Thread: American Health Care System and Life Expectancy Research

Some recent research shows that lower life expectancy or longevity in America when compared to other industrialized nations is not a result of the health care system. This puts some perspective regarding some of the health care rankings which tend to attribute longevity to a country's health care system.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/science/22tier.html

...a prominent researcher, Samuel H. Preston, has taken a closer look at the growing body of international data, and he finds no evidence that America’s health care system is to blame for the longevity gap between it and other industrialized countries. In fact, he concludes, the American system in many ways provides superior treatment even when uninsured Americans are included in the analysis.



“The U.S. actually does a pretty good job of identifying and treating the major diseases,” says Dr. Preston, a demographer at the University of Pennsylvania who is among the leading experts on mortality rates from disease. “The international comparisons don’t show we’re in dire straits.”

[quote name='Christopher' date='10 October 2009 - 02:00 PM' timestamp='1255204826' post='35727']

Some recent research shows that lower life expectancy or longevity in America when compared to other industrialized nations is not a result of the health care system. This puts some perspective regarding some of the health care rankings which tend to attribute longevity to a country's health care system.

http://www.nytimes.c...nce/22tier.html

[/quote]



Thanks for the perspective Christopher. I wonder how much the various types of "stress" contribute as well, if it's ever been "quantitatively" established?



There's no doubt our lifestyles are primarily responsible for our longevity (and not solely the result of our health care system). The 4 majors; lack of exercise, eating habits, smoking, and lack of sex (I had to add that one ). Perhaps we should generally tax food specifically on it's individual health care impact! A "national health impact tax". If you think about it, the rationale and precedent for such a tax exists. The tax could be used to offset cost-shifting of medical expenses, and promote healthy lifestyles....it worked for smoking.



Deserves more thought!



-sensored

[quote name='Feslin' date='10 October 2009 - 03:10 PM' timestamp='1255209045' post='35758']

No. The government shouldn't be in the business of micromanaging everyone's lives. If Fatty Chubbins wants to eat buckets of chicken for breakfast every day, that's his problem, as long as he's paying for his own healthcare.[/quote]



It wouldn't be Feslin. The choice whether to eat what food still lies with the consumer. It's just that with this model, THE PEOPLE THAT CAUSE THE EXPENSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT PAY THE BILLS. How is that micromanaging? I would think this is exactly managing the issue in a way that puts the burden of "cost" where it belongs.



-sensored

[quote name='Feslin' date='10 October 2009 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1255210136' post='35766']It's an attempt to micromanage people's live through the tax code, you know that. It's a fine for eating unhealthy foods.



We should simply allow individuals to freely trade amongst each other. If the fatty wants chicken, he should be able to buy chicken without being fined. If the fatty ends up needing a heart bypass, he should go and pay a doctor with his own money or money attained through voluntary agreement.[/quote]



Or the tax could be interpreted as "pre-paying" for the health carethey will need in the future. Just depends on the way you look at it.I'm more interested in strategies THAT WORK. Practically speaking, yourinterpretation hasn't. That's not to say it "couldn't", but in orderfor it to work - all the way downstream - we would have to be willingto let people die that make the mistakes of their youth. Although"idealistically" it's possible, historically it hasn't worked.



-sensored

[quote name='Feslin' date='10 October 2009 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1255210136' post='35766']It's an attempt to micromanage people's live through the tax code, you know that. It's a fine for eating unhealthy foods.



We should simply allow individuals to freely trade amongst each other. If the fatty wants chicken, he should be able to buy chicken without being fined. If the fatty ends up needing a heart bypass, he should go and pay a doctor with his own money or money attained through voluntary agreement.[/quote]



Or the tax could be interpreted as "pre-paying" for the health carethey will need in the future. Just depends on the way you look at it.I'm more interested in strategies THAT WORK. Practically speaking, yourinterpretation hasn't. That's not to say it "couldn't", but in orderfor it to work - all the way downstream - we would have to be willingto let people die that make the mistakes of their youth. Although"idealistically" it's possible, historically it hasn't worked.



-sensored

[quote name='Feslin' date='10 October 2009 - 04:49 PM' timestamp='1255214950' post='35787']

No, that's stupid. You can't involuntarily charge someone for something they may not need, especially not if it's not the government providing the service.



Let the fatties pay for their own care. It's their business, not yours.

[/quote]



ok, so you don't agree with the concept of insurance. I get ya..... after all, insurance is "paying for something you may not need". You are obsessed with the idea that government is some kind of "control mechanism" whose only purpose is to deprive us of our freedom of choice, and should be avoided at all costs. Too bad, I think it does a pretty good job of managing our defense, or do you then think we should abolish the military in favor of hiring Blackwater, because they can do a better job? Competition will insure that we get the "best possible defense". It's a natural by-product of capitalism after all.



Unlike corporate america, at least we have a "say" in how we are governed. I take it you're not one of those that have lost their job lately because our true patriots (corporate america) have shipped it overseas. THESE are the true american citizens that we should protect at all costs.



The problem with "Let the fatties pay for their own care. It's their business, not yours" is, IT WON'T HAPPEN. In the end, we will NOT let them die (that's a pipe dream), and so they will get the care they need, and WE will pay for it. Like it or not, that is the destiny of doing things your way.



just m2c