Country Life!expectancy Infant! mortality!rate! per!1000!live! births Physicians!per! 1000!people Nurses!per! 1000!people Per!capita! expenditure!on! health!(USD) Healthcare! costs!as!a! percent!of!GDP %!of! government! revenue!spent! on!health %!of!health! costs!paid!by! government Australia 80.5 5 2.47 9.1 3,123 9.6 18.5 67.5 Canada 80.5 5 2.14 9.95 3,037 9.8 17.1 69.8 France 79.5 4 3.37 7.24 3,464 10.5 15.4 76.3 Germany 80 4 3.37 9.72 3,521 10.6 17.3 76.9 Japan 82.5 3 1.98 7.79 2,823 7.8 17.2 81.3 Sweden 80.5 3 3.28 10.24 3,532 9.1 13.6 84.9 UK 79.5 5 2.3 12.12 2,900 8.1 15.9 86.3 USA 77.5 6 2.56 9.37 6,096 15.4 18.9 44.7
conversations.psu.edu/docs/calkins_*comparison*.pdf - Cost per person almost double On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > KIT, > > Of course we spend more gross dollars on not only health care but also > things like blue jeans and other consumer products, we have 300 plus > million people in our country. Now express what our health care costs > us in terms of percentage of GNP and compare THAT figure to other > industrial nations. > > On Mar 10, 3:58 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > Holly, (And Studio) > > > > I wrote this to another group, but it applies equally here. I hope that > you > > take the time to read it. > > > > Keith > > > > ========== > > > > There are many in this Nation, like you, who claim that the United States > > spends more money per year on health care and has one of the worst > systems > > in the industrial world. On the other side of the aisle, you have folks > > like me, who admit that while we may spend more than any other nation on > > health care, this claim would be equally true of expenditures on blue > > jeans, pro sporting tickets, aquariums, X-boxes, lawn mowers, beer and > > cocktails. Further, folks like me believe that instead of being one of > the > > worst providers of medical care, the Unites States delivers the best care > in > > the world. > > > > Who is right? Let’s go to the data. > > > > In your last post, you state that the United States is ranked 37th, in > > health care quality. We had this discussion in the group, predominately > > with former member Larry over a year ago, and I wanted to take the time > to > > revisit this subject, and attempt to demonstrate once again how this > number > > is unfair and is skewed. > > > > Let’s first focus on the infant mortality rate; (“IMR”). Those who > > champion universal health care claim that the United States ranks 30th in > > the world in IMR. Here is a chart (with the link) that shows this > > position: > > > > [image: IMR Ranking]< > http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db23._fig1.gif> > > > > Many “left of center” individuals, (like Larry, who is a very good > example > > of an “Academian”) claim that the infant mortality rate is an indicator > of > > health care services in a country. For this to be true, three conditions > > must be met: > > > > 1. All nations are reporting their numbers correctly/consistently. > > > > 2. The infants that are dying are of the same type. > > > > 3. Factors other than medical services are being accounted for. > > > > *Consistency in Reporting* > > > > We know for a fact that not all nations count the infant mortality rate > the > > same. In the United States, we use the “World Health Organization”; > > (“WHO”) Definition: > > > > http://www.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/indneonatalmortality/en/ > > > > The term, “Live birth” refers to the complete expulsion or extraction > from > > its mother of a product of conception, irrespective of the duration of > the > > pregnancy, which, after such separation, breathes or shows any other > > evidence of life; *e.g*.; beating of the heart, pulsation of the > umbilical > > cord or definite movement of voluntary muscles; whether or not the > > umbilical cord has been cut or the placenta is attached. Each product of > > such a birth is considered live born. > > > > In Europe, for example, they use a totally different way of calculating > > IMR’s; (*See* Page 122, of the report: > http://www.europeristat.com/bm.doc/european-perinatal-health-report.pdf > > Attached > > below) > > > > The infant mortality rate is defined as the number of infant deaths (days > > 0-364) after live birth at or after 22 completed weeks of gestation in a > > given year, expressed per 1000 live births in the same > > year. > > > > Nevertheless, even this definition is not standard across all of the > > European Union, much less all of the European Nation-States!! (*See* the > > Above Referenced Report at Page 122, Attached Below) > > > > Almost all Nation-States provide data on overall infant mortality rates. > > However, very few Nation-States provide data on infant mortality rates by > > gestational age or birth weight, like we do here in the United States, > since > > infant deaths are registered in separate systems and not linked to > perinatal > > data. These data were available for gestational age only from Flanders > and > > Brussels in Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Malta, Austria, Poland, > > Finland, Sweden, the UK, and Norway. > > > > This means, of course, that for Nation-States like Portugal, France, > > Belgium, Greece, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Austria, Italy and the > > Netherlands the method for counting doesn’t abide to even the less > > restrictive definition that the rest of the EU uses, and all of these > > countries rank higher than the United Sates in the ranking by the CDC. > > > > Moreover, the United States actually OVER-REPORTS the live births and > > subsequent deaths!! > > > > http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-doctor-is-in-infant-mortality-compar... > > > > What happens when adjustments are made for these differences? > > > > Norway boasts one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. But > > when the main determinant of mortality — weight at birth — is factored > in, > > Norway has no better survival rates than the United States. > > > > *Which Infants Are Dying?* > > > > The reason for the death is important in measuring IMR as well. If, for > > example, there is an indicator that results in a much larger IMR than > > another, and that indicator is present in one population but not another, > > that would explain a difference in the two IMR rankings. One of the > first > > things that we should look at in determining if these IMR rankings are > > accurate is to identify if such in indicator exists. And it > > does<http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db23.htm> > > : > > > > In 2004, the U.S. infant mortality rate (excluding births at less than 22 > > weeks of gestation) was 5.8, nearly twice the rate of 3.0 for Sweden, one > of > > the two European countries with the lowest infant mortality rate (along > with > > Norway). > > > > Using direct standardization (10), we applied the U.S. gestational-age > > specific infant mortality rates to Sweden’s distribution of births by > > gestational age. If the United States had Sweden’s distribution of births > by > > gestational age, the U.S. infant mortality rate (excluding births at less > > than 22 weeks of gestation) would go from 5.8 to 3.9 infant deaths per > 1,000 > > live births—a decline of 33%. > > > > [image: US adjusted]< > http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db23._fig1.gif> > > > > In fact, if we use the numbers above, and just the numbers above, the US > > moves from its current ranking of 30th to a ranking of 12; tied with > > Germany. And this does not even include the adjustments that certainly > > would move many of those countries 1-11 even lower!! > > > > And how does the United States rank in Pre-Term Birth Percentages? > > > > [image: Preterm Rate]< > http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db23._fig1.gif> > > > > We rank among the highest in the world. The ranking that WHO and the > CDC > > and the CIA report are now, perhaps, showing a different story. They may > > not be showing a picture of the medical delivery service in America for > > infants, rather, they may be showing that America delivers far more > Preterm > > babies than the rest of the world, or that we REPORT more preterm live > > births than the rest of the world. If even one of these two statistics > were > > reported, the United States would jump either near the very top or would > > move up 18 spots on the list!! > > > > *Non-Medical Factors* > > > > Lastly, when looking at the IMR as an indicator on the medical delivery, > or > > health care, system, it is equally important to look into factors that > > contribute to IMR that have nothing to do with that system. And again, > we > > see that there are such factors: > > > > [image: IMR by Race]< > http://www.mchb.hrsa.gov/healthystart/evaluation/benchmarkreport/benc...> > > > > http://mchb.hrsa.gov/healthystart/evaluation/benchmarkreport/disparit... > > > > It jumps out of the page; black babies dies at a higher rate than any > other > > followed by Hawaiian and Native American. And why the discrepency in > Black > > women? > > > > The largest difference in rates between the two groups was for preterm > > birth/low birthweight infants; *e.g*.; infants born to Black women had > an > > infant death rate due to preterm birth/low birthweight four times higher > > than those born to White women. > > > > [image: LBW by race] > > > > And why are we seeing black women delivering babies with such low > > birthrates? > > > > There are only two possible reasons: > > > > (1): The reason that African American mothers have babies who weigh less > at > > birth is that they are at greater risk for such conditions as high blood > > pressure and preeclampsia; and (2): Minority women are subject to > stress > > caused by perceived racial discrimination, according to the researchers > in > > this study: > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070730173400.htm > > > > By example, in this study, David & Collins spoke with black women who > had > > babies with normal weights at birth, comparing them with black women > whose > > babies’ birth weight was very low — under three pounds. > > > > They asked the mothers if they had ever been treated unfairly because of > > their race when looking for a job, in an educational setting or in other > > situations. > > > > Those who felt discriminated against had a twofold increase in low birth > > weights. And for those who experienced discrimination in three “domains,” > > the increase was nearly threefold. > > > > In David and Collins’ study of black women who gave birth in two Chicago > > hospitals, 16 percent said their partner was in jail during the > pregnancy. “We > > interpreted this finding as another indicator of stress, but one caused > by > > institutional rather than interpersonal racial discrimination,” David > said. > > > > There is no question that we could improve upon a lot of different > aspects > > with regard to our health care system. Do we need a complete overhaul, > at > > the expense of the majority of Americans? Are we basing our decisions > on > > propaganda, created by folks with an agenda? > > > > By example, I have shown here today, that the statistic, at least with > > regard to our Health Care System being 37th in the world is inaccurate > and > > not based on real, factual data, the raw statistic showing that the > United > > States has such a low IMR is simply not accurate. Where the data is > > accurate, the data can be explained in large part, to conditions that > may > > have nothing to do with medical service delivery. > > > > Yet you and others would cite this fraudulent, misleading data as being > the > > gospel, and are willing to make wholesale changes in our laws, that will > > effect our Nation for generations. We are bankrupt! Our debt is now at > a > > ... > > > > read more » > > > > image006.gif > > 87KViewDownload > > > > image003.gif > > 18KViewDownload > > > > image004.gif > > 12KViewDownload > > > > image002.gif > > 25KViewDownload > > > > image001.png > > 42KViewDownload > > > > image005.gif > > 80KViewDownload > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Mark M. Kahle, , www.filacoffee.com -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
