The current healthcare debates on prevention versus treatment have made it clear that either someone is lying or that we are all defining prevention a bit differently. Charles Krauthammer argues in a recent Washington Post op-ed that the price of prevention will never be cheaper than treatment. He cautions readers to be wary of President Obama's claims that focusing on prevention will save both lives and money. Krauthammer sketches out an example:

Think of it this way. Assume that a screening test for disease X costs $500 and finding it early averts $10,000 of costly treatment at a later stage. Are you saving money? Well, if one in 10 of those who are screened tests positive, society is saving $5,000. But if only one in 100 would get that disease, society is shelling out $40,000 more than it would without the preventive care.

Larry Cohen, of the Prevention Institute in Oakland, CA has a different take on how we should approach prevention. His response to Krauthammer's piece was posted in the Chicago Tribune:

Preventive medicine - the statins and diabetes tests Mr. Krauthammer describes - is necessary but not sufficient. Community prevention, absent from his commentary, means investing in the creation of healthy communities to prevent disease before it occurs. Community prevention efforts such as sidewalks and farmers' markets support physical activity and access to healthful foods, keeping people out of the doctor's office in the first place and reducing health-care costs for everyone.

Health reform must include the kind of community prevention strategies, such as those used to reduce smoking, that have historically documented cost savings and will contain skyrocketing chronic disease rates and costs.

In Cohen's world, and that of the Prevention Institute, prevention does actually save money and save lives. Check out their list of resources and talking points for advocates.