Last week, the news offered a compelling example of. It's hard to understand how reasonable people could oppose conducting the sort of research that aims to collect data so that we can actually know if one drug or medical device works better than another at fixing the same medical problem. And while I understand the concern that data could eventually be used to deny care if treatment is deemed not effective enough or too pricey, that hardly justifies not doing the research in the first place. But the relatively paltry $1.1 billion that President Obama's budget would put toward comparative effectiveness research has created a firestorm of controversy, with conservative commentators and some providers raising the specter of regulation-happy government bureaucrats intruding into medical decisions that should be left to patients and their doctors. This is good stuff, not only for the medical establishment but also for patients, who are increasingly expected to play an active role in managing and paying for their healthcare.

Comparative Effectiveness Research as Patient Education Tool In this era of 12-figure federal bailouts, a government proposal to spend a billion dollars on something seems pretty ho-hum.