Would health-care reform affect invention, and innovation, of medical equipment?
Sunday, January 31st, 2010 at
11:08 am
MRI’s, PET and CAT Scans, etc… R&D is expensive. And the cost to own/rent medical equipment is very high, so Hospitals and Doctors need to keep using it and bill insurance companies.
For good or bad, would this change? Would companies still be motivated to produce better equipment?
Beatle Dave…is that You?!!!
Very interesting answers. And very contradictory to each other.
Filed under: Pet Health Insurance
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
I can’t imagine why invention and innovation would be effected.
They might use it as an excuse but that would be the only reason I could think of.
It would affect anything that reqwuired investment because nobody is going to put a lot of money in something without a good chance at a profit. That is what is wrong in Canada and other socialized countries – their medical industry as become stale and stagnant.
Good question.
First of all, let me just say that I think part of the reason US health care is the most expensive in the world is due to too many MRIs and CAT scans and such, so I suspect any attempts to reduce run away health care will have to reduce this.
Would that affect innovation though? I don’t think so. I suspect it will still be very lucrative to develop a new medical equipment if it works better than the old stuff, they will not sell as many machines as before, but that just means selling each at a bit more profit. The marketing channels might change, the sales force might look a little different, but I doubt the R&D looks different….just my two cents…
Most equipment innovation were developed at publicly funded University hospitals so it probably not have much effect on R&D only on the number that are purchesed. However people are worried about the effect on new drugs because the trials to show they work are very expensive and under the current system it is paid for by drug companies, If we reduce their profit the government will have to pay for some of the cost of drug trials if we want the same number of new drugs to come to market.
No. Just more pain meds and more commercial advertising, if you can imagine that.
The companies will most likely be reduced to making replacement parts for existing equipment. there wont be money for improvements. Less medical tests will be done,more pain pills perscribed. Just look at Canada or Europe it is on its way here.
no a socialistic non-profit approach will lead to new world shattering inventions in both technique and treatment for the sole benefit of the masses.
All the more reason for a single payer plan. Because it is so damm expensive. But understand, if corporations can charge the goverment $12.00 for a screw, $469.00 for a hammer, $3000. 00 for a toilet, you can bet there is incentive. Who would’nt want a contract with the goverment. The competition that would be created by having the goverment as a player would help drive the costs down and finally become mangeable for both goverment and healthcare recipients.
Much like what they did at the VA.