VINDICATION BY ADMINISTRATIVE FIAT

So one of the ongoing discussions in our marriage is over the value of fruit snacks, which is distinct from the value of snacking on fruit. For the non-parental, “fruit snacks” are (in my wife’s opinion) a healthy food kids will actually eat, or (in my opinion) cross-branded GummiBears shot full of synthetic vitamin C in an effort to convince guilt-ridden parents that they’re not really giving their kids a small bag of candy. My stance is, if you want your child to eat fruit, then give them fruit, since it’s cheaper and healthier than giving them a bag of little grape-flavored SpongeBobs. My wife’s stance is, kids think fruit is slimy and at least fruit snacks have vitamin C.

Anyway, my stepdaughter (who shares her stepdad’s fondness for white peaches and Gala apples) starts 1st grade next week, and the school she goes to requires parents to send along two healthy snacks in addition to lunch. Now, guess what is specifically excluded from the list of healthy snacks, along with candy, cookies, and chips? Hint: it’s not white peaches.

SAY ANYTHING . . .

Yesterday I asked the question of why health care costs so much. For the record, the question was occasioned by a bill for my wife’s six-hour hospitalization for pre-term labor–$1800.

Today in the Washington Post (thanks, OTB), there’s a bi-partisan effort (Sens. Bill Frist and Hillary Clinton) to spread the blame without providing any real answers to the problem of Malthusian health costs. I’ll give Frist and Clinton credit for pointing out that, essentially, we’ve got an outdated system based on diagnosing emergent health problems rather than preventing such problems in the first place. I only wish they’d come up with a solution, rather than just reiterating what we all know to be true already. (It’s also telling that there’s not a word about tort reform in this article.)

A huge part of the problem is that we’re, for the most part, lousy health-care consumers. We expect far too much of doctors, and educate ourselves far too little about the workings of our bodies. The classic example of this is the patient who demands antibiotics for a cold, which is a viral infection for which antibiotics are about as effective as eye of newt and tongue of salamander.

But we’d also rather take a pill than change our lifestyles, even though we know little about the long-term effects of the medicines we take. I love cheeseburgers, but I’d rather stick to my plan of one really good burger a month (and hold the fries, please) than take a medicine that might destroy my liver, but will keep my cholesterol down. In other words, I’d rather learn the proper way to incorporate cheeseburgers into my diet than depend on pharmaceutical companies to protect me from the effects of eating them too often.

We all know that “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” So why don’t we have incentives built into our system to encourage people to lead healthier lives?
–> read more