U.S. Ranks Below 16 Other Rich Countries In Health Report


It's no news that the U.S. has lower life expectancy and higher infant
mortality than most high-income countries. But a magisterial new report
says Americans are actually less healthy across their entire life spans
than citizens of 16 other wealthy nations.

And the gap is steadily widening.

"What struck us — and it was quite sobering — was the recurring trend in
which the U.S. seems to be slipping behind other high-income countries,"
the lead author of the report, Dr. Steven Woolf, tells Shots.

He says Americans of all ages up to 75 have shorter lives and more
illness and injury.

*****Strikingly, even Americans who are white, insured, college-educated
and upper-income are worse off than their counterparts around the world
— a finding that no one quite understands.*****

"People with seemingly everything going for them still live shorter
lives and have higher disease rates than people in other countries,"
Woolf says.

The 378-page report was completed under the auspices of the National
Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences. It grew
out of an effort last year that concluded the U.S. has a large and
widening "mortality gap" among adults over 50 compared with other
high-income nations.

The new report focuses on the other part of the population, Americans
under 50. Two-thirds of the difference in male life expectancy between
the U.S. and other countries is due to deaths in that under-50 age
category, and one-third of the gap is due to deaths among women under 50.

The report also finds that the U.S. fares worse in nine health domains:
birth outcomes, injuries and homicides, teen pregnancies and sexually
transmitted infections, HIV/AIDS, drug-related mortality, obesity and
diabetes, heart disease, chronic lung disease, and disability.

Areas in which the U.S. is not behind other wealthy countries are cancer
screening and mortality, control of high blood pressure and cholesterol,
smoking rates, and suicides.

The panel concludes that part of the nation's poor ranking can be
attributed to problems with its $2.6 trillion-a-year health care system
(the world's most expensive by far). Those problems include the 50
million Americans without health insurance, fewer doctors per capita,
less access to primary care and fragmented management of complex chronic
diseases.

But the new report places more stress on nonmedical shortcomings.

Many people might be surprised to learn, for instance, that for more
than half the males who die before age 50, the cause of death has
nothing to do with disease — and is therefore not amenable to reduction
through medical care.

Those causes include murder (19 percent of deaths in males under 50),
traffic accidents (18 percent), other accidents (16 percent) and suicide
(4 percent). Only 35 percent are disease-related, and 7 percent are
other causes.

Among U.S. women under 50, the picture is different — 53 percent of
deaths are disease-related, 38 percent are due to accidents, homicides
and suicide, and 9 percent are listed as "other."

Guns have a lot to do with the homicide and accidental deaths. The
report notes that murder rates involving guns are 20 times higher in the
U.S. than in 22 other rich countries.

"Clearly we need to do something about violence and firearm-related
homicides if we're going to close the gap," Woolf says. "It's a major
contributor to the loss of years of life in our country among young people."

Much of the poor health outcomes and premature mortality is due to other
nonmedical causes — such as behavioral choices like drug and alcohol
abuse, a built environment that favors auto travel at the expense of
exercise, and dietary habits.

Americans consume nearly 4,000 calories a day on average — more than
anyone else in the world.

"That wasn't always the case," Woolf says. "But over the past 20 years,
the consumption of high-calorie foods and refined sugars and other
dietary causes of obesity has increased dramatically in the United
States in comparison to these other countries."

Many reports of this ilk serve as doorstops or dust-catchers, but Dr.
David Kindig, a population health specialist at the University of
Wisconsin, Madison, says this one shouldn't be ignored.

"It's not like we haven't known some of this yet, but it hasn't
penetrated — how serious it is," Kindig says. "I hope that [the report]
would be a wake-up call, almost like Sputnik. You know, let's get going
on this over the next decade."

Kindig says some clues about what to do come from a state-by-state
analysis of U.S. health disparities that he and his colleagues do every
year.

"Some of the healthiest states — say, like Minnesota — actually spend
less on health care," Kindig says. "And presumably that allows them to
spend more on some of the other determinants of health."

Education is one of those determinants. Kindig says it would be a
mistake to cut spending on schools since education and health are
tightly linked — and cuts there will just show up later in poorer health.

Woolf, the panel chairman, says the nation's problems may be deeply
rooted in Americans' love of personal choice and aversion to government
regulation of health and safety. That won't be easy to change.

"It is a difficult one to tackle," Woolf acknowledges. "But we need to
have a national discussion about whether we do or don't. We're living
shorter lives and we're living sicker because of something we're doing
in this country."

Woolf says Americans need to decide if they're OK with that — or are
prepared to make different choices.




http://tinyurl.com/bdleyxn

On 1/15/2013 12:18 PM, ESAD wrote:

What for? You aren't a doctor. Take your perverted sex fantasies elsewhere.

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:18:49 -0500, ESAD wrote:



U.S. Ranks Below 16 Other Rich Countries In Health Report


It's no news that the U.S. has lower life expectancy and higher infant
mortality than most high-income countries. But a magisterial new report
says Americans are actually less healthy across their entire life spans
than citizens of 16 other wealthy nations.




http://tinyurl.com/bdleyxn

I wonder how many of those other 'high income' countries have the illegal immigrant population and
downtown ghettos that our beloved Democrats have and are creating.


Salmonbait

--

'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument!

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 12:18:49 -0500, ESAD wrote:



U.S. Ranks Below 16 Other Rich Countries In Health Report


It's no news that the U.S. has lower life expectancy and higher infant
mortality than most high-income countries. But a magisterial new report
says Americans are actually less healthy across their entire life spans
than citizens of 16 other wealthy nations.




http://tinyurl.com/bdleyxn

I wonder how many of those other 'high income' countries have the illegal immigrant population and
downtown ghettos that our beloved Democrats have and are creating.


Salmonbait

Ghettos are exclusive to Democrats?? You are nothing short of a narrow
minded idiot!!!

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:36:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Ghettos are exclusive to Democrats?? You are nothing short of a narrow
minded idiot!!!

Ghettos are a product of the war on poverty. They dumped huge amounts
of money in the inner cities and people moved toward that money. We
ended up with a massive pool of unskilled labor in a place with very
little market for it. (except in the criminal enterprises)

They would have done a lot better to spread the money evenly across
the country and letting the poor people disperse or simply get aid
where they were.

In that regard, democrats have certainly benefitted from, the
concentrations of welfare recipients in the big cities. Virtually all
of them are governed by democratic legislatures.

Are you SERIOUS????? There weren't ghettos before this war on
poverty?????? But even before that, I asked "ghettos are exclusive to
Democrats?"

Now, please give cite that the ghettos are a direct product of the "war
on poverty"......

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:14:26 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:36:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Ghettos are exclusive to Democrats?? You are nothing short of a narrow
minded idiot!!!

Ghettos are a product of the war on poverty. They dumped huge amounts
of money in the inner cities and people moved toward that money. We
ended up with a massive pool of unskilled labor in a place with very
little market for it. (except in the criminal enterprises)

They would have done a lot better to spread the money evenly across
the country and letting the poor people disperse or simply get aid
where they were.

In that regard, democrats have certainly benefitted from, the
concentrations of welfare recipients in the big cities. Virtually all
of them are governed by democratic legislatures.

Are you SERIOUS????? There weren't ghettos before this war on
poverty??????

Find one cite that says the concentration of poor people in inner
cities was greater before the late 60s than it is now.

You didn't say that, you said "Ghettos are a product of the war on
poverty". That's pure bull****.

But even before that, I asked "ghettos are exclusive to
Democrats?"

Is there a ghetto with a republican representative?

Historically YES.

Now, please give cite that the ghettos are a direct product of the "war
on poverty"......

Before the 60s, these areas were home to the working poor, now there
are far more unemployed people than employed people (at least people
working on a W-2 job)

Please give cite.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/ghetto.aspx

On 1/15/13 2:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:36:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Ghettos are exclusive to Democrats?? You are nothing short of a narrow
minded idiot!!!

Ghettos are a product of the war on poverty. They dumped huge amounts
of money in the inner cities and people moved toward that money. We
ended up with a massive pool of unskilled labor in a place with very
little market for it. (except in the criminal enterprises)

They would have done a lot better to spread the money evenly across
the country and letting the poor people disperse or simply get aid
where they were.

In that regard, democrats have certainly benefitted from, the
concentrations of welfare recipients in the big cities. Virtually all
of them are governed by democratic legislatures.


The ghettos in this country existed long before the war on poverty, and
most of the people who you are targeting weren't allowed to live
elsewhere or get training for decent jobs.

Perhaps the big cities would have more disparity of governing if the
Republicans weren't such racists.

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:47:49 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 1/15/13 2:53 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:36:49 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Ghettos are exclusive to Democrats?? You are nothing short of a narrow
minded idiot!!!

Ghettos are a product of the war on poverty. They dumped huge amounts
of money in the inner cities and people moved toward that money. We
ended up with a massive pool of unskilled labor in a place with very
little market for it. (except in the criminal enterprises)

They would have done a lot better to spread the money evenly across
the country and letting the poor people disperse or simply get aid
where they were.

In that regard, democrats have certainly benefitted from, the
concentrations of welfare recipients in the big cities. Virtually all
of them are governed by democratic legislatures.


The ghettos in this country existed long before the war on poverty, and
most of the people who you are targeting weren't allowed to live
elsewhere or get training for decent jobs.

Perhaps the big cities would have more disparity of governing if the
Republicans weren't such racists.

How long have the corrupt Democrats been running the ghettos, ESAD?

Detroit has not had a Republican mayor for over 40 years - yet you blame the problem on Republicans?

Here, try this: http://tinyurl.com/o42at


Salmonbait

--

'Name-calling'...the liberals' answer to a lost argument!

On 1/16/13 10:32 AM, Salmonbait wrote:

Detroit has not had a Republican mayor for over 40 years - yet you blame the problem on Republicans?



Salmonbait


The fact that you keep repeating the same bull**** doesn't make it
correct or smell better.

On 1/16/2013 10:32 AM, Salmonbait wrote:


Perhaps the big cities would have more disparity of governing if the
Republicans weren't such racists.

Your statement is bogus, as it is built on the false narrative that
republicans are racist, when so obviously it's the democrats who are
intolerant and racist...



How long have the corrupt Democrats been running the ghettos, ESAD?

Detroit has not had a Republican mayor for over 40 years - yet you blame the problem on Republicans?

Here, try this: http://tinyurl.com/o42at


Salmonbait


His question was invalid.