The role of NIH-funded research in raising healthcare costs

Back in August, I had written to JAMA in response to Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel's JAMA Letter to the Editor. In it, he claimed that support of NIH funding was dwindling because its breakthroughs have been largely exciting scientifically but not creating enough societal value. He attributes NIH research to rising medical costs and argues that NIH should only fund cost-lowering and value-creating research.

While I agree that commercially viable technologies should generate value in the form of better outcomes and lower overall costs, it is difficult to "control" research outcomes at the funding stage. So much of science is serendipity and luck - there are countless examples of famous medical breakthroughs that were being in the right place at the right time, from penicillin to Her2. 

You can find Dr. Emanuel's original letter here.
My letter in response here.
Dr. Emanuel's response here.

I haven't been good at writing in my blog for the past few months since business school started. I plan to blog about my experiences and thoughts on the MBA program at Duke starting in winter break. The fall semester has been crazy busy!

No comments :

Post a Comment