More Medicine = Better Health?

Mary Casey

HST 401

Professor Horgan

12 February 2026

I pledge my Honor that I have abided by the Stevens Honor System. 

Does More Medicine Mean Better Health?

Many Americans see the healthcare system as the “best in the world,” sometimes describing it as the most advanced. They are not wrong, for the most part; America has profound technology, highly trained physicians, and some of the best hospitals in the world. However, Americans do not live as long as people in other wealthy countries, and many struggle just to afford basic care. This leads to the question of whether or not more medicine always leads to better health. 

John Horgan notes in the article “More Medicine Does Not Mean Better Health” that the U.S. spends more on health care than any other nation, yet ranks lower in life expectancy, which implies that giving more money and treatments to the system does not automatically improve patient outcomes. According to international comparison data, Americans spend thousands more per person on healthcare than people in similar countries, yet still experience higher rates of preventable disease (Peterson-KFF; PGPF). 

Overtreatment may be one of the major reasons for this data. Many patients receive tests, medications, and procedures that may be deemed unnecessary. A study of doctors found that physicians themselves estimate about 20 percent of medical care is unnecessary, which includes extra tests, prescriptions, and procedures that add cost but do not contribute enough to health (Horgan). In some cases, they may even cause harm through side effects, increased stress, and complications. 

Horgan discusses the idea that modern medicine focuses on “doing more” rather than doing what is actually helpful. Some medications only provide small benefits, and clinical trials can be inaccurate due to bias. Drug companies, researchers, and sometimes even patients all want the treatments to work, which can result in an overly optimistic view of how effective certain treatments actually are (Horgan).  

Another aspect arising from overtreatment is the healthcare system structure. Physicians might order extra tests because they fear malpractice lawsuits or because patients expect a prescription or procedure every time they visit. Finances also play a role, especially when hospitals and doctors are paid per service and there is a built-in incentive to do more, even if it is only slightly beneficial; this results in a large portion of U.S. healthcare spending going towards care that may not really improve people’s lives. 

A personal experience I have, especially when it comes to finances, involves my aunt and uncle. My uncle, who is about 85 years old living with Parkinson’s, deals with the healthcare system more and more as he grows older. He has survived sepsis, broken bones, a concussion, and multiple silent strokes. Despite all of his ailments, he is still doing remarkably well. In some ways, the healthcare system works for him, as he has easy access to specialists, treatments, and medications that keep him kicking.

At the same time, the process has not been easy for my aunt. My uncle’s schedule is filled with appointments, prescriptions, and insurance paperwork, and she is the one who takes the lead in keeping track of everything. Sometimes she brings up the cost of medications or unexpected bills, and I worry about her. Although the financial problems usually resolve themselves over time, the stress is still there. Their experience shows both sides of the American healthcare system, which can provide life-saving treatment but almost always comes with confusion, high costs, and constant uncertainty. 

Furthermore, some estimates suggest that nearly 30 percent of U.S. healthcare spending is unnecessary (Horgan), and at the same time, many Americans delay doctor’s visits because they are worried about the cost (Peterson Foundation). In turn, a contradiction arises where some people receive too much care while others receive too little. 

Horgan also notes that many improvements in life expectancy came from better sanitation, housing, nutrition, and education, not from medical treatments (Horgan). Such factors often have a bigger impact on health than high-tech medicine. Thus, the U.S. might see better results by contributing more to prevention and social support rather than simply increasing medical spending. 

In the end, the problem is not that the U.S. has too little medicine, but that they do not always use it wisely. Focusing less on the quantity of care and more of the quality of care would lead to a better system, as it would prioritize prevention, patient experience, and look at the question of whether treatments actually improve people’s lives.

Works Cited

Horgan, John. “More Medicine Does Not Mean Better Health.” Cross-Check, johnhorgan.org, https://johnhorgan.org/cross-check/more-medicine-does-not-mean-better-health. Accessed 11 February 2026.

Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker. “U.S. Life Expectancy Compared to Other Countries.” Health System Tracker, https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-life-expectancy-compare-countries/. Accessed 11 February 2026.

Peter G. Peterson Foundation. “How Does the U.S. Healthcare System Compare to Other Countries?” PGPF, https://www.pgpf.org/article/how-does-the-us-healthcare-system-compare-to-other-countries/. Accessed 11 February 2026. 

.