Why Americans Die So Much Earlier Than Other Developed Nations

Alligatorob said:
I think the article does a pretty good job of answering the question. A lot of it has to do with a higher death rate amongst our poor folks. We have more of them than many other developed countries, and without socialized medicine they have poorer health care here. Throw in the guns and auto accidents and you pretty much have it.

I also think there is something to what others here have said about diet, I think we are fatter than most developed countries.

I suspect fit thin middle class Americans live as long as anybody does.
Click to expand...
I just did a search to see if that was true and yep, it sure is!

The analysis showed that the United States is home to the highest number of overweight and obese people in the world. In the U.S., 70.9 percent of men and 61.9 percent of women are overweight or obese, compared to 38 percent of men and 36.9 percent of women worldwide.​
 

JimBob1952 said:
Our economy is hardly uncontrolled. U.S. regulatory bodies include the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Justice Department, the Occupational Health and Safety Authority, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Environmental Protection Authority, the Food and Drug Administration, and hundreds of other offices just at the Federal level. Every state has similar offices. In fact the complexity and duplication of regulations is a significant barrier to economic health.

And we're not exactly Uzbekistan here. Our per capita GDP is the highest among large countries; we have the world's best universities; we have unparalleled innovation and scientific expertise (a lot of it thanks to immigration). We do have a dysfunctional health care system, but if you do have access to it our doctors and research are amazing.

Wealth distribution is a chimera. The five "most equal" countries in terms of distribution of wealth are:

Ukraine (.241)
Slovenia (.256)
Norway (.259)
Slovak Republic (.261)
Czech Republic (.261)

Other than Norway, I wouldn't want to live in any of them. (I'm not blond enough to live in Norway).
Click to expand...

When I said "uncontrolled" economy I meant the government has no control over the price of a product. Anyone can charge anything they like.

And "per capita GDP" is misleading. It makes no sense at all to say that Bezons and you make on the average so many billions per year!
 

mellowyellow said:
I think it’s because America knows how to make delicious food people will love. Therein lies the dilemma.
Click to expand...
My thinking is that companies like Maccas train children from an early age to like the food they provide. Try coming home from a school camp with a busload of teenagers who have been eating healthily for several days. When the bus passes a MacDonalds outlet the kids are all screaming out "Stop the bus".

Fast food is OK for an occasional treat but too easily becomes staple food.
 
JimBob1952 said:
Kind of rude and unpleasant to make unkind remarks about someone else's country. I have been in Canada many times and have lots of general observations to make, but I keep them to myself.
Click to expand...
♫♫ My country's better'n your country
My country's better'n yours..... ♫♫
 
Pecos said:
I found this article in the The Atlantic to be very illuminating and more complex that I would have guessed. Since the time frame spans 30 years, it should not turn political:

Why Is America So Bad at Keeping People Alive? - The Atlantic

@OneEyedDiva @Pinky @SeaBreeze
Click to expand...
A couple of points:

I recently went on Medicare with a supplement. I suddenly found a wealth of healthcare options, which I need badly. Doctor's Offices seem very glad to see me and to help. In reality, however, I seldom see a doctor. Instead, I see a nurse practitioner in a doctor's office. There must be a way to spread healthcare through this kind of service by clinics Advanced Nurses, without dramatically increasing physician costs. I don't really need a person with a medical degree to diagnose and prescribe for simple illnesses. What we probably need is a total change in the way we provide health care. Given the vested interests that is not likely to happen quickly. I hear no interest from Washington to this subject.

Secondly, our nation is losing family and social networks. We work and drive. Even relaxing is becoming a kind of competition. Almost every child is from a divorced family. The church is no longer the center of our people's lives. (Remember that Churches provided as much community as it did religion.) These changes remove the sense of social cohesion. This contributes to the violent deaths and the deaths of despair. They probably also reduced the survival rate from disease. Without a family and community based, the will to survive is reduced.
 
CAKCy said:
When I said "uncontrolled" economy I meant the government has no control over the price of a product. Anyone can charge anything they like.

And "per capita GDP" is misleading. It makes no sense at all to say that Bezons and you make on the average so many billions per year!
Click to expand...
GDP per capita in 2020 was $63,416. Average household income was $87,864, but median household income was $61,937. I don't find that misleading at all.
 
Last edited:
CAKCy said:
I wonder if this applies to Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, North Korea, China etc. etc. etc......
Click to expand...

If people from those countries posted on SF, I would try to be as courteous to them as I would be to someone from, say, Canada. Or the UK. Or Cyprus. Or Australia.
 
JimBob1952 said:
If people from those countries posted on SF, I would try to be as courteous to them as I would be to someone from, say, Canada. Or the UK. Or Cyprus. Or Australia.
Click to expand...

Got it. I'm not sure I'm in complete agreement with it but I understand what you are saying. The problem I see is that the US have affected the life in almost every country in the world. So, it's kind of hard for people not commenting on it, even if the majority of the members of SF are US citizens.
 
oldiebutgoody said:
Simple: the USA has many more people living in poverty and the safety net is so much less than it is in Europe with millions still lacking universal health care coverage.
Click to expand...
We have spent too much of our treasure trying to protect the world... which replies by hating us. Europe is not perfect, but they are focusing more on the life and health of their own people. I don't mean to sound socialist, but so many of today's children are born in violence and hopelessness. They are our citizens and out responsibility.
 
I have certainly noticed, especially in the last couple of years, that so many younger people are dying! My son and DIL lost more friends than I have. I've seen so many obituaries for Gen-Xers and Millennials that it's mind boggling. A few of my son and DIL's friend died of heart attacks and a few from cancer. One of my son's friends (and his fan). who was my neighbor, died from COVID early in the pandemic. Another of his good friends, also a neighbor, died of a heart attack. I had just chatted with him a couple of weeks before and was concerned because of his weight, knowing he'd had a heart attack previously. I was shocked when the son of one of my very good friends died just 10 months after he did. I never found out the cause of his death but he was preparing to go back to work as an educator in our school system. I'm thinking he probably had a heart attack or stroke.

There are a lot of factors to consider within the OP's article, which I didn't finish because my ADD kicked in (the same ADD that almost guarantees that I'll only watch half of an 41 - 42 minute episode then move on to something else). I read until my brain got boggled. This particular passage stood out because it's always been assumed that Black people are the only ones on welfare and Medicaid but that's simply not true. In fact as the article linked below points out, almost the same amount of Blacks and Whites receive welfare.
"Policy also plays a starring role. Schwandt credits the Medicaid expansion in the 1990s, which covered pregnant women and children and likely improved Black Americans’ access to medical treatments." So didn't Medicaid similarly help poor Whites?
https://brandongaille.com/welfare-statistics-by-race-state-and-payment/#:~:text=The following percentages are recipients of welfare based,• Black – 39.8% • Hispanic – 15.7%
I'll return to this thread later to further comment.
 
Last edited:
OneEyedDiva said:
"Policy also plays a starring role. Schwandt credits the Medicaid expansion in the 1990s, which covered pregnant women and children and likely improved Black Americans’ access to medical treatments." So didn't Medicaid similarly help poor Whites?
https://brandongaille.com/welfare-s...fare based,• Black – 39.8% • Hispanic – 15.7%
I'll return to this thread later to further comment.
Click to expand...
Thanks Diva, good post and very interesting article.

One thing I found in the article that was particularly troubling:

The following listing of states has more residents that receive welfare versus an employed population.

1. California
2. New Mexico
3. Hawaii
4. Mississippi
5. Alabama
6. South Carolina
7. Illinois
8. Kentucky
9. Ohio
10. New York
11. Maine

That just does not seem sustainable to me, how can a minority of the population generate enough income and taxes to support a majority on welfare? Seems like a big problem to me.
 
Alligatorob said:
Thanks Diva, good post and very interesting article.

One thing I found in the article that was particularly troubling:

The following listing of states has more residents that receive welfare versus an employed population.

1. California
2. New Mexico
3. Hawaii
4. Mississippi
5. Alabama
6. South Carolina
7. Illinois
8. Kentucky
9. Ohio
10. New York
11. Maine

That just does not seem sustainable to me, how can a minority of the population generate enough income and taxes to support a majority on welfare? Seems like a big problem to me.
Click to expand...
Thank you Alligatorob, your point is interesting as well. I wondered if those states had a higher per capital income thus collected more in taxes from it's wealthier residents but only California and Hawaii are among the top 10 "riches states". It was surprising to me that New York didn't make that list. The welfare systems in N.J. are county and city run agencies. I don't know where each gets their funding.

A good friend of mine lives in California not far from L.A. and she's mentioned several times how bad the homeless situation has gotten there. But who knows what percentage of the homeless receives welfare since they are transient.
 
OneEyedDiva said:
I wondered if those states had a higher per capital income thus collected more in taxes from it's wealthier residents but only California and Hawaii are among the top 10 "riches states". It was surprising to me that New York didn't make that list.
Click to expand...
It is interesting. And I suspect one thing is that only the family earners are counted in the employed category where as the whole family, kids included, are counted as receiving welfare. If true that makes the statistic a bit biased. But it is still an awful lot of people on welfare.

I am not anti-welfare, particularly for shorter terms I know some people need a safety net. However I worry that longer term welfare becomes a trap. Few, if any, can live very well on welfare, to live well here you need a job leading to a career. That will provide a more livable income. Though to be honest I have not known many people on welfare, so I am not sure what most of them are about.

I can think of one family I do know who seem to me to have become experts on figuring out how to get the most money out of the government possible. And I know it has persisted through 3 generations now... If they put the same effort into finding work and working hard they would be better off, and so would we all. However it is a sample size of one family, don't know how prevalent it is.
 
adele.jpeg
Something that we see in our press regularly is the one hundred pound weight loss of singer, Adele.
You could be forgiven for thinking that it happened overnight but in fact it took a number of years.
She has attracted some harsh criticism from some quarters of the press. The Independent wrote:
"Celebrating Adele's weight loss isn't a compliment, it's fatphobia."

"Insider," reported that many people congratulated and celebrated Adele for her weight loss. However, not everyone thought of it as a good thing. Several of her, plus-size fans, felt betrayed after seeing her lose weight. Some also pointed out that it is weird to compliment someone who lost a huge amount of weight.

Others also went on to assert that, making a big deal out of someone’s weight loss, is inappropriate. This reportedly makes fat and bigger individuals feel the need to be slender to become better. Although Adele has kept quiet about the debacle, her post reportedly sparked debates among people who are for and against her weight loss.

Reading those reports it doesn't help any of those people who are trying to do something about their weight, it could be that others with less self discipline, discourage anyone from showing that, with determination, a lifestyle can be turned around.

That sort of attitude seems curious because there was a time in the UK when almost 80% of the nation smoked, today that figure is less than 14%, so educating people about smoking has had a dramatic effect, but it would appear that challenging obesity is falling on deaf ears. Yet obesity is a killer just as tobacco is.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top