Live data from Hacker News

U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

latimes.com

41–50 of 110 posts

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#41
My first thought was "what the hell does health have to do with accidents?", which I learned was justified by the first article I found after googling for "life expectancy without accidents": http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-amer...

>A few years back, Robert Ohsfeldt of Texas A&M and John Schneider of the University of Iowa asked the obvious question: what happens if you remove deaths from fatal injuries from the life expectancy tables? Among the 29 members of the OECD, the U.S. vaults from 19th place to…you guessed it…first. Japan, on the same adjustment, drops from first to ninth.

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#42
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is health interesting to anyone? Viewed in a more hackish light: here's a problem; how can we fix it?

It's not a problem that can be 'hacked'. Much like hunger in the third world: it's a political problem. Practical solutions have long since been developed and proved in other places. The problems persist where they do, because there's no political will to actually implement the solutions in those places.

> It's not a problem that can be 'hacked'.

While I agree it's a political problem in general, there's apparently a lot that can be hacked. Starting with lowering the cost of diagnostics and improving the information flow... There were a couple of interesting companies interviewed on Mendelspod (http://mendelspod.com/) - if you're interested in what can be hacked, give it a go.

There are also projects like http://nhshackday.com/

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#43
Worth remembering some things here:

* The US is thought by some economists to have an artificially high infant mortality because the US is more rigorous about reporting live births than other countries which might write up the same events as stillbirths.

* Outcomes in the US for chronic serious illnesses are at or near the top of the rankings.

* Life expectancy figures in the US are anchored down by suicides and, more importantly, traffic fatalities, which the US leads the world in. While that's not something we should be OK with, it's also a direct consequence of the vast land mass and wide population dispersal in the US.

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#44
post #31

The US is at or very near the worst among OECD countries in: infant mortality, child poverty, child health and safety, life expectancy at birth, healthy life expectancy, rate of obesity, disability-adjusted life years, doctors per 1000 people, deaths from treatable conditions, rate of mental health disorders, rate of drug abuse, rate of prescription drug use, incarceration rate, rate of assaults, rate of homicides, i…

Dig a bit deeper and you'll see that those statistics don't tell you the whole story. In the US, premature births occur at a much higher rate than other country and account for a large portion of the higher infant mortality rate. Those stats also don't tell you that if you have a premature baby, it's most likely to survive if treated in the US.

Also, the exact same event can take place in two different countries, but be classified called "live birth, dead baby" in the US and "stillbirth" in another country. [1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infant_mortality#Measuring_IMR

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's very interesting - can you provide a reference?

Check out The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger by Richard Wilkinson et al.

How about a reference to the research?

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#47

And yet people from around the world fly here every day to have critical surgeries performed by the world's top doctors in state of the art facilities. News Flash: The U.S. isn't a welfare state. To benefit from everything this country has to offer, you need to pay for it. Yes, it would be better if that didn't apply to healthcare, but there needs to be some method of exclusion when demand is high and supply is low.…

That's not a valid comparison. "State of the art" facilities are not being argued against, but "health of the populace".

People also used to (maybe still do) fly to Australia for cardiac surgery.

The US may be able to pull in doctors from around the world with salaries that are high (correlating to high healthcare costs), but the regular individuals access to such doctors is limited: if I, talking to my insurance provider in Washington, said I wanted to go to the East Coast and have Dr Oz do my cardiac surgery (leaving aside any, and indeed valid, controversy over him - I was just looking for a notable/famous surgeon), I'm fairly certain they'd balk (and I'm fairly certain because I've worked on software systems that determine such things for insurance providers).

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#48
In a top-level comment, the HN participant who kindly submitted the L.A. Times article that opens the thread here notes with regret that the New York Times report

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/10/health/americans-under-50-...

on the same report provides more detail. The lede paragraph shows the importance of cultural and lifestyle factors rather than health-care-as-such in the mortality and morbidity outcomes:

"Younger Americans die earlier and live in poorer health than their counterparts in other developed countries, with far higher rates of death from guns, car accidents and drug addiction, according to a new analysis of health and longevity in the United States."

Drug addiction in particular is a severe problem in the United States to a degree not seen in (for example) east Asia. The stark historical memory of the Opium Wars imposing Western drug-pushing on east Asian populations makes many countries on the other side of the Pacific Rim very wary of letting young people start drug use. Illicit drugs were all but unknown in the childhood experience of my wife under Taiwan's former military dictatorship. Growing up free of harmful psychoactive substances allows young people clear heads to learn a lot (including learning other languages for international understanding) and to grow up to promote social improvements, such as the steady democratization and upgrades in provision of health care in Taiwan during my adult life.

So let's be clear what the report tells us: health outcomes in the United States often fare poorly compared to the health outcomes in other countries approximately as rich. But the challenges to health in the United States sometimes differ in ways that reflect long-standing differences in United States culture that still need to be nudged in healthier directions.

AFTER EDIT: There has been some hand-waving (without specific deep links) about OECD health statistics in this thread. In fact, the United States does not fare as badly in comparison to other OECD countries

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/factbook-2011-en/12/01/01...

as some of the statements in this thread have suggested. The decline in all-cause mortality at all age ranges during my lifetime in the United States

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=longevity-w...

has been steady, so people in general in the United States are living longer, healthier lives than ever before in history.

Re: U.S. health is lousy compared with peer nations, report says

#49
post #36

And yet people from around the world fly here every day to have critical surgeries performed by the world's top doctors in state of the art facilities. News Flash: The U.S. isn't a welfare state. To benefit from everything this country has to offer, you need to pay for it. Yes, it would be better if that didn't apply to healthcare, but there needs to be some method of exclusion when demand is high and supply is low.…

My US-based dad recently had to wait a month for a knee replacement surgery. And, of course, for people who can't afford the inflated prices we've got here... the waiting time is infinite.

A surgery can involve a lot of resources, they tend to have long wait times. For comparison, this article from 2007 says the average wait for a surgery in canada is 4.5 months: http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2007/10/15/waittimes-fra...
Post reply on HN