U.S. lags behind 41 nations in life span

[leekohler]

Countries that surpass the United States include Japan and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.

http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?date=2007/08/14/4

I'll let the article speak for itself.

[Aea]

To best honest, I really don't trust that as a source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy is what I would go by, and honestly the differences are very minor, and are likely being brought down by the rising (illegal) immigrant population.

[leekohler]

To best honest, I really don't trust that as a source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy is what I would go by, and honestly the differences are very minor, and are likely being brought down by the rising (illegal) immigrant population.

It's an Associated Press article. What? Just because it's an AP article on PlanetOut it's a bad source? Sorry- I'm sure that article is in more than a few places.

Here you go. It's the same article in the Chicago Tribune. It's not on a gay website this time, so you can trust it now.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-lifeaug12,0,2630777.story

Here it is on CNN too.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/08/13/life.expectancy.ap/

[PlaceofDis]

doesn't surprise me one bit. we have a terrible health care system and a workforce that stresses itself too much.

[Swarmlord]

doesn't surprise me one bit. we have a terrible health care system and a workforce that stresses itself too much.

We have a world class healthcare system and a workforce that not only stresses out too much, but also eats and exercises poorly.

We have a poorly implemented and regulated insurance industry that makes it difficult for some people to fully utilize our world class heath system, but there's nothing lacking here that others have in terms of equipment, expertise or treatment.

[Aea]

[T]here's nothing lacking here that others have in terms of equipment, expertise or treatment.

That's true, it's an issue of money. Unfortunately too many people are capitalizing on the health care industry to where many people simply can't get (or afford) proper coverage.

[PlaceofDis]

We have a world class healthcare system and a workforce that not only stresses out too much, but also eats and exercises poorly.

We have a poorly implemented and regulated insurance industry that makes it difficult for some people to fully utilize our world class heath system, but there's nothing lacking here that others have in terms of equipment, expertise or treatment.

sure we have the people and the equipment. but its not easy to get the treatment you need. hence why i said we have a 'terrible healthcare system'. if people could get the treatments that they needed without going broke or bankrupt from the cost then the system would work.

[skunk]

there's nothing lacking here that others have in terms of equipment, expertise or treatment.Which makes your ranking all the worse.

[leekohler]

We have a world class healthcare system and a workforce that not only stresses out too much, but also eats and exercises poorly.

We have a poorly implemented and regulated insurance industry that makes it difficult for some people to fully utilize our world class heath system, but there's nothing lacking here that others have in terms of equipment, expertise or treatment.

What did I hear you say? Did I hear you say the evil word "regulated"?

And there are certainly other causes as well. I wonder why the workforce is so stressed out and why insurance isn't regulated. Could it be due at least in part to...hmmm...laissez faire capitalism? ;)

[calculus]

Is it not because you keep shooting each other?

[leekohler]

Is it not because you keep shooting each other?

I don't shoot nearly as many people as I'd like to. :D

But seriously, I doubt that's the reason.

[66217]

I don't know how the Health Care System is in the United States. But I know pretty well that the lifestyle of most americans is not the best.

-Fast food (in other words, bad eating habits)
-A lot of stress (work, college, etc) This, in fact, has become a global issue
-Not sure about this one, but it seems as if making exercise also has decreased, instead, people play more video games , etc.

If I am not mistaken, one of the things that causes more deaths in the USA is obesity. So the only way out, or at least the most important action that needs to be done, is to change the eating habits.

[leekohler]

I don't know how the Health Care System is in the United States. But I know pretty well that the lifestyle of most americans is not the best.

-Fast food (in other words, bad eating habits)
-A lot of stress (work, college, etc) This, in fact, has become a global issue
-Not sure about this one, but it seems as if making exercise also has decreased, instead, people play more video games , etc.

If I am not mistaken, one of the things that causes more deaths in the USA is obesity. So the only way out, or at least the most important action that needs to be done, is to change the eating habits.

Our relationship with food and excercise is certainly not a healthy one.

[Bobdude161]

Americans need to healthier....

*eats another Funyun*

[nbs2]

I'm going to go a step beyond Swarmie (surprised?) and say that our health care system is perfectly fine.

However, our legal system is broken. It is driving up costs to the health system at such a rate, that to cope, the health system has been forced to price out too many people. Fix the legal, and health will slowly improve.

[Says I as I sit at my desk eating a bit of grocery store sushi :o]

[Swarmlord]

Is it not because you keep shooting each other?

I'm sure the number of 14-28 year old inner city urban violence victims don't help the stats. Nor do the 40,000 highway fatilities from alcohol related use either.

[skunk]

I'm going to go a step beyond Swarmie (surprised?) and say that our health care system is perfectly fine.Must be the patients who are crap.

[miloblithe]

There are definitely a ton of factors that figure into the life expectancy of 300+ million people. Access to healthcare is one. Nutrition, healthy lifestyle, environment, violence, quality of senior care, pensions, etc. are others. There are many more.

Serious analysis would break out the U.S. population into subgroups and look at which Americans have long life expectancy and which don't, then you'd start to see ways in which there are significant weaknesses. I think you'd find a wide range between the 1st and 5th quintiles.

[mactastic]

Ah yes... it's not the insurance industry's fault. It's the damn trial lawyers. Riiight...

[yg17]

I don't even think obesity can be fully to blame. Hell, I'm a bit overweight and just as healthy as anyone else, at least so my doctor says. I have high blood pressure (which is taken care of with medication) but that's hereditary, everyone in my family is it. So I think while obesity is a factor, but just not as big of a one as people think, and I think our poor life expectancy rates can be blamed on the fact that, oh, I'd say maybe a third, of the population either doesn't have health insurance, or has insurance but still can't afford the copays. Give, not sell, people the health care they need and I bet our life expectancy would go way up

[nbs2]

Must be the patients who are crap.

Did you read the rest of my post? I can see mactastic did.

Ah yes... it's not the insurance industry's fault. It's the damn trial lawyers. Riiight...

Follow the money. The insurance industry has to respond to doctor incurred costs and charges. Doctors have to respond to malpractice premiums. Malpractice insurance has to respond to the cost of lawsuits (not cheap) and payouts (also not cheap). Lawsuits are encouraged by trial lawyers, many of whom dance on the edge of the ethical cliff in their goals.

Does the insurance industry crap on a lot of people? Yes. Should their rules be more relaxed, coverage and policies more people-friendly? Yes. Do I think the industry would play a lesser factor if the trail of money didn't end on the door step of ambulance chasers? Yes.

I've seen the costs of malpractice trials to all the parties involved. I've seen juries willing to rule in favor of plaintiffs because "we felt bad for the guy" even though "Oh no, [they] don't think the Dr. did anything wrong."

[Peterkro]

More worrying than life expectancy is infant mortality rates in the US that really is a scandal.

[Ugg]

To best honest, I really don't trust that as a source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy is what I would go by, and honestly the differences are very minor, and are likely being brought down by the rising (illegal) immigrant population.

The studies I've seen have only measured native born Americans as immigrants might possibly skew the results.

Our health care system has abandoned its patients. Preventative health care is virtually unknown in the US. Doctors and hospitals are out to treat diseases not prevent them. The states have stepped in to some extent, at least when bushco hasn't quashed their efforts.

The FDA continues to be controlled by the food industry and that certainly adds to the health problems in the US.

I don't think the time is far off when we'll begin to see class action suits against food companies for their meddling in the FDA.

[skunk]

Did you read the rest of my post? I can see mactastic did.Sure I did. I just don't think that if you put the foxes in charge of the chicken coop you can blame the foxes when a few chickens go missing. It's a political and ideological problem.

[mactastic]

Did you read the rest of my post? I can see mactastic did.



Follow the money. The insurance industry has to respond to doctor incurred costs and charges. Doctors have to respond to malpractice premiums. Malpractice insurance has to respond to the cost of lawsuits (not cheap) and payouts (also not cheap). Lawsuits are encouraged by trial lawyers, many of whom dance on the edge of the ethical cliff in their goals.

Does the insurance industry crap on a lot of people? Yes. Should their rules be more relaxed, coverage and policies more people-friendly? Yes. Do I think the industry would play a lesser factor if the trail of money didn't end on the door step of ambulance chasers? Yes.

I've seen the costs of malpractice trials to all the parties involved. I've seen juries willing to rule in favor of plaintiffs because "we felt bad for the guy" even though "Oh no, [they] don't think the Dr. did anything wrong."
If you want to follow the money, why don't you also look to big pharma and the insurance industry as well. I don't dispute that rising malpractice costs contribute to the increase in health care costs, but they are not the only, nor even the biggest, place where money pools in this system.

And lets not forget that the hospitals often must charge exorbinate fees to cover the costs of care for the uninsured - whom they are legally obligated to care for despite not being paid for said care. When someone tells you they don't feel like they should have to pay for the uninsured, tell them they already do.

[bousozoku]

...
Follow the money. The insurance industry has to respond to doctor incurred costs and charges. Doctors have to respond to malpractice premiums. Malpractice insurance has to respond to the cost of lawsuits (not cheap) and payouts (also not cheap). Lawsuits are encouraged by trial lawyers, many of whom dance on the edge of the ethical cliff in their goals.

Does the insurance industry crap on a lot of people? Yes. Should their rules be more relaxed, coverage and policies more people-friendly? Yes. Do I think the industry would play a lesser factor if the trail of money didn't end on the door step of ambulance chasers? Yes.

I've seen the costs of malpractice trials to all the parties involved. I've seen juries willing to rule in favor of plaintiffs because "we felt bad for the guy" even though "Oh no, [they] don't think the Dr. did anything wrong."

Bad doctors are not put out of practice--they're hidden. Bad lawyers are not put out of practice--they advertise on t.v.

If the bad doctors wouldn't practice again, things would be simpler for the doctors who continue to practice.

I worked for a hospital that was being strangled by HMOs. I can understand that an HMO has to offer lower cost to their insured but to tell a hospital that they won't be allowed any business unless they agree to a certain price is horrible. The hospital never can make up the difference from that HMO's insured. They have to charge others more or put a lot to bad debt.

As far as lifespan goes, it seems as though the size of eating out is the problem. When I was young, we couldn't really afford to eat out and we got pizza once a week and maybe, went for ice cream during the summer. People around here seem to eat at their houses once a week and eat out the rest of the time.

How can people not be less healthy when they indulge most anything? Exercise seems to be reaching for the wallet and walking from the closest parking spot to the door of the restaurant with the biggest portions.

[nbs2]

Sure I did. I just don't think that if you put the foxes in charge of the chicken coop you can blame the foxes when a few chickens go missing. It's a political and ideological problem.

I'm not sure how the trial lawyers are the guardians of the health care system. I think they serve a purpose - when mistakes are made proper restitution is important. But the legal system has run wild and needs to be pruned. Blaiming the chicken coop for letting itself get overrun by plants isn't fair. The farmer should have been doing his job, and our politician have all been asleep at the wheel for too long.

Bad doctors are not put out of practice--they're hidden. Bad lawyers are not put out of practice--they advertise on t.v.

If the bad doctors wouldn't practice again, things would be simpler for the doctors who continue to practice.

I worked for a hospital that was being strangled by HMOs. I can understand that an HMO has to offer lower cost to their insured but to tell a hospital that they won't be allowed any business unless they agree to a certain price is horrible. The hospital never can make up the difference from that HMO's insured. They have to charge others more or put a lot to bad debt.

As far as lifespan goes, it seems as though the size of eating out is the problem. When I was young, we couldn't really afford to eat out and we got pizza once a week and maybe, went for ice cream during the summer. People around here seem to eat at their houses once a week and eat out the rest of the time.

How can people not be less healthy when they indulge most anything? Exercise seems to be reaching for the wallet and walking from the closest parking spot to the door of the restaurant with the biggest portions.

If only the bad Drs. were the only ones being sued, life would be much easier.

That HMOs fight tooth and nail for lower rates is the one most powerful protection for the under/un/self-insured in MD. State law requires that services be billed at the same rate for everybody - the question being hwo picks up the bill. Sure just about every hospital in my county is falling apart, but at least the care is somewhat affordable.

I do agree that our eating out habits are doing nothing to help our LE. Growing up, we never ate out. Now it seems like eating out is the normal thing to do. I don't know if you have seen the KFC commercials that proclaim "dinner is back" or something like that. The parents call out to the kids "Dinner time" and you see all the kids run out to the car to get ready to leave the house. The parents laugh and the voiceover tells us that we can bring a bucket of fried chicken home. to have dinner as a family. For the commercial to be even moderately effective, there needs to be an element of truth. Which makes the truth scary.

I think that the rise of the eating out can be tied to one aspect of society that has changed - the decline of the stay-at-home wife. As more families are DI, preparing dinner for families a little more difficult. Both parents aren't home all day and when they get home, unless they make something fast (and usually unhealthy), they aren't going to eat for an hour or so. And more work will be required to prep dinner. Having a spouse who is home to do prep work or cooking just doesn't happen. There seems to be a bit of a backlash as men and women are trying to telecommute or have one spouse stay home. The telecommuting is tough since the person still has to work, but they can do little things like take ten minutes to do quick prep work, ensuring dinner will be ready fairly quickly. Also companies like Let's Dish (http://www.letsdish.com) are making it easier for adults to have food prepped and just cook as soon as they get home. Is it the healthiest option? No. Is it better than what we are doing right now? Yeah. I hope we just continue to improve.

[it5five]

I saw a chart yesterday that sort of ties into the subject at hand:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialized_medicine#Relation_to_universal_health_care

Compares life expectancy, infant mortality, and a lot of others things about the US vs. countries with Universal Healthcare.

[bousozoku]

...
If only the bad Drs. were the only ones being sued, life would be much easier.

That HMOs fight tooth and nail for lower rates is the one most powerful protection for the under/un/self-insured in MD. State law requires that services be billed at the same rate for everybody - the question being hwo picks up the bill. Sure just about every hospital in my county is falling apart, but at least the care is somewhat affordable.

I do agree that our eating out habits are doing nothing to help our LE. Growing up, we never ate out. Now it seems like eating out is the normal thing to do. I don't know if you have seen the KFC commercials that proclaim "dinner is back" or something like that. The parents call out to the kids "Dinner time" and you see all the kids run out to the car to get ready to leave the house. The parents laugh and the voiceover tells us that we can bring a bucket of fried chicken home. to have dinner as a family. For the commercial to be even moderately effective, there needs to be an element of truth. Which makes the truth scary.

I think that the rise of the eating out can be tied to one aspect of society that has changed - the decline of the stay-at-home wife. As more families are DI, preparing dinner for families a little more difficult. Both parents aren't home all day and when they get home, unless they make something fast (and usually unhealthy), they aren't going to eat for an hour or so. And more work will be required to prep dinner. Having a spouse who is home to do prep work or cooking just doesn't happen. There seems to be a bit of a backlash as men and women are trying to telecommute or have one spouse stay home. The telecommuting is tough since the person still has to work, but they can do little things like take ten minutes to do quick prep work, ensuring dinner will be ready fairly quickly. Also companies like Let's Dish (http://www.letsdish.com) are making it easier for adults to have food prepped and just cook as soon as they get home. Is it the healthiest option? No. Is it better than what we are doing right now? Yeah. I hope we just continue to improve.

I haven't seen that particular KFC advert but they're all the same: eat more at your own convenience. It's not great value but it's generally warm and, if you go there, you don't have to do dishes. They probably supply you with foam plates, if you take away.

Hormel, Banquet and others provide 30 minute meals that you must cook somehow. Most aren't healthy except in the sense that you won't lack for calories.

In the 30 years or so that they've been going on about fewer fried foods or better oil or whatever, nothing has really changed. People are still buying two quarter pounders and a diet Coke.

I know that the doctors and lawyers won't be regulated too closely but they need to be responsible in such a way that the whole industry, as well as the public, doesn't suffer. I just don't see how protecting someone who does bad work helps anyone. I also don't see the benefit in filing a lawsuit against good doctors, unless they really have made a terrible mistake. (I experienced corneal abrasions while in an unrelated surgery and didn't sue.)

[nbs2]

I know that the doctors and lawyers won't be regulated too closely but they need to be responsible in such a way that the whole industry, as well as the public, doesn't suffer. I just don't see how protecting someone who does bad work helps anyone. I also don't see the benefit in filing a lawsuit against good doctors, unless they really have made a terrible mistake. (I experienced corneal abrasions while in an unrelated surgery and didn't sue.)

I'm fine with bringing a suit against the good Dr. that hasn't made a mistake if there is a valid issue of whether or not a mistake was made. The problem is when people go looking for mistakes and when juries make payouts based on emotion, not liability.

I couldn't find the commercial. I'll keep an eye out for it though.

[solvs]

and are likely being brought down by the rising (illegal) immigrant population.
They weren't counted in the surveys done.

We have a world class healthcare system
That very few, even with insurance, can afford.

Is it not because you keep shooting each other?
Violent crime is relatively high here, especially in poorer areas.

I'm going to go a step beyond Swarmie (surprised?) and say that our health care system is perfectly fine.
No, it really isn't.

However, our legal system is broken. It is driving up costs to the health system at such a rate, that to cope, the health system has been forced to price out too many people. Fix the legal, and health will slowly improve.
They've already tried to do tort reform, and made it harder to sue. Big surprise, hasn't helped. My Stepbrother is a doctor, my Stepmom an RN, they'll both tell you the biggest problem is the insurance companies. As would my clients when I worked for a medical billing company. Or when I worked at a hospital. Which seem to be closing at an alarming rate. I won't even get into my personal issues with them, but needless to say, I am not alone. Cutting down unnecessary lawsuits is great, but it's not the main problem.

Though, yes, our poor eating habits and lack of exercise are also major contributing factors.

[Eraserhead]

I saw a chart yesterday that sort of ties into the subject at hand:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialized_medicine#Relation_to_universal_health_care

Compares life expectancy, infant mortality, and a lot of others things about the US vs. countries with Universal Healthcare.

The hilarious thing about that chart is that we (the British) spend less than 1/2 as much as the Americans on healthcare and have a better system.

[solvs]

The hilarious thing about that chart is that we (the British) spend less than 1/2 as much as the Americans on healthcare and have a better system.

That's because we don't want to pay for it, even though we're already paying for it.

[Eraserhead]

That's because we don't want to pay for it, even though we're already paying for it.

The other interesting thing is that according to those figures your government already pays $2547 per person on healthcare, whereas ours only pays $2041

[takao]

yeah i heard that numbers of eating out per week are quite different in the US compared to europe (can't confirm it since i'm not in the US)

for me eating is out is more the exception: like perhaps once every 2 weeks/ once per month and not the rule
i never had food delivered either actually

[it5five]

The hilarious thing about that chart is that we (the British) spend less than 1/2 as much as the Americans on healthcare and have a better system.

I am incredibly jealous of you and your NHS.

[leekohler]

yeah i heard that numbers of eating out per week are quite different in the US compared to europe (can't confirm it since i'm not in the US)

for me eating is out is more the exception: like perhaps once every 2 weeks/ once per month and not the rule
i never had food delivered either actually

Part of the problem is that we work too damn much. I couldn't stop to cook a dinner during the week if I wanted to. I even eat lunch at my desk, there's really no way to stop and go to a sit-down lunch. Then I usually go home and do freelance the rest of the night. The only other time I have is to go to the gym. That is my typical weekday, to be quite honest.

[takao]

Part of the problem is that we work too damn much. I couldn't stop to cook a dinner during the week if I wanted to. I even eat lunch at my desk, there's really no way to stop and go to a sit-down lunch. Then I usually go home and do freelance the rest of the night. The only other time I have is to go to the gym. That is my typical weekday, to be quite honest.

well i eat lunch too at my desk but i simply take some apples or fruits with me from home in the morning (i'm breakfasting 2-3 slices of breaded toasted with lean ham,chesse or jam) and eat dinner at home and still have 5-6 hours left in the evening

i rather eat less and skip on the gym ;)

[teflon]

I don't even think obesity can be fully to blame. Hell, I'm a bit overweight and just as healthy as anyone else, at least so my doctor says.

There's a difference between a bit overweight and obese. Just because you are heavier than xxxx pound that your height doesn't actually mean you are unhealthy. You can just have a lot of muscles, bigger frame etc. Obese, however, means you have too much body fat. That is the real danger. Many people are "overweight" but healthy as can be. But people that are obese are definitely at risk.

Edit: I think that the higher college tuition in the US is another factor. Starting from college, younger people have to work hard to pay for their tuition, and work even harder when they graduate to pay off their loans. So from a younger age, people are already too busy to eat healthy or exercise.

[juanm]

That's another thing. Back in 2005, while travelling, we met a couple from the US. They told us that they only had two weeks of holidays, or something like that! Was it an exception, or is it something normal? How many free days do you get on average?

[Swarmlord]

That's another thing. Back in 2005, while travelling, we met a couple from the US. They told us that they only had two weeks of holidays, or something like that! Was it an exception, or is it something normal? How many free days do you get on average?

That's the normal amount of vacation provided to people in their first 1-5 years at an employer. Then it usually goes up a week for the next 5 and maybe another week after that. We also get about 5 solid holidays and some floating holidays depending on the type of business.

Many of us just bank those days and not take them so that we can cash them out when we leave anyway though.

[nbs2]

Edit: I think that the higher college tuition in the US is another factor. Starting from college, younger people have to work hard to pay for their tuition, and work even harder when they graduate to pay off their loans. So from a younger age, people are already too busy to eat healthy or exercise.

I don't know if I would buy that as an excuse. At the ramp up periods around finals, yes. But the rest of the school year, there is time to exercise and eat healthy if you want. For those who choose not to, college is just an easily accessible excuse.

[leekohler]

That's another thing. Back in 2005, while travelling, we met a couple from the US. They told us that they only had two weeks of holidays, or something like that! Was it an exception, or is it something normal? How many free days do you get on average?

Yep- it's true. We don't get 8 weeks like you guys. I wish we did. Life would be a lot better. We're lucky to get 4 weeks and even then, there isn't usually the opportunity to take the time. Businesses are so lean in the US, that if I actually took two weeks off, I'd come back to such a horrendous mess that it would erase any benefit I'd gotten from a vacation. But hey- life is all about work in our "free" country.

[IJ Reilly]

Compares life expectancy, infant mortality, and a lot of others things about the US vs. countries with Universal Healthcare.

As the table shows, infant mortality is substantially higher in the US compared to other western nations, which probably the single largest reason why life expectancy is lower here. The rate of violent deaths is also a significant cause, as this also claims people early in life and drags down the averages. I'm sure someone has studied infant mortality in the US and knows why our rates are higher, but I suspect it's got something to do with the nearly 50 million people in the US who've got little access to health care, including prenatal care which assures more babies are born healthy.

[imac/cheese]

I believe that our mortality rate is lower because as a country we are fat. Carrying around a lot of extra fat wears on the body over time and causes it to fail earlier.

I really don't think you can blame us being fat and unhealthy on eating out, college tuition, stress, or capitalism. Health is a personal decision. You either choose to live a healthy lifestyle or you choose not too. A healthy lifestyle is not really any more difficult to live than a typical unhealthy one and the rewards to quality of life, self-esteem, stress relief, interpersonal interaction, and mental health are amazing. Making choices to eat healthy food instead of unhealthy food does not take much more time or money. Choosing to take a walk instad of watching TV is better for you and in general more relaxing.

I eat out everyday but I choose to eat healthy foods instead of unhealthy ones. Even McDonalds offers healthy choices, but people just don't get the same satisfaction eating healthy as they do when they eat crap.

People all have priorities. Americans are fat because they place other pleasures over being healthy. Whether these pleasures are eating poorly, lounging in front of the TV, never exercising, or living a life of constant work, these people have chosen to live an unhealthy lifestyle.

[IJ Reilly]

Obesity is a big problem of course (so to speak) but hardly unique to the United States. If you think statistically, you will find that a relatively small increase in infant mortality rates will make a much larger difference in life expectancy numbers than a whole lot of people dying at ten years below the average due to heart disease.

[imac/cheese]

but I suspect it's got something to do with the nearly 50 million people in the US who've got little access to health care, including prenatal care which assures more babies are born healthy.

I really don't know too much about our health care system except what I have read because my wife and I have been generaly healthy for the most part; however, I do have a bit of experience with the child protective services. I have seen numerous extemely poor women getting prenatal care for free from the health clinic or through the hospital and they are not expected to pay for it. I am not sure who covers the bill but they do not have to pay.

Child Protective Services actually ensures that mothers in the system who are pregnant again get the proper medical care they need. Also, every child that we have fostered has been on medicaid which pays for everything from doctor visits to prescriptions and all the kids were on medcaid before they entered into foster care.

[IJ Reilly]

I really don't know too much about our health care system except what I have read because my wife and I have been generaly healthy for the most part; however, I do have a bit of experience with the child protective services. I have seen numerous extemely poor women getting prenatal care for free from the health clinic or through the hospital and they are not expected to pay for it. I am not sure who covers the bill but they do not have to pay.

Child Protective Services actually ensures that mothers in the system who are pregnant again get the proper medical care they need. Also, every child that we have fostered has been on medicaid which pays for everything from doctor visits to prescriptions and all the kids were on medcaid before they entered into foster care.

Again, just look at the statistics. Infant mortality is substantially higher in the US. I'm not sure why either, but I suspect the uninsured are at least part of the reason. Poor people don't have that problem -- they are covered by social services. It's working people who don't get employer-provided health care and can't afford to buy their own insurance who are screwed by the system.

[Ugg]

Obesity is a big problem of course (so to speak) but hardly unique to the United States. If you think statistically, you will find that a relatively small increase in infant mortality rates will make a much larger difference in life expectancy numbers than a whole lot of people dying at ten years below the average due to heart disease.

Obese mothers are more likely to have health impaired children so it's possible that some of that infant mortality can be attributed to obesity.

New York Magazine has an article (http://nymag.com/news/features/35815/) on the increasing life span of New Yorkers. Much of it is attributable to lower rates of AIDS deaths and fewer gun deaths and a lower infant mortality rate. They also bring up the idea that New Yorkers, being urban dwellers, probably get more daily exercise than suburbanites.

I don't think there's a single answer but I do believe that stress, poor food, lack of exercise, lack of universal health care, suburban living and violence all lead to lower life spans amongst Americans.

[imac/cheese]

Again, just look at the statistics. Infant mortality is substantially higher in the US. I'm not sure why either, but I suspect the uninsured are at least part of the reason. Poor people don't have that problem -- they are covered by social services. It's working people who don't get employer-provided health care and can't afford to buy their own insurance who are screwed by the system.

I know in my town, anyone can go to the free health clinic. I have been there with a foster son and I wouldn't want to go back because of the crowd and general lack of cleanliness, but it is free. The working poor do get screwed in our country and there are very few incentives for them to work at jobs and then have to pay for all the services that would have been free if they never worked at all.

[IJ Reilly]

Obese mothers are more likely to have health impaired children so it's possible that some of that infant mortality can be attributed to obesity.

New York Magazine has an article (http://nymag.com/news/features/35815/) on the increasing life span of New Yorkers. Much of it is attributable to lower rates of AIDS deaths and fewer gun deaths and a lower infant mortality rate. They also bring up the idea that New Yorkers, being urban dwellers, probably get more daily exercise than suburbanites.

I don't think there's a single answer but I do believe that stress, poor food, lack of exercise, lack of universal health care, suburban living and violence all lead to lower life spans amongst Americans.

Possibly. This has all been studied, I suspect, though even with studies, the causes can be far less than clear.

I did see the report about the life expectancy of New Yorkers, which is interesting. It does show how decreasing infant mortality rates can have a significant statistical impact life expectancy.

I know in my town, anyone can go to the free health clinic. I have been there with a foster son and I wouldn't want to go back because of the crowd and general lack of cleanliness, but it is free. The working poor do get screwed in our country and there are very few incentives for them to work at jobs and then have to pay for all the services that would have been free if they never worked at all.

Probably most communities have some free health care, but this type of service tends to be crisis oriented, is no substitute for full and complete access to preventative medical care, including having a family doctor whom you see regularly.

[nbs2]

Probably most communities have some free health care, but this type of service tends to be crisis oriented, is no substitute for full and complete access to preventative medical care, including having a family doctor whom you see regularly.

There are a handful of more enlightened/cost-savvy clinics that try to get people to come in for preventative care. They found that that the ounce of prevention/pound of cure motto does hold true. The folks that utilize the clinic services to end up costing less than the folks that go to the ER. My law school campus used a subsidized clinic for student care - I wasn't impressed by the folks there, but it was better than nothing (and we subsidized the subsidies with our fees, so it was free for us)

But, there are really two major hurdles that they seem to be facing. First, there is a fair bit of distrust in the community for the hospitals behind the free clinics (JHU has a pretty bad rep in Baltimore). Second, a lot of folks don't see the point in preventative medicine and don't bother to go to the Dr. until it does become an emergency. In the end, the more stable hospitals are the only ones who can afford to take the hit, since (thanks to their higher charges) they the the few that can absorb the money-bleeding clinics and the underpaid-ER bills.

[SMM]

Most people do not understand what life expectancy is, or how it is calculated. It is a complex algorithm. To make my point, I am not going to describe anything more than the highlights.

Life expectancy is calculated from the point where 50% of a like group is still alive. Beyond that point, there are measurable factors which increase/decrease the groups, or sub-groups, survivability.

If you were to factor a group's infant mortality rate, that would only impact the point at which the group reaches to 50% mark (high IMR = lower age to reach 50%). However, beyond that point, other factors will influence how quickly each group reaches other milestones (nutrition, natural disasters, health care, etc). I do not recall where the final milestone is when the LER is calculated.

The bottomline is, this is a very long, complex exercise. I actually studied one of these in one of my statistics classes. It weighed about 20 pounds. Besides the sheer volume, I distinctly remember the top groups scored well in all factors, but may not have been top in any of them.

[mactastic]

Yep- it's true. We don't get 8 weeks like you guys. I wish we did. Life would be a lot better. We're lucky to get 4 weeks and even then, there isn't usually the opportunity to take the time. Businesses are so lean in the US, that if I actually took two weeks off, I'd come back to such a horrendous mess that it would erase any benefit I'd gotten from a vacation. But hey- life is all about work in our "free" country.
Christ, ain't that the truth. I took a week off recently, my first paid week off in probably 6 years (well, except for the one about 10 months ago -- but that was when my wife had our kid. Not exactly a vacation!), and when I got back there was so much crap on my desk I almost needed another vacation just to recover from the catching up I did that first week back...

[leekohler]

Christ, ain't that the truth. I took a week off recently, my first paid week off in probably 6 years (well, except for the one about 10 months ago -- but that was when my wife had our kid. Not exactly a vacation!), and when I got back there was so much crap on my desk I almost needed another vacation just to recover from the catching up I did that first week back...

I know- because no one can cover for you except the bare essentials, they have too much work of their own.

[Swarmlord]

If you're self employed, you can take off all the time for vacation you want to. I don't know anyone that's self employed that does though.

[mactastic]

If you're self employed, you can take off all the time for vacation you want to. I don't know anyone that's self employed that does though.
What does that have to do with anything? Or are you just obfuscating again?

[dswoodley]

If you're self employed, you can take off all the time for vacation you want to. I don't know anyone that's self employed that does though.

That's not a very good solution. Yeah take off every other week if you are self-employed for vacation? Wonderful if you are in a lucrative industry or a high paid consultant, but most self-employing ventures don't fall under this category. There's reason you don't know anyone that does that.

[mactastic]

That's not a very good solution. Yeah take off every other week if you are self-employed for vacation? Wonderful if you are in a lucrative industry or a high paid consultant, but most self-employing ventures don't fall under this category. There's reason you don't know anyone that does that.
I know a couple of guys who do the Alaskan fishing boat or oil field thing. They work about 6 months a year.

Love the new avatar, BTW.

[LethalWolfe]

What does that have to do with anything? Or are you just obfuscating again?

I think Swarm meant to say "unemployed" not "self employed." ;)

In my personal experience self employed people tend to take the least amount of vacation because the more you work the more you make and the less you work the less you make (unlike someone who's salaried for example). At a point though people realize (hopefully) they need take a step back or they are going to burn themselves out and then a better work/vacation balance starts. I know I fret about the "double whammy" of vacations (paying for the trip and losing otherwise billable hours) but it's not healthy to keep your nose to the grindstone 24/7/52.


Lethal

[dswoodley]

I know a couple of guys who do the Alaskan fishing boat or oil field thing. They work about 6 months a year.

Love the new avatar, BTW.

Thanks, the 'tar reflects my penchant for paradox - surely you've seen that?

It's funny you bring up those two examples because i know a few too. And while they can make decent money if not better, those industries usually break all but the toughest of souls within a decade or two. Let's just say they don't promote longevity!

[juanm]

Wow... I shouldn't say it because I'd make you angry, but now, it's summer, and I'm unemployed (I could work, but, you, know... it's summer) so I'm taking a three months course (graphic design software + Rhinoceros 3D) for free because I'm unemployed. If I'm taking this training, technically, I'm not unemployed, so it helps reducing the statistics and they push people to take them. On the top of this free training, I'm going to get my unempoyement allowance (ok, I worked for it, but now it's nice to get my hands on it).

And yet, I'd still say yes if I had the chance to go living to the US for a while! I dunno why... :cool:

[leekohler]

Wow... I shouldn't say it because I'd make you angry, but now, it's summer, and I'm unemployed (I could work, but, you, know... it's summer) so I'm taking a three months course (graphic design software + Rhinoceros 3D) for free because I'm unemployed. If I'm taking this training, technically, I'm not unemployed, so it helps reducing the statistics and they push people to take them. On the top of this free training, I'm going to get my unempoyement allowance (ok, I worked for it, but now it's nice to get my hands on it).

And yet, I'd still say yes if I had the chance to go living to the US for a while! I dunno why... :cool:

As far as I'm concerned, that's how it should work. Train the unemployed to learn new things, making them more marketable and thus ultimately more productive.

[juanm]

Yep... The great thing is that everyone can apply. There's a selection test, but as far as I can see, they take everybody, no matter the background they come from. Usually it's 2/3 attending classes and 1/3 on an internship. I helps to acquire some experience, it's free (the same course would cost in excess of 1200€, I think)... Great thing. There are other courses too for employed or freelance people I'll try to attend when I'm back to work. Autocad this time, though.

[mactastic]

Autocad this time, though.
Aw, AutoCad's not that difficult. I could get you up and running in a few hours.

We are losing one of our better drafters at the end of the month. Which sucks, because until we can hire someone new and bring them up to speed, guess who gets to help pick up the slack? Oh yeah! And she was at 75% construction documents for an entire elementary school. Gotta have that set at 100% by end of September for initial submittal to the state....

I sense some overtime coming my way whether I like it or not.

[teflon]

Does anyone actually get paid 1 1/2 times when they work overtime, 2x when they work over 12 hours etc? Or when they work on holidays/weekends? It seems to me that many people are getting cheated out of their extra compensations. Maybe if everyone gets paid properly, then less people would have to work so much for the money.

[LethalWolfe]

Does anyone actually get paid 1 1/2 times when they work overtime, 2x when they work over 12 hours etc? Or when they work on holidays/weekends? It seems to me that many people are getting cheated out of their extra compensations. Maybe if everyone gets paid properly, then less people would have to work so much for the money.

Labor laws vary by state, and not everyone is eligible for over time pay. CA is much more labor friendly than IN is for example. In IN OT is only calculated on a weekly hours so you could work someone 40hrs in three days and not pay them over time because they didn't go over the 40hr weekly limit. CA on the other hand is setup so that anything beyond 8hrs in a day and anything beyond 40hrs in a designated work week is OT. Guess which state I prefer working in.

Of course if have a contract or are a salaried employee the rules depended on the agreement between you and your employer.


Lethal

[CorvusCamenarum]

Labor laws vary by state, and not everyone is eligible for over time pay. CA is much more labor friendly than IN is for example. In IN OT is only calculated on a weekly hours so you could work someone 40hrs in three days and not pay them over time because they didn't go over the 40hr weekly limit. CA on the other hand is setup so that anything beyond 8hrs in a day and anything beyond 40hrs in a designated work week is OT. Guess which state I prefer working in.

Of course if have a contract or are a salaried employee the rules depended on the agreement between you and your employer.


Lethal

If memory serves, another factor is how often you are paid. If you're paid biweekly, in some cases an employer only has to pay overtime for anything over 80 hours in that two week period. It opens an employee up to get screwed sometime, but when I was under that system I had a guaranteed 50 hour workweek so it was all good.

Overtime pay is also taxed at a much higher rate than straight pay.

Does anyone actually get paid 1 1/2 times when they work overtime, 2x when they work over 12 hours etc? Or when they work on holidays/weekends?
Overtime for working on a Saturday/Sunday? I've never heard of that one.

[it5five]

If memory serves, another factor is how often you are paid. If you're paid biweekly, in some cases an employer only has to pay overtime for anything over 80 hours in that two week period. It opens an employee up to get screwed sometime, but when I was under that system I had a guaranteed 50 hour workweek so it was all good.

Overtime pay is also taxed at a much higher rate than straight pay.


Overtime for working on a Saturday/Sunday? I've never heard of that one.

I get night differential pay. An extra ~$1.60 for every hour I work past 6pm. But I also have a really strong union.

[mactastic]

I get 1-1/2 time for anything over 40 in a week. I go over 8 in a day quite often and use the time for appointments or other times I need to be away from work. I'm glad it doesn't ding my employer for that. Oh, and 2x for anything over 80 in a week. God I hate it when I hit that rate...

[Swarmlord]

That's not a very good solution. Yeah take off every other week if you are self-employed for vacation? Wonderful if you are in a lucrative industry or a high paid consultant, but most self-employing ventures don't fall under this category. There's reason you don't know anyone that does that.

I was being sarcastic. Obviously, when you are your own employer you don't grant yourself months of vacation. You'd go broke doing it. That's why employers don't provide more than two weeks until you've logged some serious time with the company.

[takao]

here what you get for overtime is mostly regulated through contracts/unions

actually austria, germany and switzerland have NO minimum wage, in praxis it is all regualted through the unions and collective-contracts

for overtime: i have a 08/15 contract as bureau sitter with having a workdays x 8 limit... if i get more hours i get compensated with extra (50% i think)

and for saturday and sunday (with a standard monday-friday job) it would be 100% extra

[63dot]

I don't know how the Health Care System is in the United States. But I know pretty well that the lifestyle of most americans is not the best.

-Fast food (in other words, bad eating habits)
-A lot of stress (work, college, etc) This, in fact, has become a global issue
-Not sure about this one, but it seems as if making exercise also has decreased, instead, people play more video games , etc.

If I am not mistaken, one of the things that causes more deaths in the USA is obesity. So the only way out, or at least the most important action that needs to be done, is to change the eating habits.

that is exactly how i would put it

well said

i am glad i lost 12 lbs. and brought my bmi out of "obese" range, down to 28, but i still need cholesterol meds as i just found out two days ago...and i am only in my mid 40s

but i have a friend who has a low normal bmi and he has to fight to stay in the low cholesterol range, and he takes cholesterol meds so there is a genetic factor there

i know i cannot eat today the way i did back in high school

....

so let's say we are in 42nd place...not bad for 193 nations/nation states, but being as rich as we are and educated, we should do better than being in the second fifth of all nations in life span

maybe japan, sweden, and germany builds better cars than us, but we are definitely in the top ten

maybe some countries produce better scientists, programmers, or doctors, but we are among the best

maybe some countries outproduce us in certain textiles, but again we are near the top of the list

maybe some developed nations have cleaner air than us, but we are trying with our emissions standards

but i can't rest with 41 nations outliving us...we are doing something very wrong in america