Final Exam

.docx

School

North Carolina State University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

354

Subject

Economics

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

1

Uploaded by SargentAtomBison30 on coursehero.com

Policy 1: In the podcast presented by B2 about Vinay Prasad on Cancer Drugs, it was presented that the market for pharmaceutical drugs is not an actual market, and that cancer drugs have such a wide variety that markets are able to thrive off of them. One argument for this policy is the use of incentives. Medical companies and pharmaceutical companies use incentives, such as profits, to incentivize people into making these medications, which may not even be effective drugs, but they do it because it results in a large amount of revenue, and profits are attractive. One argument against this policy is the argument of trade-offs. In this case, the trade-off would be the choice between making more revenue or saving a patient’s life. If pharmaceutical companies choose to focus on their revenue, they are trading off saving a cancer patients life to create a new drug. If companies are paying money for the drugs, that are essentially paying for a patient’s life extension, or paying for your own life. Policy 2 : In the podcast presented by A4 about medical conservatives, the policy talked about was that drug companies should be forced to place money into a public resource who would then design and run the trails. The goal is to consider the costs, benefits, and economics in terms of patient outcomes. One argument for this policy is market competition and monopoly power. When you look at patient outcomes, you are awarding the patient which provides the innovator with monopoly power, which means they are able to limit the availability of the product and set prices that are above the marginal cost of production. One argument against this policy is market pricing and producers. In the market, high prices tell producers to do more, and people spend a lot of money on healthcare. Prices, however, only tell producers how much to allocate their resources, it will not tell producers how scarce a product is. If the price isn’t allocated, something else will be, such as the willingness to wait, and who you know in the medical field. Policy 3 : In the podcast presented by C1 about Employer-sponsored Health Insurance, the problem of high costs associated with physicians providing unnecessary test/procedures was presented. To solve this, it was suggested to transition from fee-for-service care to value-based care. One argument for this policy is that value-based care lowers healthcare costs by using marginal analysis. By doing so, healthcare providers should only increase the payment of a patients visit (increase marginal cost) only if it will increase patient outcome (marginal benefit). However, if the cost of the procedure outweighs the benefit, meaning the patient wouldn’t benefit from the procedure, then the test should not be performed. By doing so, providers will realize that they do not have to order tests/procedures for their patients if it doesn’t benefit them. One argument against this policy is that fee-for-service incentivizes providers to order additional tests and procedures by associating additional income for each additional test and procedure that is ordered. Since this generates more income for the providers, it is a more attractive model, and therefore physicians/providers will want to use this model more, than a model that will not reward them monetarily.
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help