Public economic gains from tax-financed investments in childhood immunization in the United States.

The emergence of COVID-19 has displayed the importance of immunization and the need for continued public investment in vaccination programs. Globally, national vaccination programs rely heavily on tax-financed expenditure, requiring upfront investments and ongoing financial commitments. To evaluate annual public investments, we conducted a fiscal analysis that quantifies the public economic consequences to government in the United States attributable to childhood vaccination. To estimate the change in net government revenue, we developed a decision-analytic model that quantifies lifetime tax revenues and transfers based on changes in morbidity and mortality arising from vaccination of the 2017 U.S. birth cohort. Reductions in deaths and comorbid conditions attributed to pediatric vaccines were used to derive gross lifetime earnings gains, tax revenue gains attributed to averted morbidity and mortality avoided, disability transfer cost savings, and averted special education costs associated with each vaccine. Our analysis indicates a fiscal dividend of $41.7 billion from vaccinating this cohort. The bulk of this gain for government reflects avoiding the loss of $30.6 billion in present-value tax revenues. All pediatric vaccines raise tax revenues by reducing vaccine-preventable morbidity and mortality in amounts ranging from $7.3 million (hepatitis A) to $20.3 billion (diphtheria) over the life course. Based on public investments in pediatric vaccines, a benefit-cost ratio of 17.8 was calculated for each dollar invested in childhood immunization. The public economic yield attributed to childhood vaccination in the U.S. is significant from a government perspective, providing fiscal justification for ongoing investment.

Can medical students afford to choose primary care? An economic analysis of physician education debt repayment.

PURPOSE: Some discussions of physician specialty choice imply that indebted medical students avoid choosing primary care because education debt repayment seems economically unfeasible. The authors analyzed whether a physician earning a typical primary care salary can repay the current median level of education debt and meet standard household expenses without incurring additional debt. METHOD: In 2010-2011, the authors used comprehensive financial planning software to model the annual finances for a fictional physician's household to compare the impact of various debt levels, repayment plans, and living expenses across three specialties. To accurately develop this spending model, they used published data from federal and local agencies, real estate sources, and national organizations. RESULTS: Despite growing debt levels, the authors found that physicians in all specialties can repay the current level of education debt without incurring more debt. However, some scenarios, typically those with higher borrowing levels, required trade-offs and compromises. For example, extended repayment plans require large increases in the total amount of interest repaid and the number of repayment years required, and the use of a federal loan forgiveness/repayment program requires a service obligation such as working at a nonprofit or practicing in a medically underserved area. CONCLUSIONS: A primary care career remains financially viable for medical school graduates with median levels of education debt. Graduates pursuing primary care with higher debt levels need to consider additional strategies to support repayment such as extended repayment terms, use of a federal loan forgiveness/repayment program, or not living in the highest-cost areas.

Fixing health care before it fixes us.

The current American health care system is beyond repair. The problems of the health care system are delineated in this discussion. The current health care system needs to be replaced in its entirety with a new system that provides every American with first-rate, first-tier medicine and that doesn't drive our nation broke. The author describes a 10-point Medical Security System, which he proposes will address the problems of the current health care system.