Obesity and Medicare

It was recently announced that obesity treatments will now be eligible for Medicare coverage. I remember reading a number of objections to this decision, both in the blogosphere and elsewhere, though I can't find them now. One of the most plausible objections, phrased in the form of a defensible argument, goes something like this.

1. Obese people are obese (at least in part) by virtue of their own free will.
2. If these people became obese of their own free will, it is likely that anti-obesity treatments will be less effective, since the patients are not behaving in a way that would reduce their obesity.
3. Less effective treatments should not be covered by Medicare.

This is, I think, a utilitarian argument (though very rough and underdeveloped). There is a certain, limited amount of money available for health-care expenditures, so using some of it on less effective treatments is inadvisable.

Another argument goes like this:

1. Obese people are obese (at least in part) by virtue of their own free will.
2. This means that their obesity is (at least in part) their own fault.
3. Medical care should not be provided to those who harm themselves.

I can't see any way to defend this second argument, though it is also underdeveloped. In fact (and this shouldn't come as any surprise), I think physicians have a positive moral duty to heal and not to try and establish the fault (or lack thereof) of their patients.

Both arguments, though, have to come to terms with the following objection. How does one differentiate between personal decision and outside factors in the etiology of disease? It would be even more complicated to apply such differentiation (were it possible) to rationing of medical care.

To put it in more concrete terms: which of the following diseases make a patient more or less "blameworthy"? Cirrhosis of the liver; AIDS; obesity; lung cancer; heart disease; trauma sustained in an automobile accident (with a seat belt? without a seat belt?); etc., etc., etc. Keep in mind that these are some of the most common causes of morbidity and mortality in the U.S.
(Another way of going about it is to ask the question: are there other government programs which encourage patients to stop unhealthy behavior? At what point would a patient become ineligible for help in quitting smoking?)

This train of thought is inspired by a post over at Close Range. I'm not a philosopher (although I do read and enjoy philosophy), and these thoughts lack rigor. But maybe Marc can give me some advice.


  1. I was looking at your posts about cancer lung symptom and found a good article about the same cancer lung symptom info too...

    God luck with it : )

  2. Cute blog. Please visit my calico cat blog. It is all about calico cat.

  3. Searching for sign of cancer treatment and information I found this post. I totally agree with you and think it takes time!

  4. Your blog is excellent - keep it up! Don't miss visiting this site about teen mental health

  5. Alot of interesting comments on this blog, I was searching for some doctor related info and some how came across this site. I found it pretty cool, so I bookmarked. I'll really liked the second post on the front page, that got my attention.

    My site is in a bit different area, but just as useful. I have a nicotine patch related site focusing on nicotine patch and mens health related topics.

  6. Hi I don't normally bother with comments but feel a little bored today and am trying to waste a little time. I was just surfing around the net (actually looking for info on New Lung Cancer Treatment) when I came across your blog. Just wanted to let you that I've gone back and read through some of your past posts. They caught my interest and I can relate to a quite a bit of what you say. So keep it up - I guess.