One of the current disease epidemics of the 21st century is cancer. Cancer has grown to worrying levels, and it has led to huge loss of lives. Currently, cancer is the leading disease causing loss of lives in America and other countries. The effects of the cancer epidemic not only affect individuals, but their relevant countries as a whole. For instance, in the USA the economical cost of cancer has continuously increased over the past few years.
The thesis of my essay is the economic effects of cancer. This is in relation to the country’s economy as a whole, including both the private and the public sector, considering the major investments done each year to eradicate the cancer epidemic. Cancer is a growing economy threat to many countries. According to reports released by the National Institutes of Health in America, the country spends billions of shillings directly and indirectly towards cancer.
Cancer economic expenditures by the government can be easily assessed because of the specific data collection by the health department every year. However, in assessing the costs and expenditures invested by the government to eradicate cancer, there are various factors to consider. For instance, cancer health is divided by geographic regions, age, gender, population and other parameters. Further, the economic costs of cancer do not only affect the government, but the whole society in general.
The costs and benefits gained from investing in eradicating cancer cannot be clearly assessed. However, according to many economic sources, the costs are more than the benefits. For instance, the government’s investment in fighting cancer has continuously increased over past years. Even though, the effects of the investments are seen in the improvement of healthcare, the benefits are still redundant. For instance, many people, regardless of their economical status, still struggle in achieving successful cancer diagnosis. This situation has led to reduced survival rates among cancer patients. In addition, the cancer burden has increasingly affected the poor who do not have the proper information, education and fiscal resources (Alberts & Lisa, 43).
Problems such as inadequate screening, insufficient post-treatment, geographic barriers to treatment, and poor provider patient communication have increased costs related to cancer. Despite the education and awareness initiatives carried out by the government, there is still more to cover. This creates an economical situation where government spending on issues related to cancer increases year by year. The resulting condition leads to further economical exploitation of tax payers.
Labor is an important aspect of every economy. However, with huge number of lives lost or affected by cancer frequently, labor is widely affected. Consequently, the diagnosis of cancer is expensive to most American citizens. This reduces the economic potential of most cancer patients and their families. This creates a scenario where the economy is affected by the opportunity cost forgone by individuals in order to undergo cancer diagnosis.
This situation further deteriorates by the prevalence of cancer diagnosis. Cancer patients undergo multiple cancer diagnosis procedures including initial care, recurrence care and end of life cancer treatment. This leads to an increased expenditure on the diagnosis of cancer (http://crchd.cancer.gov/attachments/NCIeconomiccosts.pdf
. The initial costs of diagnosing cancer and the end of life costs are lowest, with the recurrence costs being the highest. This way cancer costs mount up from initial cancer costs for new cancer patients and reoccurring costs from diagnosed patients. Thus, the costs affect of cancer to the economy out way the benefits by far.
The costs incurred by an economy in the cancer epidemic can be categorized in three. Direct, indirect and psychosocial. Direct costs are derived from the resources that are used in the treatment and prevention of cancer by the government. Indirect costs are derived from the loss of resources such as labor and time. Psychosocial costs are derived from the impact of cancer on the costs of life. For instance, there would be social isolation, economic dependence and loss of job opportunities for cancer patients. According to the annual data collected pertaining to cancer treatment and prevention, large sums of money are spent lost on the direct, indirect and psychosocial costs.
Nevertheless, some economical sectors have started gaining from the cancer awareness measures taken. Cancer awareness has led to increased public sensitivity. This has led to the participation of many economical sectors in cancer awareness, with profit- making motive. Cancer awareness is a marketing strategy used by certain companies in order to increase their sales. For instance, the pinking initiative started by the Komen foundation has seen key economic sectors including, automobile companies, food companies, and other companies that produce various commodities. Pinking basically involves companies in allocating some of their products prize towards the treatment and prevention of cancer.
Further, the companies that take part in pinking paint their goods pink or they wrap them with pink ribbons. The cancer awareness initiative has grown substantially increasing the public’s participation towards eradicating cancer in the U.S.A. Cancer treatment initiatives such as pinking has improved the efficiency of cancer treatment and prevention measures.
However, there are numerous flaws in the initiative. First, there is a low cost-benefit balance in the initiative. For example, some of the companies that engage in pinking are responsible for producing cancer related products. This way pinking promotes a recurring cancer scenario. In addition, there are ethical malpractices among various companies that only engage in pinking to advertise their products, with less concern over the eradication of cancer.
According to an Oklahoma City Journal written by April Wilkerson 1st April 2013, researches argue that there is little invested into the research of cancer cure and preventive measures by the pinking funds. Further, the Komen Foundation is widely criticized for misuse of funds maliciously. This situation has led to reduced participation of the public towards raising funds for cancer awareness. The ineffectiveness of cancer awareness initiatives leads to the reoccurrence of the disease, and the economical costs continue to increase.
Investors are positively and negatively affected by cancer. Investors have lost market due to the relation of their products with cancer. The reduced preference of cancer-related goods has reduced the number of investors. This reduces the overall economic gains of many companies. In addition, some investors suffer from loss of labor brought about by cancer. Cancer has led to loss of lives and reduction in labor potential of cancer victims. This leads to reduction of the public’s labor potential thus increasing the production costs. This way, investors struggle with the high cost of production to produce cheap goods. This reduces their profit margins.
However, some investors have progressed positively from the outbreak of cancer. For instance, insurance companies, which invest in healthcare insurance. There is a high insurance rate against cancer. Therefore, insurance companies continue to expand their economical success in cancer insurance. Consequently, research companies and health technology companies continue to advance due to the high cost of cancer treatment. This has led to increased participation of companies in relation to cancer treatment related products (Alberts & Lisa, 43).
The high cost of cancer treatment only increases the cost of living on many countries. This results to a reduced economical potential of cancer victims. Furthermore, poor citizens are widely affected by cancer. Cancer prevention measures, such as healthcare insurance, leaves out the poor people. Therefore, there is a high vulnerability of cancer among poor people who lack cancer control measures such as screening, due to financial hardships (http://crchd.cancer.gov/attachments/NCIeconomiccosts.pdf).
The future economical performances pertaining to cancer can only be speculated. The performance of certain organizations towards cancer treatment is impressive and there is rising speculation over improvement in cancer treatment in the future. For instance, in India, the Dharamshila Hospital and Research Centre has advanced cancer treatment in India. The centre has led to improved economy from foreign sources as it attracts foreigners from outside India (Sell & Florian, 78). Improved cancer treatment and research boosts the economy of relevant countries that engage in effective cancer treatment research. This is one of the ways in which cancer research and treatment brings back cost benefits to the economy. Continued participation of key healthcare research institutions will help reduce the cost of cancer to the economy and add on the benefits.
The progressive cancer treatment research has led to reduced cancer costs. Basing my predictions of statistical data of various countries related to cancer, the effect of cancer awareness is bearing fruits. Cancer treatment and prevention measures are constantly improving. The economic costs of cancer are expected to decrease in the future. Countries with effective cancer control measures have shown an improvement in their economical performance
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3191884/).
The cost-effect potential of cancer drugs is under scrutiny by economists. Some cancer drugs cost patients large sums of money yet they only save them merely a couple of weeks from death (Alberts & Lisa, 54). This has led to intensified debates over the potential of some cancer drugs and treatment operations. Health practitioners are blamed for only focusing on the financial gains of their cancer related service with less to do with effectiveness of these cancer treatment measures. However, medical practitioners argue that these drugs and services mean a lot to cancer patients. Nevertheless, with huge levels of government spending and slow improvements of the cancer treatment and prevention measures, the impact of the disease to the economy will carry on.
The cost benefits from resources invested towards cancer treatments are low. Despite huge participation from private economy sectors in improving cancer awareness, the benefits are low. People are still suffering from cancer, physical and financially. The impact of cancer to the world’s economy is huge. Measures taken to improve the economy through effective cancer treatment are still not fully efficient. The effect of cancer to the economy is on an increase and economists criticize the slow progress of cancer treatment and prevention. Economical exploitation of cancer patients leads to economical dependence. Therefore, cancer economical effects are spread out to the society at large.
Works Cited
April, Wilkerson. "In the Pink: Oklahoma Businesses See Benefits from Cause Marketing."
2013.
http://www.pitt.edu/~super1/lecture/lec0192/w028.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3191884/
http://crchd.cancer.gov/attachments/NCIeconomiccosts.pdf
Alberts, David, and Lisa, Hess. Fundamentals of Cancer Prevention. Berlin: Springer, 2008. Print.
Senn, Hansjörg, and Florian, Otto. Cancer Prevention Ii. Berlin: Springer, 2008. Print.
