[問題] PP2-CR-65
Treatment for hypertension forestalls certain medical expenses by preventing
strokes and heart disease. Yet any money so saved amounts to only one-fourth
of the expenditures required to treat the hypertensive population.
Therefore, there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for
hypertension.
Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the conclusion above?
(A) The many fatal strokes and heart attacks resulting from untreated
hypertension cause insignificant medical expenditures but large economic
losses of other sorts.
(B) The cost, per patient, of preventive treatment for hypertension would
remain constant even if such treatment were instituted on a large scale.
(C) In matters of health care, economic considerations should ideally not be
dominant.
(D) Effective prevention presupposes early diagnosis, and programs to ensure
early diagnosis are costly.
(E) The net savings in medical resources achieved by some preventive health
measures are smaller than the net losses attributable to certain other
measures of this kind.
不懂為什麼答案是(A)
這樣理解對嗎? 如果不去treat hypertension的話 會造成其他類別的疾病更大的損失
所以去treat hypertension 還是有他的contribution在的
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.123.17.7
※ 編輯: heine564 來自: 140.123.17.7 (09/04 11:18)
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文：
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 2 篇)：