In 1960, Americans spent 10% of their healthcare dollar on medicines. Most of the money came from their own pockets, and was spent on drugs that largely treated infections heart disease, arthritis and depression. Beyond that, there was little that science could offer. Today, the range of diseases for which medical research has some partial treatment is vast. Despite this, and the double digit increase in drug spending - 75% -90% of which is paid for by insurance companies - prescription drugs now account for 9% of total health expenditures.

Similarly, claims by insurers and corporations - that drug costs are driving insurance costs up in general - are overstated. According to health analyst J.D. Kleinke, since pharmacy costs represent only 9% of all spending, even increases of 20% could not be responsible for insurance premium increases of 10% -15% over the last two years: Premiums have been increasing far out of proportion to increasing total medical costs over the past three years.

The fact is we should spend more on newer, more expensive medicines because they are worth the investment. Medical innovation creates what Harvard economist David Cutler calls health capital - the ability of people to stay well early and consistently throughout their lives, and remain that way at an increasingly older age. In fact, under the most conservative assumption, the U.S would have needed only about 30% of the improvement in medical progress over the period in time. In the case of congestive heart failure, Mr. Cutler found that increased consumption of new and more expensive drugs and other innovative technologies generated longer life, more productivity and lower health costs that offset the cost of their development and consumption.