Health economics on the complementarity of medicine and economics

A new positivist interface between Medicine, Economics and Psychology is termed Neuroeconomics. Also in a broader perspective Medicine and Economics need each other. Modern health technology requires so many scarce resources that economic priority rules are needed for an optimal allocation. Economics needs medical science, too, because the Neoclassical Paradigm of bounded economic rationality (BR) doesn`t apply to health behavior due to an “Asymmetric Knowledge” between physician and patient. This study focuses on 5 interdisciplinary relationships: 1. Neuroeconomics explains “Asymmetric Knowledge” as rooted in risk-aversive behavior 2. Cost-effectiveness Analysis (CEA) cannot stand-a-lone but is a special case of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) 3. Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a common political objective for Economics and Medicine 4. A cost-effective organization of healthcare recognizing the “Asymmetric Knowledge” must focus: a) The GP is the local key coordinator b) University regions are the basal functional unit of specialized healthcare c) A Regional Health Council, constituted by the local municipalities, advicing on continuity of care 5. Neuroeconomics identifies meditative in-depth-relaxation as complementary to physical fitness in stress-management and as such a common target for Medicine and Economics, too Discussion focuses on the development from a special HTA to Universal Technology Assessment (UTA) integrating economic, medical and ecological factors. A development constituting a new approach to the environmental crisis.