"Today it has been estimated that the average 70 year old has four chronic conditions and consumes an average of 35 PBS scripts per year for those conditions"
About this Quote
The power move here is arithmetic: aging reduced to a spreadsheet of diagnoses and prescriptions. Julie Bishop isn’t reaching for poetry; she’s reaching for a policy lever. By stacking “four chronic conditions” beside “35 PBS scripts per year,” she turns an abstract demographic problem into a vivid systems problem: older bodies as recurring line items in the health budget, older voters as living evidence that the status quo is unsustainable.
The intent is managerial and persuasive. “Estimated” signals technocratic credibility while giving her room to maneuver if challenged. The specificity of “70 year old” is strategic, too: it’s old enough to evoke vulnerability and complexity, young enough to feel proximate for a broad middle-class audience. This isn’t about the frailest edge cases; it’s about the mainstream future.
Subtext: the healthcare system is treating chronic illness like a permanent subscription service. The sheer number “35” reads as absurd on purpose, inviting the listener to ask what’s driving it - fragmented care, polypharmacy, defensive medicine, or incentives that reward volume over outcomes. It also quietly reframes the patient: less a person with needs, more a consumer of scripts, a throughput problem in a clogged pipeline.
Contextually, it fits a politician’s favorite genre: “responsible reform” rhetoric. Numbers like these are often deployed to justify restructuring - prevention programs, integrated care, prescription monitoring, cost containment - while sidestepping the messier moral argument about what a society owes its elderly. The line is designed to make reform feel not ideological, but inevitable.
The intent is managerial and persuasive. “Estimated” signals technocratic credibility while giving her room to maneuver if challenged. The specificity of “70 year old” is strategic, too: it’s old enough to evoke vulnerability and complexity, young enough to feel proximate for a broad middle-class audience. This isn’t about the frailest edge cases; it’s about the mainstream future.
Subtext: the healthcare system is treating chronic illness like a permanent subscription service. The sheer number “35” reads as absurd on purpose, inviting the listener to ask what’s driving it - fragmented care, polypharmacy, defensive medicine, or incentives that reward volume over outcomes. It also quietly reframes the patient: less a person with needs, more a consumer of scripts, a throughput problem in a clogged pipeline.
Contextually, it fits a politician’s favorite genre: “responsible reform” rhetoric. Numbers like these are often deployed to justify restructuring - prevention programs, integrated care, prescription monitoring, cost containment - while sidestepping the messier moral argument about what a society owes its elderly. The line is designed to make reform feel not ideological, but inevitable.
Quote Details
| Topic | Aging |
|---|
More Quotes by Julie
Add to List


