An Overview of Technology (G)

The United States of America is a country that is desperately focused on having the biggest and best toys. To think that that idea would change when it came to our attitude on health care, you would be out of your mind. Because of the complex nature of technology and all the benefits it has provided, technology has somewhat of a cultural authority. People have seen new technology work before and they believe that it can answer everything. Technology can indeed answer many of our medical problems, however there are also downsides that simply can't be overlooked.
"Advances in bacteriology, antiseptic surgery, anesthesia, immunology, and diagnostic techniques, along with an expanding repertoire of new drugs, gave medicine an aura of legitimacy and complexity"(Shi and Singh, 2008). New technologies often fell into place from other fields practice and doctrine. The discovery of anesthesia by Horace Wells a dentist in 1846 helped surgery take great advancements. Prior to the discovery of anesthesia, large doses of alcohol would be given to patients to help dull or numb the pain. In 1865 Wilhelm Roentgen a German physicist developed the use of an X-ray for advancement in imaging and diagnostics. These types of tests go hand in hand with us in the Community Health field and the whole theory of prevention and primary care. These are a few examples of how the actual pieces of technology help us, there are also positive side effects of new emerging devices. Consumers have high expectations for new equipment and thus increase their demand and utilization of these new, expensive, tools. This increased spending was never shunned by the economy and in fact gives it a substantial boost. It has also increased our access of certain pieces of technology. Before technological advancements were made we could only go to hospitals for the most recent practice. Now these specialized services are available in outpatient centers near you.
Although technology has seemingly only helped us out, there are numerous aspects of technology that are problematic. Like we stated in our original posting on our Political/Philosophical stance, Technology is indeed "two-headed." Technology is a strong contributor to the health care cost inflation we are seeing. Increased money is being poured into research and development of new machines and techniques. This increase in health care inflation doesn't pose much of a threat to the consumer because of the third party that is involved. People tend to overuse health care when they know that an insurance company or the government pays for the majority of it. Possibly the most popular knock of new technology is stem cell research. Many ask the question if we should be playing "God" by determining what chromosome goes where. Ethical concerns rise as to whether we should conduct these techniques to better our health, or if it is just going too far. We have gotten to the point in technology that many of these ethical questions are starting to come to a head. How long should we keep our loved ones alive? Is it worth keeping them alive considering the quality of it? Who should receive the testing of new technological procedures? The list goes on and on each as important as the next.
How important is it that we continue to be the first to come out with new technologies? In a world that knowledge can be accessed so easily via the Internet is it necessary that we develop all the breakthrough technology. Should we slow down the amount of money and effort we put into new technology, and maybe put it towards education, or even into a plan to create a universal health care program? Until we can answer some of the ethical questions we have approached, maybe a different use of the money is in our best interest. Can the United States of America take a step back not looking at profit or technological advancement for once and focus on health care for every American citizen?

Written by: Ryan Buenning

References

Campbell, D. & Gilmore, G. (2005). Needs and Capacity Assessment Strategies for Health Education and Health Promotion (3rd Edition). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Shi, L. & Singh, D. A. (2008). Delivering health care in America: A systems approach (4th Edition). Boston: Jones and Bartlett.

Two-Faced Technology

What do you get when you cross the invention of the hypodermic needle and morphine? To soldiers in the American Civil War, the isolation of morphine by a German pharmacist resulted in well-deserved pain relief to those who once had limbs amputated with nothing more than a belt strap to bight for comfort. Ask 400,000 of these soldiers the same question at the end of the war and they’d tell you that it has taken control of their lives. Like any medical technological advance, morphine has its positive and negative side effects. This is true with technology and health care as well. Yes, overall technology has brought great things to health care and those who participate in these innovations. However, with it comes many questions. How far is too far? When have we changed more than God intended? Should quality of life come second to religious beliefs? These questions have been, and will continue to be asked, as long as the medical community keeps pushing the envelope on research and biomedicine.

The United States of America is a Democracy. With that, many people voice their opinions and, then, majority rules. Such is true when discussing technology and its affects our nation’s health care. There is not one group who always has all the right answers for every person or every situation. Therefore, our group, as it is made up of many people, proclaim that we are a democracy, just as technology is. We greatly value that technology allows us to find new ways to fix age-old problems, that it is non-bias, can help all with its discoveries, and that the people behind medical technology are persistent and passionate about healing and helping others. With these values, we share great beliefs in our health care system. We believe that our president, and presidents to follow, will always have the health and well-being of their country as a top priority, that those who suffer will one day have their victory over their disease, and that the United States of America will consistently use technology to ensure that its citizens are taken care as best they can be.

Because our nation only wants the best for each other, we believe that continuing technology research, maintenance, production, and analysis will continue to be a costly endeavor. However, what are you without your health? As Health Educators, we see how important preventative education is and hope that our country will use technological findings as education materials. This way, although we will continue to find better cures and treatments, we will have less people that need them. Yes, researchers, health educators, and facilitators will continue to be compensated for their hard work. Nevertheless, as stated above, the number of patients will decrease if we use our materials and funds for access to education. Although we are fortunate to be located among numerous medical professionals to answer our questions, others are not as lucky. Everyone must have access to all of these newly developed technologies. Wealth should not determine your health. With all the time being spent on trying to be the first to create a new drug, medical machine, or procedure, we must also find out how technology can help us bring its information to the masses. If one has a way to receive care, one must also know where to go, what is procedure consists of, and its effects and side effects.

Technology is crucial to the health field. With this, you find new ways of decreasing health costs by creating less expensive medications, create new jobs for our workforce, finds new ways for people to spend less time in the hospitals, determine what length of time a patient should stay in the hospital and appropriate post-operation recommendations, and determines the effectiveness on different cultures, genders, and races. Some may think that technology doesn’t hold a candle to topics such as knowing your target population. However, without technology we wouldn’t have learned that warning signals for heart attack between men and women are extremely different. Furthermore, without technology, we would still be sawing soldiers’ limbs off while they bight down on leather straps.

Yet, with all the good technology has brought the medical field, I ask you to simply think about the recent case of the California women giving birth to octuplets. Is this a case of technology gone wrong? Or, is this about unethical procedure? Do we blame technology or man?

Leiyu Shi, and Douglas A Singh. Delivering health Care in America: A Systems Approach.
Massachusetts: Jones and Bartlett Publishers Inc., 2008.