> Most of the tests you mention above are wasteful for your typical Medicare Advantage enrollee. A good point to discuss. Perhaps I'm overly optimistic about p

> Most of the tests you mention above are wasteful for your typical Medicare Advantage enrollee. A good point to discuss. Perhaps I'm overly optimistic about people in general, but how do we know, a priori to a data-centric healthcare model applied to a patient, about their participation? These tests are only wasteful in the context of the current care model, which stipulates that once you have Type 2, there is a lockstep progression of increasingly invasive and expensive medication and interventions, graduation to insulin injection, and culminating in early death from complications? In the face of that kind of prognosis, it is not at all surprising that any additional tests are considered futile by both medical practitioners and patients alike. But if the patient was offered via data-centric care a clearer window to their condition, amplified proactive participation in care management with negative feedback loops tamping down undesirable fluctuations, and in the case of Type 2 or metabolic syndrome the clear goal of reversion (though not a cure) and drastically improved eventual outcomes, why do we assume that even elderly patients on Medicare Advantage would not statistically respond well as a whole population? I dunno, this isn't my domain expertise, so I'm honestly asking these questions; if there is the equivalent of behavioral economics studying patient behavior, then perhaps that field has the answers I'm seeking. > There's an entire cottage industry devoted to solving this problem for insurers. I'd like nothing more than to see these efforts succeed, look forward to following the progress.