I love journalists, always looking for the easy answer the glib comment. As everybody knows we are in the mist of a flu epidemic (pandemic maybe?) of global proportion. Canada, with its socialized medicine determined that it would need 8 million vaccine doses for the entire population (basically because 2/3 of Canadian think they don't need vaccination). Needless to say with the recent death of a 13 year old boy in Ontario every parent is freeking out. Yet the authorities are not making the vaccine available to children, the government in order to maximize the effectiveness of the vaccine has targeted specific segments of the population, which do not yet include children.
Journalists at the CBC know that the vaccine can only be administered to a certain number of individuals at anyone time (you cannot vaccinate 8 million Canadian in one day!) so there is a queuing system to optimize the delivery process: First, medical workers as the first line of defense it is only reasonable, second groups at risk etc etc etc...
Now our society has suddenly decided that "our children are the most precious commodity" you only have to drive on The Boulevard at 8:15 in the morning as the precious little charges are dropped off to school (its not right for them to walk 5/6 blocks in the morning). The Quebec Minister of health explained (in broken English unfortunately) that with the support of a number of epidemiologists the government had crafted the optimal distribution system for the H1N1 vaccine, that would provide Quebec resident with the optimal solution.
That was clearly the wrong answers, because our Children are at risk. Part of the problem is that there is no concept, in the general public, that this is not a zero sum game, there are just so many vaccine available at anyone time, and that the distribution of these vaccine must be done in the most efficent manner, to maximize the benefits to the overall population.
As a wider debate about health care it is a discussion about resource allocation, a word that apparently doesn't exist in the U.S. since everybody can pay for health care (assuming that every American is a millionaire of course -- the true Republican point). The distribution of H1N1 vaccine is actually a very good example of resource allocation, that is by definition the base issue with health care, because when you are ill there is nothing that can stand in your way. There are discussions here that certain cancer drugs are not available in Canada because they are very expensive, adding only a few months to the patient life. Whereas in the U.S. the drug is available (nobody seems to say if it is paid by the HMO, but anyway). It puts a defining value to human life which is the first time this kind of analysis has been observed by the general public.
With the arrival of targeted drugs the issue will become more and more common. Should there be a drug, which cost $1 million dollar but prolongs the life of a patent be given? If it's $10 million? Once you agree that there exists a price at which treatment must be refused it becomes a negotiation; what is acceptable what is not!
In sense the journalist of CBC was unwilling to make this decision; it was far easier to say: The Children, The Children how could you! Than to take a responsible role in the information process. I get why politicians are often viewed with disdain, they do make errors, but others carry part of the blame, such as those that cover the news.
Ok end of rant!
Comments