{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02302025782688766, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001841620626151013, 'mean_word_length': 4.69109947643979, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Can CEOs Save the Health of Americans?

This chapter examines the assumption that CEOs may transform health care more quickly and thoroughly than the public sector has, or perhaps can. Over the past 50 years, the cultural reputation of the corporate CEO has soared. The “right” CEO can dramatically improve a private company’s performance. However, the evidence that the CEO and the private sector can actually be a force for good health remains dubious. The problem with a CEO takeover of health care is that achieving better health depends on much more than the conditions that drive the fiscal well-being of a single organization, that is, the conditions over which the CEO has the most influence. The truly important conditions are social, economic, and environmental. Improving these conditions as a means of improving health takes time and effort across a range of sectors, both public and private. A good CEO can be a welcome and important part of these efforts, but best functions as a supporting player, rather than as the focal point of what is, at heart, a collective effort.