If expenditures on medical services are less effective in reducing mortality rates than are changes in lifestyle behavior, why does the U.S. continue to spend an increasing portion of its resources on medical care? Feel free to draw upon your own experiences as well as the library or other resources to answer this question. Sites all References.
I have responded to your question: “If expenditures on medical services are less effective in reducing mortality rates than are changes in lifestyle behavior, why does the U.S. continue to spend an increasing portion of its resources on medical care?” I have cited references and added two articles to draw on as well. I hope this helps.
This question deals with two issues, the negative relationship between mortality rate and lifestyle behavior change and, on the other hand, the increasing US healthcare expenditures. How do they fit? How can we make sense of these two seemingly oppositional statements?
1. Human Agency/Free Will
Research from various disciplines lends support to the relationship between lifestyle and health. However, just because the relationship exists, human agency and free will exists alongside. The question relevant here is, how does one motivate people to live a lifestyle that promotes health instead of illness and disease? Part of the responsibility falls on the government to fund education and preventive and early detection interventions. In fact, the World Health Organization holds this position:
“3 April 2003 | GENEVA — Cancer rates could further increase by 50% to 15 million new cases in the year 2020, according to the World Cancer Report, the most comprehensive global examination of the disease to date. However, the report also provides clear evidence that healthy lifestyles and public health action by governments and health practitioners could stem this trend, and prevent as many as one …