Mexico is in red, which I suppose is "technically" accurate, but the Mexican Constitution guarantees health care to all citizens:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Mexico#Public_he...
Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
51–60 of 107 posts
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that awesome when you remember that correlation does not necessarily equal causation.
It's not about showing correlation. It's about showing that we're not getting what we're paying for.
It fails to definitively show that we're not getting what we're paying for because a graph such as this only shows correlation.
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Here's the same data in a scatter plot (second chart down). Far, far easier to grasp. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2009...
Thank you. As I suspected, I can immediately read the scatter plot. And the correlation that I wondered about is indeed there.
The problem with the scatter plot is that you lose the average cost/average life expectancy info. On the original plot, the UK corresponds roughly to average health care costs and average LE. The slope shows if the country is getting value for money. The upward slope of New Zealand shows that they are spending less money per person than the average yet getting better than average results. The downward slope of Denmark shows that they spend more than the average for inferior results. That information is lost in the scatter plot.
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
They trust their doctors. In the rest of the world there are not the restrictions on drugs that are found in the USA. Also, what about all the people that could be saved by a medicine that have nothing to lose if it doesn't work since they have no other options -- right now they SOL. The amount of people that die because they cannot receive medicines that may work is staggering and a great injustice.
Do you have data on the number of people who die because the FDA has not approved a drug that may save their life? Note that this is different from people who die because they can't afford treatment. I would be more comfortable with point 4 if we once again banned prescription drug advertisements.
Remember that the FDA in the US only requires that a drug be better than placebo to be "effective" in many cases the drug company just has to show 0.1% better than placebo to get passed.
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#55The way the UK hits just at average (for cost and life expectancy) appears to almost make that look intentional.
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about showing correlation. It's about showing that we're not getting what we're paying for.
It fails to definitively show that we're not getting what we're paying for because a graph such as this only shows correlation.
You are correct. But, If Americans are paying (av. 7k) per year on health and have a lower life expectancy that other industrialized nations, the data alone suggest Something is going very wrong. Strange that it has some of the highest paid doctors and most profitable health care companies also.
Surely there must be an explanation study somewhere?
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/how-much-do-doc...
http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=103622972.h...
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. As I suspected, I can immediately read the scatter plot. And the correlation that I wondered about is indeed there.
The problem with the scatter plot is that you lose the average cost/average life expectancy info. On the original plot, the UK corresponds roughly to average health care costs and average LE. The slope shows if the country is getting value for money. The upward slope of New Zealand shows that they are spending less money per person than the average yet getting better than average results. The downward slope of Denmar…
[deleted]
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#58In addition to health insurance being broken, it seems like most doctors are really terrible in the U.S. I read the other day that it takes on average seven years to correctly diagnose a medical condition. Some diseases, like celiacs, have an average time until diagnosis of 10 years. If you haven't already read How Doctors Think, it's truly horrifying. Unless you have something like strept throat, you're generally pretty screwed even if you have great medical insurance. And I'm speaking from personal experience here; about three years ago I started having some medical issues, and I went into the doctor the day the symptoms started happening. A dozen doctors and specialists later and I still don't have a correct diagnosis. The fact that I'm probably going to have to wait another 5+ years until I can get the problem even diagnosed is complete bullshit. Now it could just be that I have something that is really hard to diagnose, but more likely the reason no one can figure it out is that medical schools have done their best to select doctors with zero intellectual curiosity who never voluntarily read anything about medicine other than pharma pamphlets. Just look at what happened to Shooter because the 'best' doctors couldn't even diagnose something as trivial as lyme disease: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=868325
edit: Someone really needs to make a crowdsourced website where you can post all your symptoms and test results, and then offer up a bounty to anyone who can figure out the correct diagnosis.
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
They trust their doctors. In the rest of the world there are not the restrictions on drugs that are found in the USA. Also, what about all the people that could be saved by a medicine that have nothing to lose if it doesn't work since they have no other options -- right now they SOL. The amount of people that die because they cannot receive medicines that may work is staggering and a great injustice.
Do you have data on the number of people who die because the FDA has not approved a drug that may save their life? Note that this is different from people who die because they can't afford treatment. I would be more comfortable with point 4 if we once again banned prescription drug advertisements.
I don't have any hard numbers, but here is a good article from 2007 that may provide insight into the problem.
http://reason.com/archives/2007/07/25/dying-for-lifesaving-d...
Re: Cost of Health Care By Country, as Compared to Life Expectancy
#60Graphs are abused. Graphs are meant to present data clearly and concisely. The most clear and concise presentation method should be used. If it is not, there are reasons to be skeptical. This graph is not the best presentation imaginable; it's not even mediocre. It is meant to appeal visually to those who already have reached the conclusions it is meant to illicit; it is graph porn. Health care spending and quality i…
The research question is one that occurred to me. Do these cost data include spending on medical and pharmaceutical research? I would imagine that the bulk of that spending occurs in those same countries that are "above" the average line in this graph, and could contribute to that skewing.