|
Distorted spending priorities in Canada CMAJ 2000;162:1402-4 I was intrigued by a recent news item in CMAJ entitled "Detecting hep C for $1.5 million a case."1 The title implies concern about the cost of a new program to identify donors infected with hepatitis C by nucleic acid amplification testing. I am concerned about any inference that the decision of the Canadian Blood Services to implement this program was cost-ineffective. I believe it would have been morally and fiscally irresponsible to decide otherwise. If screening for hepatitis C were not introduced, all of the carriers detected would be denied vital personal information and possible treatment. Some could donate again and infect additional blood recipients. People who received the contaminated, unscreened blood products could potentially infect others. The lives of up to 13 Canadians every year could be ruined, with far-reaching effects on their family, friends and associates. The treatment, lost productivity, early disability and death of these 13 people would actually prove to be even more costly than the screening program. Rather than focusing solely on the short-term cost-effectiveness of our underfunded health care system, let's look at the Canadian Blood Services' decision relative to the distorted priorities of our federal government. Consider, for example, the $30 million aid package recently offered to professional hockey franchises, the $3 million Ottawa spends on fireworks every Canada Day, the $2.4 billion of the $3 billion federal job creation program that our Auditor General says was wasted and the $5 billion spent on fruitless, politically motivated attempts to bail out defunct and poorly managed industries.2 We need to guard against pressures that could cause a return to the administratively and philosophically challenged processes that resulted in the demise of the Red Cross blood program and a lot of Canadians. If we do not, the worst thing about the Canadian health care system could be that we deserve it.
G.F.O. Tyers
References
© 2000 Canadian Medical Association or its licensors |