one might reasonably expect them to approach the topic in much the same way. however, as was the case with the blind men and the elephant, this is not the case.
Whereas policy makers approach the elephant (healthcare) within the perspective of attempting to create policy decisions which will provide a greater benefit to the highest number of shareholders, the economic costs of some of these policies are often not considered. In this way, the economic policy makers have a firm grasp and understanding concerning the elephant’s tail. however, they lack a complete grasp of the entire animal as a function of what parts they are not realizing exist. In this way, those that focus too intensively on a specific aspect of the issue will oftentimes miss the overall broader application.
Similarly, those specialists that approach the elephant (healthcare) from the economic standpoint are trying to find the most viable ways to provide the level of care that is needed while still doing so under an economically viable and reasonably fiscal model. This is oftentimes an impossibly difficult process due to the fact that treatment options are almost never easily determined to be perfectly economic as well as exhibiting a high level of care for the patient in question. In this way, the health economic analyst will likely be examining the micro application of the policies put in place by the economic policy makers (macro approach).
The problem lies in the fact that one particular approach is examining the “wall” of health care policy and trying to make sense out of it. whereas the other economic approach is dealing with explaining how the tail must function with relationship to the larger entity. In this way, understanding both approaches is necessary for creating a more efficient and better healthcare policy.