Rearranging the Deck Chairs: Death Displacement

Friday, September 23, 2011

One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved
Part III: Death Displacements Are Temporary

Saving lives sounds quite heroic, but the reality is that we are at best only displacing or delaying death for a few years.

We will all die. We will all die. We will all die……
We spend the most health care dollars at the end of life in ways that are wasted.
We spend the most on just a few and the least on the most.
We spend so much at the end of life for few that the quality of life is impaired for many.
We spend over $40,000 on 1% of the US pop and less than $800 per person on 50%.
We allow half of medical education economic impact to be sent to a few dozen zip codes in 6 states.

And we steal from future generations to pay for current generations that can contribute less in this life while depriving generations to come.

More cost for little gain has become epidemic. Higher status populations already are maximizing outcomes. Improvements for many if not most Americans are about daily living conditions - conditions worsening as more goes to fewer. Morbidity and mortality are already worsening in ways that the Million Hearts Campaign cannot touch.

Perhaps what is most missing from health leadership (and from government because of health leadership) is lack of understanding of what is preventable or not. After 100 years of solid advances in many areas, we have accomplished the easier and less costly advances for the major gains in life. We are working against
social determinant limitsthe limits of preventable in some and limitations of belief in preventable in othersthe lack of the reality of death in nearly all peoplethe limits of understanding of highly intelligent but lowly aware leaders

You must know what people can do and cannot do to understand how health outcomes can be impacted or not impacted by interventions regarding physicians or patients.

The body has limits as we age and accumulate damage and fixing one part does not mean much gain as other body parts can and do fail. We can fix the body but fixing the mind is still limited.

The perspective of a physician may be helpful. The first time you "save a patient life" by an astute preventive diagnosis such as an aortic aneurism - you feel good. But when your patient dies of a heart attack 6 months later, you begin to be aware of such limitations. Your actions helped take away half of his remaining life or 3 good months out of his last 6.
The family is still grateful that you “found the aneurism in time” but have no real way to grasp what you have figured out.

And you begin to be aware of what can or cannot be accomplished. Once this awareness is gained during training for some, during the early career for others, or later in some who provide direct patient care, even more awareness can be gained. When few gain such awareness, the past mistakes are repeated again and again. Physicians can bring the numbers to life and awareness and they can also help bring the false assumptions to awareness.


One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved
Part IV: Poor Understanding of Preventable

Taught One Way But Narrowly and Not Globally

We err in a number of assumptions about life, health, and death. We have essentially decided to do more and more as a knee jerk response for decades. More interventions, more workforce, more services, more technology, etc. We have continued to do more even after more has failed to work well, other than to increase costs massively for health care. We are not SMART and this means less specific, more costly, and less efficient - by design.

Being taught one way is a common pathway for health professionals and PhDs and MBAs and JDs but learning to grasp the global concepts necessary for an entire nation to do well is quite another.

Focusing on ever greater technology has not worked well. It is only recently that overall cancer outcomes improved after decades of effort and high cost - and the major gains were made in stopping smoking, something already significantly accomplished with ever less to gain for fewer.

A decent awareness of the relationship of social determinants to health outcomes can indicate that simple changes such as aspirin and reductions of BP smoking, cholesterol, or transfats may not really accomplish what we have seen in past studies. We should understand that interventions are limited in any number of populations where what is predicted may not work.
  • We should understand that nationwide hypertension treatment behavior changes in physicians (UK) did not result in better outcomes for UK patients.
  • We should understand the very basics of "correlation is not causation"  Instead we have more studies that use correlations to predict even with the correlations themselves explain so little of better outcomes - also due to too little known
  • Later blogs indicate the problem when associations claim benefits for innovations that are really just rearrangements of social determinant characteristics - in this case a promotion of the Continuity Medical Home. What Do Medical Home Studies Indicate?

    We should understand that quality improvements may not be possible with basic interventions in low income or underserved populations, as noted by Hong in JAMA with regard to Pay for Performance. We have even more implementations of pay for performance despite known consequences and failures such as UK BP.
But we fail in basic understanding, so we have top leaders propose changes that are not likely to work or will work much less well than predicted.
Priorities in Prevention

We constantly fail to understand what is preventable. We have battled for centuries. Civilizations have risen and fallen and those surviving have passed on the best priorities. We have addressed these areas earliest (by trial and error and other methods). What we have now in the US is the result of centuries of effort. We point to many US advances in sciences but forget about public health and other areas even more basic. We have made the easy high yield low cost efforts such as clean water, sanitation, basic vaccination, and basic drug interventions in areas such as hypertension, antibiotics, etc.

What we must pay to accomplish improved health is more and more and the result is less and less. We have many health leaders that have taken public health 101 but fail to understand the basics of more and more required to move from 80% to 90% to 95% in vaccination, BP, smoking, and other areas.

We are losing these basic battles for clean water, sanitation, and immunization that are high yield and we focus on areas with less potential for improved health.

Populations are limited as much or more by social determinant areas that are often linked to the major causes of death and their risk factors in ways that are difficult to separate

But with poor understanding of preventable, of illness, of death, of the American people, and of  the limits of health care, more battles may be lost than won - and in areas outside of health.
One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved
Part V: The Case for Basic Health Access not Million Hearts

Health and Human Services needs more from health access and more about health access. Health access is the key to addressing the areas indicated by Million Hearts
  • Aspirin is not a blanket solution and requires consultation with an experienced health professional, preferably primary care or internal medicine in training or nursing. Aspirin does kill and maim at higher rates when used in the wrong way in the wrong people. HHS lists the areas where aspirin can save, but also HHS can save lives by fewer using Aspirin when it is not indicated. Doing no harm also involves expanding use in the right populations according to their risk factors and characteristics without increasing use in the wrong populations.
  • Hypertension successes are failing and hypertension failures are more and more about primary care workforce failures. Clearly more and more with high blood pressure in emergency rooms is just a tip of the iceberg situation – and one going downhill fast. Million Hearts designs can distract from primary care design failures and could contribute to more fragmentation of BP management as new players (pharmacists, retail clinics, Walgreens) enter an already confusing field. Is it a good idea for smokers to go to retail stores that prominently display and sell tobacco products?
  • Smoking interventions that are easy have been implemented. Getting more doctors to confront patients is less likely and the patients are changing as well. Side effects of smoking cessation drugs are significant with many yet to be discovered. Is it a good idea to promote more and more drug solutions to solve drug additions – such as smoking and other areas? The nation has had hundreds of millions of dollars of tobacco settlement money to accomplish smoking cessation and substantial taxation – yet smoking remains prominent and may be making gains in certain younger populations. How will we accomplish more with less, including less awareness, less funding, and more negative influences and side effects of interventions? Also we are moving toward more widespread smoking – with legalized marijuana. More interactions are possible that result in poor health. Higher taxes on tobacco and alcohol products also have consequences on poor, near poor, and lower income populations – so do lotteries.
  • Smoking cessation also may not result in changes in health outcomes. Smoking as a variable represents much more than just smoking. Smoking is not just a simple bivariate representation of a single adverse behavior. Even with smoking cessation eliminated from an individual, the other risk factors remain within the individual (drug use, education, poverty, employment). These and other factors have associations with social determinants. Million Hearts plans for physicians to tell patients to stop smoking. This also requires the workforce that accesses patients at risk. The ability for physicians to tell patients about smoking cessation also depends upon health access for patients and sufficient basic health access workforce. Both areas appear to be set for even greater limitations. How are declines from over 100,000 to less than 50,000 primary care internists going to help with this area? How can family medicine help any more locked at 100,000 with no way to increase since the 1980 design of 3000 graduates per year is still the design 32 class years later.  How can more non-physician clinicians help when expansions of annual graduates are negated by steadily fewer remaining in primary care and especially in family practice – the only choice that results in enhanced distribution to 30,000 zip codes with 65% of the US population and lower to lowest workforce levels – by design.
  • Dietary interventions by dieticians have not worked out well in past studies, yet this did not prevent the Million Hearts proposals regarding salt, cholesterol, and transfat. Basic understandings of the limited food choices facing many Americans left behind have also been left behind. Million Hearts goals are again related to access to basic health services with integration of nutrition, mental health, health education, family, parenting, and other counseling. Stress, diet, risky behaviors, social determinants, health access, and health outcomes are interrelated in many ways that make each difficult to separate. This does not stop the assumptions of various leaders, associations, and corporations, however.
It is too late to stop the Million Hearts bandwagon and we should all hope that it actually works to save lives and make lives better.

But we should not allow Million Hearts to distract from the basic health needs of 160 million Americans left behind in one or more dimensions - and by aberrant designs.

Perhaps more troubling is the tendency to scapegoat behaviors of individuals behind in various health or education or income outcomes - rather than aberrant designs by a nation that send funding more specifically to those with most funds and less to those with least spending already.

And recent events and situations are frightening confirmations of the value of scapegoating and distraction rather than facing real issues and the most important issues.


Both videos are similar as the crowd rallied, led on by selfless individuals, and the group coordinated efforts to save one of their own.

When we all have the same concerns for most of our youth left behind and for most Americans left behind in basic health services, we will have a great nation by the numbers and by what has been considered great for centuries. Civilization requires nothing less that sacrifice by those older for those younger or youngest. Indeed this is the only real progress for those that are still alive – temporarily as are we all.


The Million Hearts Campaign has been shaped by those leading health care – government, associations, business, and insurance. Million Hearts is not a poor choice in itself. It is what Million Hearts represents that is the problem. Million Hearts represents numerous choices past, present, and future that have not worked for most Americans. These continued choices distract and divert attention from what works. A focus upon diseases and risk factors is quite different when compared to specific focus upon the basic needs of most Americans.

  • One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved   Million Hearts is another attempt to turn risk factors into saved lives - specifically reductions in heart attacks and strokes. The targets are once again human behavior changes (patient and provider) regarding aspirin, blood pressure, salt, cholesterol, and transfats. The campaign involves a number of federal agencies and health leaders, but the campaign will not address the top issues facing most Americans in their life, death, or health.
  •  Part I Million Hearts Limitations of Awareness  We demonstrate little understanding of what is preventable or not, the limits of risk factor modification (including the limits in the populations in need of modification), what it requires to accomplish greater prevention and greater proportions with prevention, what can result in fewer deaths (or what can result in more deaths).
  •  One Million Part III Higher Priorities A Million Hearts Campaign that hopes to change human behavior should realize that the easiest and best way to change human behavior is changing humans during birth to age 8. To have people decide to improve their health, they must be invested in a better future. Children reduced to growing up in survival mode may never be able to focus on a better future.
  •  Rearranging the Deck Chairs: Death Displacement Saving lives sounds quite heroic, but the reality is that we are at best only displacing or delaying death for a few years. We will all die. We will all die. We will all die…… We spend the most health care dollars at the end of life in ways that are wasted. We spend the most on just a few and the least on the most. We spend so much at the end of life for few that the quality of life is impaired for many.

Thanks to all 12,000 who have visited Basic Health Access in 2011.


Robert C. Bowman, M.D.        Basic Health Access Web    Basic Health Access Blog

Dr. Bowman is the North American Co-Editor of Rural and Remote Health and a Professor in Family Medicine at A T Still University School of Osteopathic Medicine. He was the founding chair of the Rural Medical Educators Group of the National Rural Health Association, he was the long term chair of the STFM Group on Rural Health, he is the founding director of Priority Infrastructure at http://www.infrastructureamerica.org/ and he is the author of the World of Rural Medical Education, and Physician Workforce Studies
SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely

One Million Part III Higher Priorities

One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved
Part II: Choices for Higher Priority Areas That Could Make a Difference

National leaders have chosen a campaign to prevent deaths. This appears to make sense except for higher priority areas that represent a choice for better life and a better nation.

National gold standards for interventions should involve better nurturing, better child development, and better early education - the most bang for the buck in any number of better outcomes for children, education, health, health outcomes, numerous budgets public and private, and a nation. Better outcomes for millions of children year after year in a number of areas should be the top focus.

A Million Hearts Campaign that hopes to change human behavior should realize that the easiest and best way to change human behavior is changing humans during birth to age 8.
To have people decide to improve their health, they must be invested in a better future. Children reduced to growing up in survival mode may never be able to focus on a better future.
Child well being is a travesty in our nation as is lowest GDP expenditures for birth to age 6. Child poverty is the single greatest measure of lack of a great nation and is related to all of the areas that make it less than great.
Another top priority would be universal health care coverage for primary care and public health (not all health care, at least not without about 10 years of this first) - Primary care and public health also become inseparable due to universal coverage. Designs can also take out profiteers that profit over lack of convenient health access due to current US designs.
Single payer for primary care fits well with universal coverage. All patients can go in, pay a co-pay, get care, and get on with their life and work and family.
The changes could also move the primary care nurse into a more effective direct care role. Instead of working for insurance companies to save them money, primary care nurses can help with best use of aspirin, cuts in aspirin use in those not appropriate, and best management of BP, cholesterol, smoking, diet, obesity, and stressors. The primary care nurse can also put the longitudinal track MD, DO, NP, PA, and RN students to work efficiently and effectively in health care teams, working for more care delivered at lower cost and where needed. Adding substantial workforce via student team training and facilitating greater care delivering by the most numerous primary care workforce (270,000 primary care nurses) should be a top priority.

And to actually come close to a Million Hearts safely, efficiently, and effectively, more basic health access will be required.
More and Better Primary Care Workforce Is Needed
·         to use aspirin more correctly and less incorrectly,
·         to address HBP, smoking, salt, and diet more correctly and less incorrectly.

Immediate Help for Primary Care Shortages Growing Shorter By the Day

We should be harnessing the energies of RN, MD, DO, NP and PA students to make primary care more efficient and effective. Student training that is SMART or specific for primary care can make a difference. With 9 – 12 months spend working in continuity primary care teams, substantial accomplishments are possible directly and indirectly that address Million Hearts and any number of other preventive efforts.

We need leaders that understand and promote long term student training rotations serving where primary care is needed - instead of traditional short rotations and exposures
·         that are a burden upon those delivering most needed primary care
·         that drive students and residents away from primary care
·         that are far too short to address any care at all
·         that are far too short to aid in understanding of health care team function.

And we might just delay the deaths of countless Americans in these and many other areas and in the process save millions for hospitals.

Hospital readmissions is just one area. Hospitals have been incented to dump patients too soon and student interventions can cut readmissions and result in better cost, quality, and access. In heart patients the students can work with dieticians or other health personnel to cut readmissions from 20% to less than 8% by working with diet, activity, smoking, salt, and needed connections between patients and their care givers. One glance at the food, freezer, refrigerator, and home situation can do much that a visit to a cardiologist or primary care practice can never accomplish.

WE WASTE TRAINING WORKFORCE and frustrate students that want to make a difference and chafe under designs that limit their ability to make a difference just as this limits their training. They can train in the most important areas of all - on the front lines working with those that deliver the care.

We need health care leadership that presents workable plans to government as Virchow promoted - not more of the same that has not been working - and certainly not MEDPAC recommendations for a ten year freeze on primary care reimbursement.

Any number of areas can yield a year of useful life for low cost expenditures - if we are not distracted from these areas by leaders focusing elsewhere - areas where the usual suspects are focused and have been for 100 years.


The Million Hearts Campaign has been shaped by those leading health care – government, associations, business, and insurance. Million Hearts is not a poor choice in itself. It is what Million Hearts represents that is the problem. Million Hearts represents numerous choices past, present, and future that have not worked for most Americans. These continued choices distract and divert attention from what works. A focus upon diseases and risk factors is quite different when compared to specific focus upon the basic needs of most Americans.

  • One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved   Million Hearts is another attempt to turn risk factors into saved lives - specifically reductions in heart attacks and strokes. The targets are once again human behavior changes (patient and provider) regarding aspirin, blood pressure, salt, cholesterol, and transfats. The campaign involves a number of federal agencies and health leaders, but the campaign will not address the top issues facing most Americans in their life, death, or health.
  •  Part I Million Hearts Limitations of Awareness  We demonstrate little understanding of what is preventable or not, the limits of risk factor modification (including the limits in the populations in need of modification), what it requires to accomplish greater prevention and greater proportions with prevention, what can result in fewer deaths (or what can result in more deaths).
  •  One Million Part III Higher Priorities A Million Hearts Campaign that hopes to change human behavior should realize that the easiest and best way to change human behavior is changing humans during birth to age 8. To have people decide to improve their health, they must be invested in a better future. Children reduced to growing up in survival mode may never be able to focus on a better future.
  •  Rearranging the Deck Chairs: Death Displacement Saving lives sounds quite heroic, but the reality is that we are at best only displacing or delaying death for a few years. We will all die. We will all die. We will all die…… We spend the most health care dollars at the end of life in ways that are wasted. We spend the most on just a few and the least on the most. We spend so much at the end of life for few that the quality of life is impaired for many.

Part I Million Hearts Limitations of Awareness

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved
Part I: Limitations of Awareness

It is not a bad idea to battle against preventable illnesses and deaths. Million Hearts is a campaign designed by top federal and health care experts with the goals of changing people behavior and physician behavior. These behaviors are focused on an increase in the use of aspirin and a decrease in smoking, a decrease in blood pressure, a decrease in cholesterol, a decrease in salt intake, and a decrease in transfat.

When a nation goes to battle, it must know its enemies, the limits of its methods, the strengths of the enemy, the false assumptions that you will make, and the weakness of your own leadership – glaringly apparent in the first months or years of any war.

"It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."   Sun Tzu   Art of War (Good timing as this was on Star Trek Next Generation as I was writing this).

We will be imperiled in every battle in Million Hearts as well as in the battle for a Million better child outcomes and a Million of any number of federal, state, or private efforts - because we fail in understanding our strengths, weaknesses, and assumptions.

We demonstrate little understanding of what is preventable or not, the limits of risk factor modification (including the limits in the populations in need of modification), what it requires to accomplish greater prevention and greater proportions with prevention, what can result in fewer deaths (or what can result in more deaths), and

We fail when we focus inappropriately on preventable illnesses and deaths when there are other higher priority areas - balancing budgets, stimulating jobs, reducing health care costs, better children, and health access. We fail when we can accomplish one Million Hearts and much more by improving children and better health access.

And we forget that we cannot win against the enemy of death and many if not most of its causes. Death is inevitable. We all will die. All efforts will fail as death will conquer. – You get the point, but do the experts?
If you do not think something as simple as aspirin can damage or kill, try this illustration. The same computations that indicate lives saved also indicate the substantial group not improved, the one that has a hemorrhagic stroke, those that have bad outcomes anyway, and those that have bad outcomes because of aspirin. There is also the problem of going to the store and finding aspirin at a reasonable cost - one certain to increase because of the retail opportunities afforded by Million Hearts. So even in best case settings, Million Hearts efforts can be expensive and costly – especially in populations that do not actually benefit or that are at higher risk from harm.

Most importantly right now, the nation has a great need to focus on very pressing priorities. Health care leaders must focus on health care in rural, underserved, and primary care settings – health care more endangered with each passing day.

We have a ton of tough high priority problems right now. Yet we have leaders that are spending their political and media and social organization capital in areas that are not going to help the nation right here right now where it needs help, particularly with primary care facing serious problems and health care costs moving to 20% of GDP and beyond.

This bothers me greatly as a primary care physician. Million Hearts interventions all demand more primary care workforce (RN, MD, DO, NP, PA, team members) and a more experienced primary care workforce and a better trained primary care workforce and primary care workforce that is distributed to 30,000 zip codes or adjacent zip codes where 65% of Americans need primary care. Failures in basics such as education, health coverage, and primary care make it difficult for any interventions to succeed. Again I would have to point out that changes in the design that free up primary care nurses from onerous tasks with little benefit (insurance and government requirements especially) and place them back into direct patient care encounters and directing health care encounters - would be one of the best ways to address Million Hearts and health access improvements for 160 million left behind.

SMART designs work to achieve more for less cost with better result. 

Also sending RN, MD, DO, NP, and PA students for long term continuity experiences with primary care health teams would greatly expand primary care services and access and training and outcomes - by design.



The Million Hearts Campaign has been shaped by those leading health care – government, associations, business, and insurance. Million Hearts is not a poor choice in itself. It is what Million Hearts represents that is the problem. Million Hearts represents numerous choices past, present, and future that have not worked for most Americans. These continued choices distract and divert attention from what works. A focus upon diseases and risk factors is quite different when compared to specific focus upon the basic needs of most Americans.

  • One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved   Million Hearts is another attempt to turn risk factors into saved lives - specifically reductions in heart attacks and strokes. The targets are once again human behavior changes (patient and provider) regarding aspirin, blood pressure, salt, cholesterol, and transfats. The campaign involves a number of federal agencies and health leaders, but the campaign will not address the top issues facing most Americans in their life, death, or health.
  •  Part I Million Hearts Limitations of Awareness  We demonstrate little understanding of what is preventable or not, the limits of risk factor modification (including the limits in the populations in need of modification), what it requires to accomplish greater prevention and greater proportions with prevention, what can result in fewer deaths (or what can result in more deaths).
  •  One Million Part III Higher Priorities A Million Hearts Campaign that hopes to change human behavior should realize that the easiest and best way to change human behavior is changing humans during birth to age 8. To have people decide to improve their health, they must be invested in a better future. Children reduced to growing up in survival mode may never be able to focus on a better future.
  •  Rearranging the Deck Chairs: Death Displacement Saving lives sounds quite heroic, but the reality is that we are at best only displacing or delaying death for a few years. We will all die. We will all die. We will all die…… We spend the most health care dollars at the end of life in ways that are wasted. We spend the most on just a few and the least on the most. We spend so much at the end of life for few that the quality of life is impaired for many.

Thanks to all 12,000 who have visited Basic Health Access in 2011.


Robert C. Bowman, M.D.        Basic Health Access Web    Basic Health Access Blog

Dr. Bowman is the North American Co-Editor of Rural and Remote Health and a Professor in Family Medicine at A T Still University School of Osteopathic Medicine. He was the founding chair of the Rural Medical Educators Group of the National Rural Health Association, he was the long term chair of the STFM Group on Rural Health, he is the founding director of Priority Infrastructure at http://www.infrastructureamerica.org/ and he is the author of the World of Rural Medical Education, and Physician Workforce Studies
SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely


One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved

Friday, September 16, 2011

Where Should Our Leaders and Our Designs Take Us as a Nation?



Million Hearts is another attempt to turn risk factors into saved lives - specifically reductions in heart attacks and strokes. The targets are once again human behavior changes (patient and provider) regarding aspirin, blood pressure, salt, cholesterol, and transfats. The campaign involves a number of federal agencies and health leaders, but the campaign will not address the top issues facing most Americans in their life, death, or health.

Health and Human Services in the United States represents biggest government that dwarfs all other world governments other than the United States government and total government in all but a few other nations. Health and Human Services and other government leaders play a key role in guiding health care in our nation as well as economics, jobs, and health spending. Not surprisingly those shaping our health care designs invest billions of dollars to influence our government, particularly with health care a much more stable investment compared to most for the last decades.

The Million Hearts Campaign has been shaped by those leading health care – government, associations, business, and insurance. Million Hearts is not a poor choice in itself. It is what Million Hearts represents that is the problem. Million Hearts represents numerous choices past, present, and future that have not worked for most Americans. These continued choices distract and divert attention from what works. A focus upon diseases and risk factors is quite different when compared to specific focus upon the basic needs of most Americans.

The Million Hearts Campaign has been shaped by those leading health care – government, associations, business, and insurance. Million Hearts is not a poor choice in itself. It is what Million Hearts represents that is the problem. Million Hearts represents numerous choices past, present, and future that have not worked for most Americans. These continued choices distract and divert attention from what works. A focus upon diseases and risk factors is quite different when compared to specific focus upon the basic needs of most Americans.

  • One Million Hearts Saved or 160 Million Lives Improved   Million Hearts is another attempt to turn risk factors into saved lives - specifically reductions in heart attacks and strokes. The targets are once again human behavior changes (patient and provider) regarding aspirin, blood pressure, salt, cholesterol, and transfats. The campaign involves a number of federal agencies and health leaders, but the campaign will not address the top issues facing most Americans in their life, death, or health.
  •  Part I Million Hearts Limitations of Awareness  We demonstrate little understanding of what is preventable or not, the limits of risk factor modification (including the limits in the populations in need of modification), what it requires to accomplish greater prevention and greater proportions with prevention, what can result in fewer deaths (or what can result in more deaths).
  •  One Million Part III Higher Priorities A Million Hearts Campaign that hopes to change human behavior should realize that the easiest and best way to change human behavior is changing humans during birth to age 8. To have people decide to improve their health, they must be invested in a better future. Children reduced to growing up in survival mode may never be able to focus on a better future.
  •  Rearranging the Deck Chairs: Death Displacement Saving lives sounds quite heroic, but the reality is that we are at best only displacing or delaying death for a few years. We will all die. We will all die. We will all die…… We spend the most health care dollars at the end of life in ways that are wasted. We spend the most on just a few and the least on the most. We spend so much at the end of life for few that the quality of life is impaired for many.
Our Nation must stop, repeat stop, its magical thinking with far too much emphasis on innovation and reorganization and manipulations of numbers. We have far too little emphasis upon people - especially people with basic health needs and people that can address basic health needs - for entire careers with best experience and coordination and dedication. We fail to understand people and the people that serve people. When we understand most Americans and the teacher, nurse, public servant, public health, and primary care workforces that serve most Americans, we fail to understand America and what is best for Americans.

Introduction

For 100 years our national priorities have been focused upon health innovations and interventions that cost more, yield less, and benefit less.

The Million Hearts Campaign appears to be an attempt to save lives but it is still a continuation of the past 100 years and a process that no longer works for better lives or health for most Americans. Our leaders have been taught by the same people that have led the United States to the brink of financial ruin as we spend far too much on health care – impairing all budgets that involve people at all levels. This in itself makes government at all levels from school districts to the national level inefficient an ineffective as we have to cut teacher, public servant, nurse and other front line jobs just to satisfy the health care cost demands. Poor awareness has also impaired our judgment in defense expenditures, bailouts, and financial system rewards.

Those doing well in America are doing better than ever by any number of measures (top 1%, top 10%, CEOs, healthiest, wealthiest, most and best health care coverage, the most highly educated, children of professionals, highest property value living places, most social and political organization).

We have forgotten how to address the basics – basic birth to age 8 in children, basic health access, public health, clean water, sanitation, use of government dollars efficiently and effectively to make a nation more efficient and effective. We have forgotten how to maintain a nation and the people that maintain and progress a nation - those on the front line serving occupations. 

In the realm of major health campaigns, we have been focused on curing diseases such as breast cancer and heart disease. Meanwhile failures in health are more evident as well as failed health designs that make matters worse for the nation. More move toward health care in search of profits as health care (especially non-primary care) is one of few routes available to profit in a sinking United States economy – an economy sinking faster mainly due to too much health care for too few at costs far too high. These campaigns have begun to abuse statistics by making claims that are just not possible – reduce smoking and obesity and save 1 trillion dollars, spend much more now to get cures from research in the future after 50 years of little gain in cures, or save one Million Hearts.

Playing the same old tunes is not going to address the needs of 160 million Americans at the current time. Shell games indicating innovation as a solution or reorganization disrespect those who are dedicated to making a difference as well as those who need a difference made in their lives. Focusing ever more attention on one area that has had 50 years of work is not likely to result in much more improvement.

The limitations of the interventions are easily seen and are the same limitations facing 160 million Americans – whose health care is more about limitations and barriers than specific biomedical markers indicating some small increased probability of future death. These predictions also use equations that are far from complete, with much or most of the reason for future death unexplained. But this does not stop the biomedically trained, the biomedically profiting, the biomedically employed, or those representing biomedical interests. Until we understand much more about the human condition and human relationships with regard to health conditions, we will not address the barriers to better life and health.

Governments across the globe have been shaken up increasingly in recent years due to government that has grown distant from the people. The United States should pay attention more than which side should win. When government has leaders that are less representative of the people and less mindful of the people, there are any number of consequences to most of the people.

Our leaders in government are less and less representative of most Americans. Our professionals that shape America's decisions are less and less representative of America. Health care is a prime example. Our health care design has been shaped by few and fails in impact for most Americans. Our health care spending and the economic impact of health care favors a few Americans in a few locations with most Americans left out by design. In such a setting it is difficult to even craft a design that can help most Americans as those that can influence designs have such a poor grasp of how to impact the daily life and health needs of most Americans. Until dominant perspectives understand that excesses for some lead to consequences for most, there will not be improvement.

So we have Million Hearts that once again attempts to turn aspirin, blood pressure, salt, cholesterol, and transfats into better lives.

We are not quite to “let them eat cake” or “fiddling while Rome burns” but we are not going to receive much gain for the effort, especially for those in the 160 million left behind. The Million Hearts campaign will directly or indirectly reinforce the past decades of more done for less at higher cost with little benefit. The Million Hearts campaign will take interventions that work best on those doing well - interventions that work less well on those who are least well – in health and job and income categories.

The Million Hearts campaign will not introduce or reinforce tough decisions that should have been made each year for 30 or more years. We must spend less on the few and more on the many. We must reduce non-primary care spending and increase basic health services spending specific to places and populations that need the basics. We must redirect spending from those nearest death or those dying to interventions that would result in improved national outcomes for future generations.

Most of all the political and health care leaders of the United States must reinforce a single basic truth – we will all die. How we choose to live or die as well as our collective decisions that shape life and death, impact quality of life for far more people than we grasp at the current time.

It takes national campaigns to focus attention elsewhere, rather than the basic needs of most Americans left behind in so many ways important to a nation – in basic nurturing and child development, in early education, in basic health care, and in other basics. Only a focus on improving the daily lives of most Americans will improve America and such a focus may actually gain far more than a Million Hearts saved because spending a little more on the many in ways that make small improvements can have major improvements in outcomes. Allowing a continuation of ever more spend for fewer for less result is intolerable in health care.


Thanks to all 12,000 who have visited Basic Health Access in 2011.


Robert C. Bowman, M.D.        Basic Health Access Web    Basic Health Access Blog

Dr. Bowman is the North American Co-Editor of Rural and Remote Health and a Professor in Family Medicine at A T Still University School of Osteopathic Medicine. He was the founding chair of the Rural Medical Educators Group of the National Rural Health Association, he was the long term chair of the STFM Group on Rural Health, he is the founding director of Priority Infrastructure at http://www.infrastructureamerica.org/ and he is the author of the World of Rural Medical Education, and Physician Workforce Studies
SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timely