Reply #17: More lousy numbers and more condemnation from the WHO... [View All]

[warren pease]

Here's the news release that accompanied that 2000 WHO study comparing 190 individual health care systems along just about any criteria and metric you can imagine.

And here's one of the more damning statements in the release, which is also a good summary of the disconnect between how much the for-profit bastards are gouging us for -- more money per capita than any other country in the world -- and what kind of results we're getting for all that money -- we rank 37th overall on the WHO's set of criteria that define a quality health care system and we're sinking fast. Here's what the WHO's director of health policy evaluation had to say back in 2000:

The United States rated 24th under this system, or an average of 70.0 years of healthy life for babies born in 1999. The WHO also breaks down life expectancy by sex for each country. Under this system, U.S. female babies could expect 72.6 years of healthy life, versus just 67.5 years for male babies.

"The position of the United States is one of the major surprises of the new rating system," says Christopher Murray, M.D., Ph.D., Director of WHO's Global Programme on Evidence for Health Policy. "Basically, you die earlier and spend more time disabled if you're an American rather than a member of most other advanced countries."

The WHO cites various causes for why the United States ranks relatively low among wealthy nations. These reasons include:

* In the United States, some groups, such as Native Americans, rural African Americans and the inner city poor, have extremely poor health, more characteristic of a poor developing country rather than a rich industrialized one.

* The HIV epidemic causes a higher proportion of death and disability to U.S. young and middle-aged than in most other advanced countries. HIV-AIDS cut three months from the healthy life expectancy of male American babies born in 1999, and one month from female lives;

* The U.S. is one of the leading countries for cancers relating to tobacco, especially lung cancer. Tobacco use also causes chronic lung disease.

* A high coronary heart disease rate, which has dropped in recent years but remains high;

* Fairly high levels of violence, especially of homicides, when compared to other industrial countries.

The 2000 WHO report's statistical abstract is available here, downloadable as a pdf file from the bottom entry of this menu:

REPORT BY CHAPTERS
- Director General's Message
- Chapter 1: Why do health systems matter?
- Chapter 2: How well do health systems perform?
- Chapter 3: Health services: well chosen, well organized?
- Chapter 4: What resources are needed?
- Chapter 5: Who pays health systems?
- Chapter 6: How is the public interest protected?
- Annexe statistique


There are so many more sources of health care information out there, and every single damn one of them -- except those from the AMA or some other group of for-profit medicine shills -- without exception says the US system is not only one of the worst performers, but the most expensive by thousands per capita per year.

If I were able to get any more pissed off about this hideous scam fobbed off as a free market solution, my blood pressure would rise into the danger zone. So, not wishing to have a stroke this evening, I'll check out for now.

Also, if you want to read a GREAT ARTICLE on the whole crock of shit and a demand for a single-payer system to replace it yesterday, here's a link to a REALLY WELL WRITTEN PIECE by modesty forbids from earlier this year.


wp