WatchU.S. ranks 28th in life expectancy (lower than Chile and Greece) while it pays the MOST for health care
Meanwhile, Americans receive comparatively little actual care, despite sky-high prices driven by expensive tests and procedures.
They also spend more tax money on healthcare than most other countries, the study showed.
Follow
Befriend (16)
766 threads
7,711 comments
Boca Raton, FL
Premium
What's Killing America?
- High fructose corn syrup
- Pollution
- Inadequate access to preventative health care
Follow
Befriend (4)
28 threads
776 comments
everything says
Chris Rock said back in '99 that AIDS would get to the point where it might be a cold using a voice "::sniff:: hey man I think my AIDS is acting up I might need to take tomorrow off....:sniff:: man I might need two days you know how I get when my AIDS acts up"
Well in the western world it is largely treated to the point where this might soon be true..granted the medications cost a great deal
Follow
Befriend
1 threads
61 comments
Miami, FL
Horrible diet and low exercise. Spend too much time in front of TVs and computers. Especially the message boards!
Follow
Befriend (25)
413 threads
6,983 comments
Saint George, UT
elliemae's website
IMHO, America is bloated with bad food on every corner. And the fact that so many people aren't able to access regular, preventative care makes it difficult for people to take care of themselves before conditions become critical.
At that point, they go to the er and are treated at huge (unreimbursed) costs. And often die.
Follow
Befriend (4)
28 threads
776 comments
Huh? Some of those numbers in the article don't jive...Japan is 83 but then it says 86
"24. Chile: 79.5
25. UNITED STATES: 80.6"
How can Chile be ahead when the numbers are lower? Poor editing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
According to the UN the USA ranks 36th...BUT the top on average is 82...arguing over four years of life from the age of 78 is kinda poor argument. A better metric to improve would be infant mortality.
Follow
Befriend
98 comments
Wheeling, WV
mdovell says
Some countries play games with their life numbers that create misleading results. For example, here is an article on infant mortality that goes into some of the different standards used outside the US that affect the official numbers: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/08/infant_mortality_figures_for_us_are_misleading.html
I suspect similar things happen with the way they calculate life expectancy as well.
Follow
Befriend
21 threads
581 comments
South Pasadena, CA
Patrick says
That's because they play soccer.
Follow
Befriend
3 threads
2,498 comments
I was trying to make the point that the article is all about political talking points, not the question of whether Hong Kong is an independent country or not.
If the article were an honest appraisal, rather than an op-ed piece commissioned by a very far right wing group, then it would have tried to make a case on how the US ranking would change if all the statistical reporting differences were normalized out. The author actually tries very hard to avoid this. Why? Because the US ranking wouldn't change very much if at all.
The simple fact is that the people in the US most likely to be without health insurance are the young and poor. These are also the groups that are very likely to have children. All the nitpickers can cut me a break and don't tell me how all children aren't born to people that or young, poor, or both. No shit sherlock holmes, but many are. Without health insurance they are much more likely to have poor or non existent pre natal care. So they are much more likely to have poor outcomes. The article even admits to this point in the last paragraph, but amazingly manages to cloak it in an anti public health care dig.
Which is why the US infant mortality ranks below almost all the countries that have public health care and is down with the start of the list of countries that lack it. It's not statistical manipulation despite what the America has no faults crowd or groups like the American Thinker that are funded by people with a very heavy financial interest in the status quo would like people to believe.
Follow
Befriend
3 threads
2,498 comments
mdovell says
For thousands of years it was a common occurance for dead young mothers to be buried alongside their dead babies. It is extremely rare in first world countries today. Which goes back to my original point that somehow sailed over your head. In the US many people don't get prenatal care because of lack of health insurance. That's directly reflected in the statistics. The earlier poster was trying to gin this all up as some conspiracy of fake reporting by other countries.
mdovell says
Trying to blame the differences in statistics on lifestyle doesn't make sense. The rest of the world has people that smoke, drink, and take drugs while pregnant. Drinking while pregnant is much much more common in Europe.
mdovell says
You seem really hung up on poor health as a result of lifestyle. I know it's hard to get your head around but not all health problems are a result of lifestyle. The four big killers are heart, cancer, respiratory, and stroke. Lifestyle is a part of it, but plenty of healthy lifestyle people die these also. If you live long enough you are going to probably die from one of these no matter how healthy your lifestyle. After that it's accidents and medical errors. No lifestyle involved.
Do you somehow believe that only the US has lifestyle issues, which is why health care is so expensive here? People smoke and drink a lot more in Europe, not less. They eat somewhat better and excercise a little more, but not a lot more. Obesity in Europe is going up fast. The difference I saw when I was back 5 years ago vs when I first went to Europe in the 80's is stunning. There are a lot more fat people. The UK, Australia, and NZ all have low 20% obesity vs 30% for America. Spain, Canada, and Germany are all pushing 15%.
Public health care is for providing basic health care at a reasonable cost, no matter what the source of the illness. Health care means treating illness, mot "making" people healthy. Where do you get this idea?
Follow
Befriend (4)
28 threads
776 comments
bob2356 says
Ok fine but is attaching that to health insurance the only way? Access to health insurance is contingent upon an employer..but because states can become areas of monopolies and the feds don't allow buying across boarders of course it raises the price. bob2356 says
Well lifestyle does dictate longevity...there's been some talk of relaxing the talk about pregnant women drinking but frankly I don't see it is worth the risk.bob2356 says
That might be true but I'd argue that dying at a older age generally is better. Lifestyle does dictate health. Obesity has little evidence that it is genetic. I have met plenty that have gained or lost weight due to their own actions. In extream cases lipo might be needed. If someone is on hard drugs they might as well say they are 15-20 years older than what they are because that is the damage being done to them.bob2356 says
I'd argue that people in europe tend to exercise more but that's in the form of walking and more accountable to having higher rates of public transport. It is harder to try to do the same thing here especially after the highway system was made.
But what is considered basic care and what a reasonable cost? Where do I get this idea? Um I live in mass and that's how romneycare passed. That's how Obamacare passed. That's pretty much what the left has said for years.
I'd argue the war on drugs really needs to be modified because we seem to be subsidizing peoples habits. Opiate abuse is high here. So much so there is a product called narcan that brings people back from Od'ing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naloxone
Yes technically it saves lives but it does not end the addiction. So people might OD 5,6,7 times or so without dying.
I'd also argue that health care is more based on pain and suffering rather than longevity. Sadly sometimes pain and suffering has no work around.
This is like the banking concept of socializing the gains (pleasures of a vice) but then subsidizing the losses (health care system pays for it) We've put taxes on various vices and made some illegal but it didn't help. Health care prevention might help but like mentioned if there is a doctors mistake it can lead to a death so which is it?
Follow
Befriend (2)
3 threads
552 comments
Madison, WI
Ten years ago graduating college my nurse friend made the same as I did in with my IT job. Now she makes 2.5 times what I do. She gets paid OT, whereas a new bill in congress will negate any OT for me permanently. Our health care industry weighs heavily on treating symptoms over prevention. Only recently they have taken a step towards prevention but only from a profit perspective - it's an easy sell.
Follow
Befriend (1)
117 threads
971 comments
zzyzzx says
"blacks"?
I think whats killing America is stupidity.
Follow
Befriend
21 threads
581 comments
South Pasadena, CA
everything says
What kind of IT job is this?
Follow
Befriend
3 threads
2,498 comments
kochevnik says
The article says nothing of the kind. Reread it. Also consider the source, a major libertarian writer article a very libertarian web site. Not totally unbiased material.
Let's see some problems with the article's analysis. Start with obesity caused by low smoking rates. Smoking is much more detrimental to life span than obesity. Where does the article address the increase in life expectancy because of reduced smoking? Oops forgot about that or perhaps didn't want to mention it.
How about where the article says life expectancy is affected because we save more low weight babies who are likely to die before their first birthday. Very low birth weight is less than 1500 grams, extremely low birth weight is less than 1000 gr. Very low birth weight babies are 1.48% of all births. Survival rate is 13.8% for infants with birth weights less than 500 g, 51% for infants with birth weights of 500-749 g, 84.5% for infants with birth weights of 750-1000 g. The average survivability for VLBW based on the proportions of each weight (most are over 750g) is 78%. So the article is trying to claim the 1.48% of births with an average survivability rate of 78% is driving down the life expectancy in the US. I don't think so. US infant mortality isn't good, but VLBW is only part of the picture.
kochevnik says
Well if it's an attempted murder it certainly doesn't affect life expectancy. Only actual murder's matter. Anyway is this a joke? Murder rates are 4.7 in 100k in the US and 3.5 in Europe. Are you seriously suggesting an additional 1.2 deaths per year per 100k people is throwing off the live expectancy numbers? Really???
kochevnik says
I've yet to see Market Ticker do an analysis of anything. Just random rants. Post Karl D's article. I'd be a lot more impressed by the subsidize the world argument if drug company didn't spend a lot less on R&D than on dividends to stockholders, executive bonuses, direct advertising to drug consumers, and lobbying congress. Here's a pretty good article about drug R&D http://www.citizen.org/publications/publicationredirect.cfm?ID=7065
Your argument is contradictory anyway. The biggest subsidized part is the cost of research done at the universities. That isn't included as part of the cost of health care.
Follow
Befriend
3 threads
2,498 comments
monkframe says
The fans of business efficiency are paid lots of bribes, excuse me lobbying dollars, to pass legislation to allow business to efficiently put lots of money in executive and stockholders pockets.
Follow
Befriend (9)
416 threads
4,138 comments
Baltimore, MD
And in a related story:
http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2011/12/19/larger-waistlines-equals-smaller-capacity-for-commercial-water-transit/
Coast Guard makes commercial passenger vessels reduce passenger capacity limits due to so many fat people
The Coast Guard amends its regulations governing the maximum weight and number of passengers that may safely be permitted on board a vessel and other stability regulations, including increasing the Assumed Average Weight per Person … to 185 lb.,” the document states. “Updating regulations to more accurately reflect today’s average weight per person will maintain intended safety levels by accounting for this weight increase.
Follow
Befriend
7 threads
187 comments
Pacifica, CA
"Although that is certainly true they did not actually even say the word exercise or fitness until when?"
What does this mean?
"The government cannot demand that any business raise or lower their pay (outside of say minimum wage)."
The government can provide services for its citizens. That is a main function, as in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.
The administrative cost of Social Security, for example, is small, and very efficient. The profit motive motive is missing, as it should be in a public benefit.
There is nothing "competitive" about our health care system. It's about gouging the public to the max while terrifying them with death if they do not pay. In many people's cases, such as my own, it's true; without health care coverage I face a potential early death.
Ten years ago, my monthly health care premiums were $250. Now, they are $804, and I'm barely able to cover that. Many people are worse off than I, they go to the emergency room I suppose, or just die, who knows?
My health care plan rejected my application to go onto a high deductible plan, saying that if I did switch (which they wouldn't allow) they might boot me off entirely on Dec. 31, 2013, at which point I'd need to get a "government-approved" plan.
That's because industry lobbyists wrote the health care bill.
Medicare for all is the solution, get rid of all the bloodsuckers.
Follow
Befriend
1 threads
208 comments
Arlington, TX
monkframe says
If you can't pay you die.
Thats capitalism. It was that way in 1867 when Karl Marx wrote Das Kapital, but was slightly derailed by WWII, and is now back on track!
Follow
Befriend
5 comments
I would love to see a break down of actual medical expenses across age groups and geographic locations.
My hunch is that age group wise most of the expenses go to the 55+ groups. While your first instinct would be to think that this normal and expected I strongly disagree. Expensive long term medical issues usually start much earlier. Early health monitoring could be a boon for life expectancy.
In the end it's mostly the young who can't afford (or are not willing to) to have health care and are not covered by Medicaid/Medicare. Fixing this problem of course is impossible in the current political climate. So health care costs will continue to rise until the cost bubble bursts.
I find it fascinating that something like dental health care still does increase in cost. Why does it not go down with more efficient technology and improved process? How much more value can you add to dental health care? We are not adding teeth to humans nor do we make false teeth out of diamonds.
The same thought should be applied to the medical field as a whole. I think this is where thinking about medical care in market terms is questionable. It has never worked for some reason. Anywhere.
Follow
Befriend (28)
171 threads
4,214 comments
Premium
Over-regulation, according to the GOP. That and taxes and Barney Frank.