use both cost (factor inputs) and survival (quality life years) to support or refute your peers' initial posts We all would like to hope the common denominator for healthcare in this day in age is cost effectiveness. Point A missed the mark lacking both cost effectiveness and benefits of healthcare choices. Point B was very close to meeting the mark however, exceeding the mark of improving healthcare. I'm not in favor of point D either. Focusing on people that fit a certain criteria to receive healthcare will not have great outcomes and definitely will not improve healthcare or cost. Point E is not a great idea to supply treatment for everyone whether they need it or not is disastrous. Point F is for failure; leaving outcomes worse and higher healthcare costs. This point will make it even worse than where we are now. It's pretty obvious I am an advocate of point C. Point C considers all aspects to include cost effectiveness and comparative effectiveness providing a well balanced outcome. No one wants to give and not receive anything in return; especially when it comes to money. I feel point C achieved the desired outcome while using the least amount