U.S. infant mortality rate among worse

[Popeye]

You would think we would be among the best, not the worst. Though a lot of factors could be at work, health care for everyone would undoubtedly improve those figures

U.S. Infant Mortality Rate Among Worst

November 11, 2007 9:34 a.m. EST

Danilo Gagelonia - AHN News Writer

Atlanta, GA (AHN) - The United States infant mortality rate is among the worst in the world.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, based on 2004 statistics, the most recent year available, approximately seven babies died for every 1,000 live births before reaching the age of one year.

In 2006, the State of the World's Mothers report stated that the United States has the second worst newborn mortality rate in the industrialized world.

The annual report said, "The United States has more neonatologists and neonatal intensive care beds per person than Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom, but its newborn rate is higher than any of those countries."

Latvia, with six deaths per 1,000 live births, has a higher death rate for newborns than the United States, is tied near the bottom of industrialized nations with Hungary, Malta, Poland and Slovakia with five deaths per 1,000 births.

A World Health Organization report in 2005 said the infant mortality rate in undeveloped Liberia was 144 per 1000 births -- 20 times higher than the U.S. rate.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7009123824

 

[PLC1]

According to this, the health care system in the US is among the worst in the industrialized world. It seems to me that we could do better.

 

[Popeye]

According to this, the health care system in the US is among the worst in the industrialized world. It seems to me that we could do better.

No. 37! That's something to be proud of. Notice who's #1, that country that Republicans are so fond of making fun of.

 

[PLC1]

No. 37! That's something to be proud of. Notice who's #1, that country that Republicans are so fond of making fun of.

How about that. Not only that, but they spend a whole lot less than we do.

We are two notches above Cuba at least.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Then move to France. I like getting to choose my own doctor.

 

[Popeye]

How about that. Not only that, but they spend a whole lot less than we do.

We are two notches above Cuba at least.

Here's a key point made in the report, "Babies born to black mothers died at two and a half times the rate of those born to white mothers, according to the CDC figures. Doctors and analysts blame broad disparities in access to health care among racial and income groups in the United States." Now, to me, that is another strong argument in favor of universal health care.

 

[palerider]

The left periodically drags this debunked piece of crap out in an effort to show how terrible the US is compared to socialist countries. But as with all information passed out by their handlers to be parrotted as much and as often as possible, there is a key bit of information being deliberately left out. A bit of information that is common knowledge and has been common knowledge for quite some time that changes the picture entirely; both on the issue of infant mortality and the death rate overall.

What they don't tell you is that in the US, extrordinary measures are taken to save high risk children. Even if the parents don't have insurance and a large number of these children die. This treatment is usually very expensive and nations with socialized medicine simply can't afford to spend the money. In nations with socialized medicine, the infant death rate is lower because no effort is made to save these children. They are set aside to die and are listed as stillborn. The same holds true for high risk older people.

Personally, I would prefer the higher death rate and to know that we aren't the sort of people who use the "Spartan model" for deciding which children have a chance for life and which don't.

 

[palerider]

How about that. Not only that, but they spend a whole lot less than we do.

Of course they do. It is pretty inexpensive to simply set a child aside to die rather than make an attempt to save its life.

 

[Popeye]

The left periodically drags this debunked piece of crap out in an effort to show how terrible the US is compared to socialist countries. But as with all information passed out by their handlers to be parrotted as much and as often as possible, there is a key bit of information being deliberately left out. A bit of information that is common knowledge and has been common knowledge for quite some time that changes the picture entirely; both on the issue of infant mortality and the death rate overall.



Personally, I would prefer the higher death rate and to know that we aren't the sort of people who use the "Spartan model" for deciding which children have a chance for life and which don't.

You would "prefer a higher death rate"? Aren't you a member of the self righteous, who would deny a woman the right to an abortion, saying it is baby killing? I guess you only care about a baby's health when it still resides in the mother's womb, and only then to make a political point.

Look, this whole thing is an excellent argument for universal health care. We have an estimated 47 million uninsured in this country. Everybody in such a country as ours, should have access to affordable health care. Calling it "socialized medicine" is bogus, as we have Medicare for senior citizens, and most will tell you it works just fine. Is that "socialist" as well?

 

[palerider]

In typical fashion, you have missed the point entirely. This is an argument against universal health care. The higher death rate in this country is the result of not simply writing off high risk children at birth and setting them aside to die as is the case in countries with universal health care.

 

[PLC1]

Of course they do. It is pretty inexpensive to simply set a child aside to die rather than make an attempt to save its life.

Right. And doing so gets you the WHO's #1 rating, and puts your infant mortality rate lower than that of other industrialized nations, including the US. Sure it does.

Sure, France must set children aside to die rather than attempting to save their lives. Sure, whatever you say.

 

[palerider]

Right. And doing so gets you the WHO's #1 rating, and puts your infant mortality rate lower than that of other industrialized nations, including the US. Sure it does.

Sure, France must set children aside to die rather than attempting to save their lives. Sure, whatever you say.

Nations with socialized medicine rarely, if ever make extroidanary attempts to save the lives of high risk children. The truth may not be palatable to you, but it is the truth none the less. The same is true for high risk elderly. If you live in a nation with socialized medicine, you get hospice care rather than any real attempt to save your life. In short, if it is going to be expensive to treat you, you are set aside to die.

 

[Popeye]

In typical fashion, you have missed the point entirely. This is an argument against universal health care. The higher death rate in this country is the result of not simply writing off high risk children at birth and setting them aside to die as is the case in countries with universal health care.

On the contrary, you are using some mutated form of circular reasoning to justify the high infant mortality rate. Let me repeat a quote from the report that I previously posted, "Babies born to black mothers died at two and a half times the rate of those born to white mothers, according to the CDC figures. Doctors and analysts blame broad disparities in access to health care among racial and income groups in the United States". Sounds plain to me, I'll take the word of medical professionals anytime over right wing ideologues.

 

[palerider]

On the contrary, you are using some mutated form of circular reasoning to justify the high infant mortality rate. Let me repeat a quote from the report that I previously posted, "Babies born to black mothers died at two and a half times the rate of those born to white mothers, according to the CDC figures. Doctors and analysts blame broad disparities in access to health care among racial and income groups in the United States". Sounds plain to me, I'll take the word of medical professionals anytime over right wing ideologues.

Look to the liberal destruction of the black family and resulting ignorance of pre natal care (along with most other health issues) for the reasons black children die more often, not the care they get in the delivery room and neo natal units. As a percentage of the population, more black children fall into the high risk category and are simply unable to be saved. In nations with socialized medicine, no attempt is even made to save them due to the expense.

 

[Popeye]

Look to the liberal destruction of the black family and resulting ignorance of pre natal care (along with most other health issues) for the reasons black children die more often, not the care they get in the delivery room and neo natal units. As a percentage of the population, more black children fall into the high risk category and are simply unable to be saved. In nations with socialized medicine, no attempt is even made to save them due to the expense.

More conservative nonsense. Lets see, according to you, liberals have destroyed the black family and blacks are ignorant of most health care issues. In other words, blacks are not responsible for their own actions and they are generally less intelligent. Do you have any more stereotypes that border on racism?

What evidence do you have that nations with universal health care discard extremely sick infants? Even if that is partially true, it logically can't completely account for the incredible discrepancy between France's #1 ranking and our #36 on the WHO's list.