The prevailing economic paradigm, characterized by free market thinking and individualistic cultural narratives, has deeply influenced contemporary society in recent decades, including health in the United States. This paradigm, far from being natural, is iteratively intertwined with politics, social group stratification, and norms, together shaping what is known as political economy. The consequences are starkly evident in health, with millions of lives prematurely lost annually in the United States. Drawing on economic re-thinking happening in fields like climate and law, we argue for a new "common sense" towards a health-focused political economy. Central to this proposed shift is action in 3 interconnected areas: capital, care, and culture. Re-orienting capital to prioritize longer-term investments, such as in public options for health care and baby bonds, can promote health and affirmatively include historically marginalized groups. Recognizing that caregiving is economically valuable and necessary for health, approaches like local cadres of community health workers across the United States would be part of building robust caregiving infrastructures. Advancing momentum in these directions, in turn, will require displacing dominant cultural narratives. As the health arena pursues change in the face of real obstacles, recent efforts reinvigorating industrial policy and addressing concentrated market power can serve as inspiration.
Conducting high-quality peer review of scientific manuscripts has become increasingly challenging. The substantial increase in the number of manuscripts, lack of a sufficient number of peer-reviewers, and questions related to effectiveness, fairness, and efficiency, require a different approach. Large-language models, 1 form of artificial intelligence (AI), have emerged as a new approach to help resolve many of the issues facing contemporary medicine and science. We believe AI should be used to assist in the triaging of manuscripts submitted for peer-review publication.
Despite remarkable clinical advances in highly effective anti-obesity medications, their high price and potential budget impact pose a major challenge in balancing equitable access and affordability. While most attention has been focused on the amount of weight loss achieved, less consideration has been paid to interventions to sustain weight loss after an individual stops losing weight. Using a policy simulation model, we quantified the impact of a weight-maintenance program following the weight-loss plateau from the initial full-dose glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or incretin mimetic use. We measured long-term health care savings and the loss of some health benefits (eg, maintenance of weight loss, improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors, and reductions in diabetes and cardiovascular events). Our model suggested that, compared with continuous long-term full-dose GLP-1 receptor agonists or incretin mimetic drugs, the alternative weight-maintenance program would generate slightly fewer clinical benefits while generating substantial savings in lifetime health care spending. Using less expensive and potentially less effective alternative weight-maintenance programs may provide additional headroom to expand access to anti-obesity medications during the active weight-loss phase without increasing total health care spending.
To provide financial relief to those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, from July to December 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act temporarily expanded eligibility for cost-sharing reduction (CSR) silver 94 plans that cover 94% of medical costs for unemployment insurance (UI) recipients enrolled in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Marketplaces. In June 2021, California's ACA Marketplace automatically redetermined eligibility and enrollment for 79 645 UI recipients so the enhanced subsidies would be applied without any action required among program participants. Using administrative data from California and a difference-in-differences design, we found that enrollees automatically moved to CSR silver 94 plans for the second half of 2021 saved $295 in premiums and $180 in out-of-pocket expenses (or $475 in total). These findings can inform state and federal policymakers exploring ways of automating benefits delivery for consumers already engaging with other safety-net programs to increase health insurance affordability.