised the "rationing" flag and waived it wildly.

Its understandable why drug companies don't want the government to fund research on which treatments actually work best for patients. In order to get a drug approved, drug companies must research whether a drug is effective. But drug companies do not have to demonstrate that their new drug is actually more effective than long established treatments. And just like in laundry soap, "new" is not necessarily better, but it always costs more. So, while no one wants rationing, we all want to know that our money is well spent. Here's how small business owner Dave Ratner, of Dave's Pet and Soda City in Agawam, Massachusetts, described it last week to the House Committee on Small Business:

One of the biggest changes will be the development of consumer-friendly comparative cost and quality information. My customers know more about the pet products on my shelf than they do about the doctor down the street, and that is not right. People should be able to select the best quality care just as they choose between me and my competitors on a daily basis. Competition encourages lower prices and better quality. More and better appropriate competition could do wonders for health care.

Call it like it is, Dave!

Media Matters did us all a service by finding and posting the actual language of this section of the bill in a quick debunking of the story.

Thanks to the stalwart lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who understood that science is good, that we do need to know both that a new drug works AND that it works better than the readily available alternatives, and that independent, unbiased research funded by the federal government is a great first step to Dave's dream of real competition in health care.

We're still waiting for an official version of the final agreement to be posted online, but for now, here's a summary posted by Chris Bowers. We'll add a link to the final text as soon as its available.

UPDATE: Conference summary posted here.

comments (1)

We need to find out which ALTERNATIVE treatments work best also (not just which drugs work best). I have been treating my severe scoliosis for years with yoga and more recently with chiropractic (Pettibon and CLEAR Institute systems), and in the past year and a half have regrown one of the inches I have lost in height. Orthopedic surgeons would not operate on me at my age, (63 years) but alternative yoga and chiropractic treatments work! We need more research on how well these yoga and chiropractic treatments work vs. conventional surgery and bracing. Which is most cost-effective and has least side effects and bad outcomes? See my web site, www.paideiayoga.com or www.scoliosisyoga.org for more details.

Post a Comment (* indicates a required field)

*Name:

*Email Address:

URL:

*Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

*Security Code:

<<< You must enter this security code!

Remember Me? Yes No