So we know that people are living longer and longer. We also know that yearly health care costs are rising. We also seem to think we can keep the latter in control while continuing with the former.
The fact is that older people incur much larger healthcare costs over their lifetimes [1]. In fact, "[those 85+] consume three times as much health care per person as those 65–74, and twice as much as those 75–84." If we keep inventing new treatments to keep you going until the next crisis, or another drug to take to prevent yet another fatal condition, then we're going to have to realize that health care costs per life-time are going to increase, and that is going to be spread through the population through insurance.
Unless our lifetime earnings increase as fast as the cost of medical technology, we will reach a point where we cannot afford to live longer even though the treatments exist. We may get to a point where we have to make the hard decision of how long we want to wait until we retire and how long we really want to live after we retire.
I don't know what the solution is, but I can't help but notice that we are not in a sustainable situation.
The fact is that older people incur much larger healthcare costs over their lifetimes [1]. In fact, "[those 85+] consume three times as much health care per person as those 65–74, and twice as much as those 75–84."
That's why curing aging should be both a fiscal and moral imperative.
"So we know that people are living longer and longer. We also know that yearly health care costs are rising. We also seem to think we can keep the latter in control while continuing with the former."
This is a lie spread by the medical guild to convince you to give them more money. In face, the increase in life expectancy has leveled off during the past thirty years (citation: http://daveeriqat.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/us_life_expect...), the time period during which medical costs have risen so much. All of the extra trillions we've spent on medicine have done very little.
"The fact is that older people incur much larger healthcare costs over their lifetimes [1]."
This is, in large part, because older people have less energy, and are therefore easier to bully into handing all their money over to the medical guild.
"We may get to a point where we have to make the hard decision of how long we want to wait until we retire and how long we really want to live after we retire."
This is, again, BS spread by the medical industry to inflate prices. The US spends twice as much on healthcare as any other country, yet ranks 42nd in life expectancy (citation: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293008,00.html, from Fox News, no less). The obscene amounts of money are not working.
There are several reasons why US healthcare costs are higher than other countries, and there is certainly a lot of inefficiency that should be fixed. But one of the major reasons is that the US effectively subsidizes drug development for the rest of the world. US buyers generally have to pay full market rate, and then in other countries prices are fixed artificially low by government fiat. The US probably can't continue paying that subsidy forever, so eventually either other countries will have to pay more, or the US will also start fixing prices and thus research funds will dry up.
Demographics is destiny. It's inevitable that retirement ages will have to increase further, and advanced medical care paid for by government and insurers will be rationed. Hopefully the rationing will be done based on QALY analysis backed by hard data.
The fact is that older people incur much larger healthcare costs over their lifetimes [1]. In fact, "[those 85+] consume three times as much health care per person as those 65–74, and twice as much as those 75–84." If we keep inventing new treatments to keep you going until the next crisis, or another drug to take to prevent yet another fatal condition, then we're going to have to realize that health care costs per life-time are going to increase, and that is going to be spread through the population through insurance.
Unless our lifetime earnings increase as fast as the cost of medical technology, we will reach a point where we cannot afford to live longer even though the treatments exist. We may get to a point where we have to make the hard decision of how long we want to wait until we retire and how long we really want to live after we retire.
I don't know what the solution is, but I can't help but notice that we are not in a sustainable situation.
1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/