Important as it is, the need to rein in medical spending must not be a
llowed to distort the proper role of prevention in the health care sys
tem. The primary reason to invest in prevention, as in other medical c
are, is to promote health - to extend life, improve functioning, and p
revent suffering. Preventive interventions should be used whenever the
y produce more health for the resources invested than alternative serv
ices, not only when they save money. Many preventive services do not s
ave money, but some are good values nonetheless, when compared with ot
her uses of the health care dollar. To identify the good values, preve
ntive services should be assessed carefully for effectiveness and cost
effectiveness. Prevention should not, however, be held to a higher st
andard than other medical services. All medical services should be eva
luated for effectiveness and cost effectiveness. To do otherwise is to
invest randomly in health rather than to place resources where they d
o the most good. Leaders of health reform would do well to set two goa
ls for the medical system: the care provided should be proved effectiv
e by good science; and among effective services, those that bring the
most health for the resources spent should be given the highest priori
ty. If policy makers followed these two principles, there would be a s
ubstantial re-thinking of current investments in health in the United
States.