Capezzone sfida a distanza Michael Moore, sostenendo che:
It is both a tragedy and an embarrassment that Europe hasn't kept up with the U.S. in saving and improving lives. What's to blame? The Continent's misguided policies and state-run health-care systems. The reasons vary from country to country, but broadly speaking, the custodians of public health budgets aren't devoting the necessary resources to get patients the most modern and advanced medicines, and are happier with the status quo. We often see news headlines about promising new cures and vaccines next to headlines about patients who can't get life-saving drugs as politicians impose ever stricter prescription controls on doctors.
The human toll can be measured in deaths and unnecessary suffering. It also costs us a lot of money. Prevention is cheaper than treatment. Modern medicine can prevent many medical complications that would otherwise require hospitalization and other expensive care. For every euro spent on new medicine, national health-care systems could save as much as €3.65 in later treatments, according to a National Bureau of Economic Research study.
This situation is especially dire in Italy. The government has capped spending on pharmaceuticals at 13% of total health-care expenditures while letting expenses for infrastructure and staff skyrocket. From 2001 to 2005, general health expenses in Italy grew by 31% while expenditure on medicines increased a mere 1.7%. Italian patients might well have been better off if the reverse was the case, but the state bureaucrats who make these decisions refuse to acknowledge the benefits of advanced drugs.
Also as a result, pharmaceutical research in Italy is falling behind even faster than in the rest of Europe. In 2004, pharmaceutical R&D spending was €3.9 billion in Germany, €3.95 billion in France and €4.78 billion in Britain, compared to only €1.01 billion in Italy.
Cosa aggiungere? Che l'aumento della spesa farmaceutica pubblica non può essere una soluzione, francamente, e pertanto misure di contenimento anche drastico sono necessarie.
Il punto è che il contenimento non diventi razionamento. Perché questo sia il caso, bisogna cambiare il bilanciamento fra pubblico e privato. Togliere terreno alla sanità pubblica.
E, sul fronte della ricerca, liberalizzare. Che vuol dire, su questo fronte, ridurre il potere discrezionale delle agenzie del farmaco, e sapere che se è vero che la sicurezza nella ricerca è una domanda sociale, è pur vero che il principio di precauzione segna la morte non solo del rischio, ma anche della speranza.