The Oxymoron

How can technology reduce health costs when the main reason that costs are rising is because of technology? New technology is more expensive so how can new technology turn around and lower the cost of health care? It really seems like the impossible question to me.

1)I mean despite all of the other ways to do this I think the number one way to lower health costs would be to find a way to lower the cost of technology somehow. Whether it be we find cheaper ways to experiment or just cheaper materials to make machines out of. If we could somehow make tools and other operational instruments out something as plentiful as dirt I think that could significantly reduce the cost. Maybe that isn't quite a valid idea because of the process it would probably take to make dirt sterile and a functional enough compound. I guess it couldn't hurt to look into though.

2) After reading the article at http://knowledge.emory.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1244 I suppose it made a good point in some ways. It basically talked about updating the computer systems in hospitals make the record keeping files, all the scans, and everything more accessible, efficient and less redundant. If you take the philosophy that time equals money, which usually is true in the health world, then all the time saved by more efficient record keeping translates to more time for other patients, therefore things get done faster. More things can then be done in a shorter period of time and therefore services should cost less. This is however, all in theory. But I know from experience that there customer service department would receive a great deal less phone calls if their record keeping was better. The amount of time spent, just because records don't transfer correctly to insurance companies, just for my family is unbelievable. Efficiency would probably cut costs slightly.

3) Another way to reduce the cost of health care is also by only using technology when absolutely necessary. We don't need a CAT scan every time we get a headache. We need to just be able to determine when we need advanced technology or not. Common sense works wonders.

4) Generally it costs much less to treat a patient who has just caught a disease. Working on ways to diagnose ailments quicker might in the long run save lives and cost less money. If we could have better technology to see when something is wrong, it could be quickly and less costly fixed.

5) Decoding human genomes has been a venture to help prevent defective genes. According to www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/science/11gene.html A few scientists have apparently figured out a way to do it much cheaper. They expect it to be able to be done in masses very soon. It will be easily accessible. This claim however might not be perfectly credible, because most of the info comes from the people making the claims. This does shed a ray of hope though.

6)http://www.news-medical.net/news/20090916/Laser-technology-lowers-manufacturing-cost-of-artificial-joints-and-arterial-stents.aspx This article talks about how they are working on ways to lower costs for bone type implants. Hip replacements and "arterial stints" are among the things they are working on. This precision can greatly reduce costs of implants and since the number of people needing implants is on the rise. So I guess this is another way to reduce cost by technology.

7) A big issue right now I guess is cardiology and there equipment, at least according to http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=219501110. They are having a lot of problems developing new technology to get the ball rolling. But they do estimate that once they can develop something it will lower costs. I'm not sure how reliable their claims are. I think its probably just wishful thinking.

8) GE has announced that they are working to reduce costs and produce better initiatives. They want to launch at least "100 medical technology products" to lower costs. Whether this is plausible or not is yet to be seen. They are also trying to do it on a global scale. I guess this isn't a way to improve but is an example of a company trying to improve. They are investing 6 billion dollars to help there claims. http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/content/232873/topic/WS_HLM2_GBL/GE-Initiative-Seeks-to-Lower-Healthcare-Costs-Improve-Quality-on-Global-Scale.html

9) At several small clinics they have used special information technology to plot patient data to detect trends in diagnosing things. This software has helped them with early prevention in many people. If we could get better technology software we might be able help many more people in early detection. http://xnet.kp.org/newscenter/pressreleases/nat/2009/072409nlcforum.html

10) We also in my opinion need to figure out how to make drugs and vaccines cheaper to produce. Or at least cheaper to test. People spend so much money on drugs for a month and it really kills their budget. I know from experience with my mother. I really don't know what we could do though. I guess I just am not that innovative.... All just wishful thinking.

Citing.... ugh

My school was very very inadequate in a lot of ways. One being that we never cited sources correctly. So all I really have to say about this is that I'm not looking forward to having to actually cite things so intensively.

In the midst of a pandemic

Well if I were truly a smart person I would probably have some ingenious plot thought up for this type of situation and have it up and running by now, but I have a little problem with creativity. That being said, my thoughts on arriving on campus would be that we need to find a way to quickly identify who has the virus and to suspend their right to leave their room. If their roommate/roommates do not already have the virus they should temporarily be given another place to stay. The room of the infected should be cleaned once their sickness has gone away.

We should also be posting lectures on the internet but only give students with confirmed sickness access to the postings. This would ensure that other healthy students would not just skip class and try to watch the lectures online. We would also need to find a way to allow the infected to turn in their homework assignments and participate in labs somehow. Someone could always pick up the infected students homework, but labs are slightly more difficult.

I suppose that instructors could give sample sets of data that the student would just have to analyze. The student could right up a lab report based on the sample data and the proposed mechanism to do the lab.

My ideas have now run dry....

Oink Oink

In my opinion, I don't think that it would be in my best interest to get the swine flu shot. First off I think the whole swine flu issue is has been blown way out of proportion. I know someone who had the swine flu and from what he said, there is not much of a difference from the regular flu. Over half of the children who died from this flu were already in a state of bad health or had previous medical conditions. This leads me to believe that the priority of shots should be given to people who are not healthy to begin with because they are much more likely to recover from the virus.

I also have heard reports of the swine flu vaccine having very bad side effects. The last time there was an outbreak, quite a few people were paralyzed and even killed by the vaccine itself. Why would I risk that, just to get a shot to protect me from a flu that I honestly don't think my body would have a hard time handling? I just think the cons for me outweigh the pros, but for everyone I suppose its different.

Health workers and people exposed to a lot of bacteria in their daily lives should also have priority to choose over regular healthy people. Mostly because they are much more likely to catch the flu and be injured by it. For me though, I don't think the shot is necessary.

Filter Mosaics?

So I just read an article about filter mosaics. (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080520110408.htm) I have never heard of them before but I guess they are cutting edge new technology. Apparently they have a bunch of different uses and will help advance medical, military, and food processes. It was actually built to find ulcers earlier than other methods "for people with impaired mobility and sensation".

I find it interesting how advanced some of this technology is becoming. It makes earlier methods or doing things seem so primitive, but I'm sure years from now this same technology will be considered just that.

I also just realized that this article was from over a year ago, yet I had still never heard of this thing. Maybe the article is just over-exaggerating the usefulness of this product. Who knows. Maybe I should do more research.

In this class I would love to learn...

the most comfortable way to sleep in those desks without being noticed. But really I think it would be great to learn all of the fields bioengineering opens us up for. Just in case there is something else that would maybe suit me better. I am very stuck on what I want to do, but who really knows?

I also think that it would be very helpful to outline the basic steps of a research paper when we get there. I know that most of our class has done this time and time again, but I did one research paper in my career and the teacher gave us no instruction and 4 days to do it. So anyways pretty much anything else that gets taught is a bonus.

Way back in the olden days...

So since I am not exactly a big fan of blood and guts (I know, a slight contradiction with my field of study but anyways), I wouldn't want to have been apart of any advancement of an incredibly gorey nature. So I think that it would have been amazing to be involved in some of the first organ transplants.

I would have loved to have been able to document those moments because they truly advanced the medical world. It is hard to think that before that point, if you were losing an organ you were pretty much dead. I just wish I could have been there to witness it, and also to witness how transplants in general have changed over time.

What do they really do?

So after my last sappy post, be prepared for the ultimate boring post.

Supposedly bioengineering offers a lot of flexibility. I have never actually met a Bioengineer but I assume that they pretty much work with designing and engineering products that have to do with humans or animals.

I have heard of a lot of Bioengineers being graduate students or going to medical school. So I guess Bioengineers also study an insane amount.

That sums up my knowledge as of now on bioengineering. Hopefully I learn something in BE100.

Sad Motivations

To begin the story I suppose a little background info is necessary.

I grew up in a town were no one goes anywhere. It was one of those so-called "black hole towns". No one gets out.

From the time I was little, my mom pushed me to be better than that. I have always had this aspiration to get out of that place and make something of myself and she was my inspiration. But it wasn't until the summer before my junior year that I found real direction.

After months of being too sick to eat or barely even move, my mom finally went to the doctors office. It was there that the doctors told her how close to death she truly was. Had she gone days later she might not still be here. Her kidneys had completely shut down long ago. She was incredibly lucky to receive a transplant a mere 4 months later. She however is not the only person in my family who has kidney problems.

My grandpa had a transplant close to 30 years ago now, but for the past few years I have watched him wasting away. He truly doesn't have much time left. And now my mom's younger brother who is only 32 is on dialysis.

I know I have to at least try do something about this before I have to watch anymore of my family suffer. I suppose that is why bioengineering is my major. Artificial organ research holds very real consequences and goals for me. I hope that somehow I can turn my family's sad story around.