Re: US health care,a winner for Hillary in 04?

[Sten Thaning]

Quoting "James A. Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> > Other countries (notably Sweden, to which the
> > USA is always being compared) don't "count" a child as born until it
> > has reached a certain age (three weeks in Sweden). Guess when most
> > infant deaths occur?
> 
> Interesting datum.  Could you give a source for this.  If true, needs 
> wide publicity, since we web search for "infant mortality" and Sweden 
> gives a zillion hits, all saying what you would expect.

I would also like to see a source for the claim, as this is something I've 
never heard before.

According to SCB, the Swedish official department of statistics, the definition 
of "infant mortality" is "all deaths which occur before the child is one year 
old". 
I couldn't find that definition in English on the department's web page, 
though. The Swedish definition is in 

(under the term "spädbarnsdödlighet")

I did find an English translation of the definition of a live birth, though.

Section 3, "Definitions and concepts"

  "A live birth refers to a newborn who after the birth has breathed or showed 
any other evidence of life such as active hearthbeat, pulsation in the 
umbilical cord or definite movement of volontary muscles. The definition is 
valid regardess of the duration of pregnancy and the maturity of the child.
   A stillbirth is a newborn who has died before or during delivery and after 
teh end of the 28th gestational week calculated from the first day of the 
latest normal menstruation. If there is uncertainty regarding gestational age, 
the length of the foetus is an important factor in the assessment. If the 
length of foetus is at least 35 centimeters, it will generally be counted as a 
child."

It would seem as we indeed count the child as born directly from, well, birth...

 - Sten

Re: CDR: US health care,a winner for Hillary in 04?

[James A. Donald]

On 28 Jan 2003 at 19:46, Marc de Piolenc wrote:
> PS - the infant mortality statistics are bogus; they are a
> record-keeping artefact. Other countries (notably Sweden, to which the
> USA is always being compared) don't "count" a child as born until it
> has reached a certain age (three weeks in Sweden). Guess when most
> infant deaths occur?

Interesting datum.  Could you give a source for this.  If true, needs 
wide publicity, since we web search for "infant mortality" and Sweden 
gives a zillion hits, all saying what you would expect.

Re: CDR: US health care,a winner for Hillary in 04?

[Marc de Piolenc]

Perfect example of a governmental "solution" (socialized health care) to
a government-caused problem (high cost of care). Instead of giving us
more of what is killing us, why not remove the causes of the problem?

Marc

PS - the infant mortality statistics are bogus; they are a
record-keeping artefact. Other countries (notably Sweden, to which the
USA is always being compared) don't "count" a child as born until it has
reached a certain age (three weeks in Sweden). Guess when most infant
deaths occur?

Matthew X wrote:
> 
> The Myth of US Health Care

> 27 January 2003
> " The US has the newest medicines in world, spends more of GDP on medicine
> than any other nation, and yet has the highest rates for at least 10 cancer
> types and the highest infant mortality rate of all developed nations. The
> conservative politicians say socialized medicine is bad because you might
> have to wait your turn for some non-emergency services,