The ideas and innovators shaping health care
| | | | |  | | By Daniel Payne, Carmen Paun, Ruth Reader and Erin Schumaker | | | | | 
When AI demands a test, will insurers pay? | Shutterstock | Artificial intelligence’s big promise in medicine is that it could help doctors diagnose diseases sooner than traditional methods. It could also hit patients in the pocketbook. A group of Stanford University professors warns in The New England Journal of Medicine that insurers aren’t yet on board with covering tests recommended by new AI tools. The professors envision an increasing number of scenarios in which AI tools identify possible disease and recommend further testing — only to have insurers refuse to pay absent traditional signs or symptoms of a condition. Why it matters: Without alignment of the financial and medical benefits of the technology, some early-detection tools could be difficult to sell to health systems — and may do little good for patients if further testing would mean steep costs for them. What’s next? The authors, Dr. Sneha S. Jain, Michelle M. Mello and Nigam H. Shah, expect insurers will need to adjust their rules. That could be challenging. Insurers will need data to assess how frequently the additional testing recommended by AI is beneficial. Even then, AI performance can change over time and may not work equally across populations, making it difficult to determine when it’s worth the cost. Some payers may look to the federal government to develop a framework for paying for health care in the AI age.
| | | | 
Bronx, N.Y. | Jeffrey Diaz | | This is where we explore the ideas and innovators shaping health care. AI-generated food recipes are gross and potentially life threatening, NPR reports. Share any thoughts, news, tips and feedback with Carmen Paun at cpaun@politico.com, Daniel Payne at dpayne@politico.com, Ruth Reader at rreader@politico.com, or Erin Schumaker at eschumaker@politico.com. Send tips securely through SecureDrop, Signal, Telegram or WhatsApp.
| | |  WHO members will reach a pandemic deal, Brazil's ambassador predicted. | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images | Members of the United Nations’ World Health Organization will reach a deal to share data on pathogens with pandemic potential circulating in their populations in exchange for tests, drugs or vaccines developed with the information. That’s the bold prediction of Brazil’s ambassador to the UN office in Geneva, Tovar da Silva Nunes, a deputy chair of the group of diplomats steering the talks. “There is no question that we will have a [pathogen access and benefit sharing system],” da Silva Nunes said about the mechanism under discussion at a regional meeting of the Pan American Health Organization in Washington on Monday. The pharmaceutical industry has already agreed to give the WHO a certain percentage of its products so they can be made available to low- and middle-income countries during a pandemic, he said. But he offered no details, saying those — including how much drug companies would contribute — will come later. Why it matters: WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus wanted a deal by last spring, but disagreements between the U.S. and Europe and low-income countries over the sharing of pathogen data and pharmaceuticals remained. The U.S. and Europe had pushed for access to pathogen data without committing anything specific by way of drugs in return. What’s next? Negotiations will resume in Geneva in early November. Whether the U.S. continues to participate likely depends on the election outcome that month because most Republicans are against proceeding. The House passed a bill by Wisconsin Republican Tom Tiffany last month on a mostly party line vote requiring that any pandemic agreement be considered a treaty subject to Senate ratification.
| | | | |  California schoolchildren will get less colorful snacks starting in 2028. | Getty Images | California schools have just three years left to serve Froot Loops, Flamin’ Hot Cheetos and other processed snacks made with brightly colored food dyes, our Blake Jones reports. That’s because Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed first-in-the-nation legislation banning the additives in the state’s schools starting in 2028. The decision was based on studies that have linked the dyes to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Why it matters: CDC data has found a big increase in ADHD diagnoses over the past quarter century, with the percentage of kids with the condition rising from 6 to 10 percent since the late 1990s. Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, a Democrat from a Los Angeles-area district and the new law’s author, hopes it will prompt food manufacturers to change their recipes. “We think it’s unlikely that folks are going to produce one version of their product for California and a different version for Kansas,” Gabriel, who has ADHD and has spoken about how additives have affected him, told reporters last month. Even so: Food industry lobbyists dispute California Environmental Protection Agency reports associating dyes with health effects and have argued the rules could limit fundraising opportunities for school sports teams that hold bake sales. “Safe ingredients have been demonized for the purpose of advancing a political agenda,” John Hewitt of the Consumer Brands Association previously told POLITICO in a statement. | | | | Follow us on Twitter | | | | Follow us | | | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment