In health economics, the maximized level of well-being being an ultimate end is ethically unjustified, as opposed to the efficient allocation of resources in health that augments the average utility level. Under this utility-maximizing approach, subject to libertarianism, a dichotomy is apparent between health and freedom as primary goods due to the condition of one is necessary to have to attain the other. Any level of access, utilization, and funding of healthcare is ethically justified as long as it accomplishes the desired and needed level of health. Health economists instrumentalise the concept of a need as that which achieves an ethically legitimate end for a person. This is based on the notion that healthcare is not intrinsically valuable, but morally significant because it contributes to overall well-being. The methodology of analysis in health economics, with respect to clinical trials, is subject to ethical debate. The experimental design should partially be the responsibility of health economists given their tendency to otherwise add variables that have the potential to be insignificant. This increases the risk of under-powering the study, which in health economics is primarily concerned with cost effectiveness, which has implications for evaluation.
