Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. healthcare system ranking revealed and compared internationally, it isn’t good
Science Recorder ^ | 06/18/2014 | James Fluere

Posted on 06/18/2014 10:01:10 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

If you could pick any healthcare system in the world, it probably wouldn’t be the U.S.’s. According to a new report from The Commonwealth Fund, titled “Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, 2014 Update: How the U.S. Health Care System Compares Internationally,” the U.S healthcare system is the most costly in the world, but it ranks poorly compared to other countries on most measures of performance.

Among the 11 nations assessed by The Commonwealth Fund — Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK and the U.S. — the U.S. ranks last, as it did in four previous editions of the report. In this edition of the report, the UK ranks first, followed closely by Switzerland.

Unlike the U.S., five other nations in this report ensure the accessibility of care through universal health systems. Obamacare is increasing the number of Americans with coverage and enhancing access to care, but the data in this report are from years prior to the full implementation of the law.

The report also reveals that the U.S. ranks behind most countries on many measures of health outcomes, quality and efficiency. Other countries have spearheaded the adoption of modern health information systems, but U.S. doctors and hospitals are catching up as they react to major monetary incentives to switch to new health information technology systems.

Although all countries show the need for improvement, the report notes that the other 10 countries spend much less on healthcare per person and as a percent of gross domestic product than does the U.S.

Image credit: The Commonwealth Fund


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 0carenightmare; healthcare; healthcarelist; healthcarerank; obamacare; ranking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last
To: teeman8r

i’ve never had mondy... is it treatable?


Sorry. I meant beeber.


21 posted on 06/18/2014 11:42:04 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie
Disaggregate the results to find that we are merely insufficiently socialist in their opinion.

*ding*! *ding*! *ding*!
22 posted on 06/18/2014 11:44:05 AM PDT by 98ZJ USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PapaNew
The truth is before the 1970's when the federal government began meddling into healthcare, our healthcare was affordable and the best in the world. It still is the best in the world, but as usual, government interference has created cost problems.

This x 100000000000 (just keep going)
23 posted on 06/18/2014 11:45:45 AM PDT by 98ZJ USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 98ZJ USMC

I’ve been doing this so long I can debunk the headline without even reading the article.


24 posted on 06/18/2014 11:48:25 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Radicalized via the Internet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I’ll go to Japan before I’d ever remotely consider the UK


25 posted on 06/18/2014 12:48:44 PM PDT by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

RE: I’ll go to Japan before I’d ever remotely consider the UK

Funny they didn’t include Japan in the survey...


26 posted on 06/18/2014 12:54:00 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: teeman8r; cuban leaf
i’ve never had mondy... is it treatable?

Monday is treatable, with a bucket of coffee and a big ol' pile of doughnuts... It will not go away, but will make it much easier to bear. Unfortunately, it always reoccurs, and there is no real cure.

27 posted on 06/18/2014 1:59:13 PM PDT by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
This is why the U.S. life expectancy was 71.96 years back in 1974 (forty years ago) and is now 78.64 years, right?

We're not healthier, we're just sick for longer.


28 posted on 06/18/2014 3:24:31 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jdege
We're not healthier, we're just sick for longer.

Word play.

29 posted on 06/18/2014 3:39:56 PM PDT by Steely Tom (How do you feel about robbing Peter's robot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jdege

From your source: “From 2006 to 2011, the number of new cases of diagnosed diabetes has shown no significant change.” Just goes to show that statistics can/are highly manipulated to get the desired result. Also, U.S. population is up over 20% 1995-2014 (so naturally more diabetes cases). http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/incidence/fig1.htm


30 posted on 06/18/2014 3:40:21 PM PDT by Drago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Drago

US poulation is up 20% - cases of diabetes is up 400%.


31 posted on 06/18/2014 7:49:03 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Drago

US poulation is up 20% - cases of diabetes is up 400%.


32 posted on 06/18/2014 7:49:14 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: jdege
I used 1995-2011 for the 20% pop. increase...according to the CDC new diabetes cases are up 98% over that time, and are currently declining. But I get your point, we may be in worse health in the last 10-20 years of life. It would require more study though....for example, middle age or younger people may have the highest incidence of diabetes. Also, diabetes rates track directly with obesity rates. Fit, lean seniors have other problems.

CDC Diabetes-New Cases http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/incidence/fig1.htm

33 posted on 06/18/2014 8:34:08 PM PDT by Drago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Drago

We’re seeing “adult-onset” diabetes show up in kids under the age of ten, which takes a couple of generations of poor dietary choices to make happen.

Look up Pottenger’s cats. Ignore the arguments about whether food should be cooked, or raw, or whatever. The critical point is that nutritional deficiencies are inherited. First generation of cats on a taurine-deficient diet suffered, second suffered more, third was either still-born or died before maturity or was sterile.

That’s exactly what has been going on with us, since the government started trying to convince everyone that a low-fat, high-carb diet, heavy on the processed foods that provide the manufacturers with the highest profits, is healthy.

Why have things gotten better, over the last few years, after so many years of getting worse? I’d say it’s because people are figuring out that the official dietary guidelines are absolute crap.

Try comparing that chart to margarine and butter sales. Margarine sales have been in a nose-dive since 1995, butter sales are at a forty-year high.

More and more people are figuring out these processed, industrial food-like substances are killing them, and that natural animal fats are essential to health.

In other words, things are getting better because more and more people have stopped listening to their doctors and the public health community on issues of nutrition.


34 posted on 06/19/2014 8:52:27 AM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-34 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson