AVERAGE LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH - America declines from 5th to 50th in last 60 years

[HenryBHough]

If Obama keeps running his illegal wars and starting new ones then the statistics are going to get worse. Excuse me, that's just the mortality stats. His killing-machine policies are working wonders for his unemployment stats. Imagine if all those dead lived and came home looking for work!

 

[Zander]

The only solution is a complete takeover of all health care!!! A full "nanny state". Think of the jobs we could "create".....

Start with 1,000,000 food police to stop people from eating "bad" foods. They would review your grocery receipts, follow you around at lunch, and search your cars and homes for salty snacks.

A national obesity office - with 500,000 field officers to find and weigh obese persons. There would be a "sexually offensive" list of morbidly obese people and a watch list for borderline morbid obese people. The fat will be found, and forced to lose weight....one way or another!

Alcohol and smoking police- 1,000,000 workers dedicated to stopping people from smoking and drinking. While these activities are currently legal, the ASP (alcohol and smoking police) will monitor and collect data on smokers and drinkers in anticipation of prohibition of these substances.

Yes, the potential for job creation is endless!! If we get everyone on food stamps too...this economy will take off like gangbusters!! There's nothing government can't do!!!

 

[Patrick2]

OR,

we could just limit care to paliative treatments for people who deliberately trash their health.

 

[PeteEU]

No matter how unbiased the study might be, it depends on the data avaiable to measure. Any infant death will dramatically lower the life expectancy averages. Most countries don't count infant deaths as they are counted in the USA.

Yes and no. Europe has a different way of counting, but if you look at the rules themselves then the only real difference is that the US does not have any rules and that Europe does. The actual statistical and factual difference between the two systems are so minimal that in reality they are the same.

If the infant is there and it dies, it's a death in the USA. In most of Europe, the baby has to be alive and well and of a minimum weight and length to be considered viable. Any preme is considered dead if below the norms. Not so in the USA.

Yes and no. The rules in Europe are all different but they are within a range of each other. The rules are based on how long the pregnancy has been, weight and size. Now this is based on logic and facts. A baby that is born before the 23rd week of pregnancy has a slim chance to survive and 22 weeks it is near impossible. There has been under a handful of babies in history born under 22 weeks (and the youngest was 21 weeks and 6 days...), and the number of babies born under 23 weeks and who lived can be counted on two hands... world wide through history. Babies are simply dont have the heart and especially lungs to survive at the age.... it is a medical fact.

But of course if a baby is born at 22 weeks the doctors in Europe dont just throw it on the scrap heap... but they know the chances of it surviving is very slim.

But most importantly... the amount of premature babies born is so small that they do not effect life expectancy statistics over all in any meaningful way.

So like it or not, the "premature" excuse as I like to call it, is nothing but partisan bullshit in an attempt to diminish the statistics because they look bad for the US. Another method is to blame the black population or the latino population like they are not Americans or something. Another lame attempt is to say that Americans have more car accidents than everyone else because they drive more, and that Americans kill each other more so that has to be taken out of the life expectancy statistic.... nothing but lame excuses and partisan statistic manipulation.

The influx of illegals is also a factor. This something that is also affecting the avearage height of the people in the USA.

Ahh the old blame the illegals excuse. You do realize that Europe has a lot of illegals too right? And that these illegals come from war torn Africa and the Middle East right? Who has the better life style... a poor Mexican or a starving African?

Any statistic taken by itself in a vacuum is deceptive.

Yes and it is especially deceptive if you dont take the time to look at the foundation base of the statistic... what are the numbers based on and can they be compared to each other without highlighting certain issues. And do those issue actually impact the statistics in a meaningful and substantive way... Crime statistics are a good example... only real crime statistic that is comparable world wide is murder... why? Because each country has different laws and a crime in the US might not be a crime in Europe or visa versa, and that effects the individual crime statistic... cant say that of murder

 

[jgarden]

The primary reason I selected the CIA World Factbook statistics and not some other source was to supposedly bypass all these "red herring" excuses about infant mortality, etc.

As a branch of the US government, one would expect that the statistics that the CIA makes avaiable to the American public to be what they consider to be a fair comparison.

If there is bias to be found, one could argue that the statistics on the CIA World Factbook were selected to portray the US in its most favorable light - why would any branch of the American government make the US look any worse with respect to its average life expectancy than it already is?

 

[Patrick2]

The primary reason I selected the CIA World Factbook statistics and not some other source was to supposedly bypass all these "red herring" excuses about infant mortality, etc.

As a branch of the US government, one would expect that the statistics that the CIA makes avaiable to the American public to be what they consider to be a fair comparison.

If there is bias to be found, one could argue that the statistics on the CIA World Factbook were selected to portray the US in its most favorable light - why would any branch of the American government make the US look any worse with respect to its average life expectancy than it already is?

Your post is beyond stupid - the CIA is renowned for getting things wrong, eg in saying that Iraq had nuclear weapons. I've already asked in this thread where the CIA got its numbers, and by what methodology - no answer. But it's standard procedure in these comparisons of health between the US and other countries to use WHO statistics, renowned for their anti-US bias regarding infant mortality. Also, merely stating the average life spans, without making a detailed analysis of the MANY factors which influence that, and then pole-vaulting to politically-loaded conclusions is a meaningless exercize at best.

 

[jgarden]

Rankings: Average Life Expectancy in the United States (2005) - by State

Rank / State / Life Expectancy (in years, 2005)
*************************************
1 Hawaii 81.7
2 Minnesota 80.5
3 Connecticut 80.1
4 North Dakota 79.8
5 Massachusetts 79.8
6 California 79.7
7 Vermont 79.6
8 New York 79.6
9 New Hampshire 79.5
10 Utah 79.5
11 Washington 79.4
12 Iowa 79.3
13 Nebraska 79.2
14 New Jersey 79.2
15 Rhode Island 79.2
16 Colorado 79.1
17 Wisconsin 79.0
18 Idaho 78.9
19 Oregon 78.7
20 South Dakota 78.6
21 Alaska 78.5
22 Florida 78.5
23 Arizona 78.2
24 Illinois 78.1
25 Maine 78.1
26 Virginia 78.1
27 Kansas 78.0
28 Maryland 78.0
29 Montana 77.9
30 Wyoming 77.8
31 New Mexico 77.7
32 Michigan 77.7
33 Pennsylvania 77.7
34 Texas 77.6
35 Delaware 77.4
36 Ohio 77.1
37 Indiana 76.9
38 Missouri 76.8
39 North Carolina 76.6
40 Nevada 76.3
41 Georgia 76.2
42 South Carolina 75.8
43 Arkansas 75.5
44 Kentucky 75.5
45 Tennessee 75.3
46 West Virginia 75.3
47 Oklahoma 75.1
48 Alabama 74.6
49 Louisiana 74.0
50 Mississippi 73.9

American Human Development Report

"Patrick2" contends that not only are the "WHO statistics, renowned for their anti-US bias," but the "the CIA is renowned for getting things wrong" so that any attempt to rank and compare nations beyond "beyond stupid!"

Interestingly enough, my critics repeatedly fail to mention any alternate sources of data that they would accept!

I believe that "beyond stupid is in the "eye of the beholder" and that those who question a source, just because it doesn't place America in a favorable position, are in a state of denial by attempting to "shoot the messanger."

You don't have to the address a problem if refuse to admit that one exists and the easiest way to accomplish that is to repeatedly question the validity of any source of the data that doesn't happen to coincide with their preconceived view of the world.

Rather getting into another prolonged discussion about the CIA source, I'll take an alternate approach. The American Human Development Report indicates that in 2005 the average life expectancy in America can vary 7.8 years (if you can find more recent data, be my guest).

Presumably this comparison will by-pass these arguments concerning international comparisons and ant-American biases.

What is interesting is that the 7.8 year difference between #1 Hawaii (81.7 years) and #50 Mississippi (73.9 years) is almost as great as the difference which separates the first 50 nations on the CIA list.

A 7.8 year life expectancy difference among American states (using US data), is even more appalling than ranking 50th in the world (using international data).

#1 Hawaii (81.7 years) would rank 11th in the world.
#50 Mississippi (73.9 years) would rank 112th in the world.

108 Saudi Arabia 74.11 2011 est.
109 Romania 73.98 2011 est.
110 Venezuela 73.93 2011 est.
111 Gaza Strip 73.92 2011 est.

MISSISSIPPI 73.9 years

112 Malaysia 73.79 2011 est.
113 Thailand 73.60 2011 est.
114 Bulgaria 73.59 2011 est.
115 Seychelles 73.52 2011 est.
116 Jamaica 73.45 2011 est.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...ook/index.html

 

[Patrick2]

Once again, einstein, provide a link to a credible souce which gives the methodologies for data collection and analysis, otherwise, you're just hot air.

 

[Toro]

Canada #12!

We rock!

 

[JMadison]

I wonder if population size is a factor.

 

[JMadison]

Canada #12!

We rock!

You're going to die early, it won't help you any.l

 

[Cecilie1200]

What's the point of the OP? Life expectancy depends on an extremely wide variety of factors: gene pool. crime rate, wars fought in, typical diet, unemployment rate, alcoholism rate, miles driven per year, divorce rate, etc etc etc etc.

Surely "Patrick2" can't be aguing that the the US is so "exceptional" that it can never be compared with any other country in the world!

Are the 49 other nations which all currently have average life expectancies exceeding the US somehow exempt from "an extremely wide variety of factors: gene pool. crime rate, wars fought in, typical diet, unemployment rate, alcoholism rate, miles driven per year, divorce rate, etc etc etc etc.?"

For starters, the 2011 CIA Work FactBook which the last time I looked was a branch of the US federal government, has a whole section on international comparisons and provides most of my data, would certainly disagree

I'm sure it would be news for the following nations to be told they have nothing to worry about when it comes to gene pool issues, crime, wars, diet problems, unemployment, alcoholism, illegal drugs, driving accidents, divorce, etc, etc, etc, etc. - that these are only problems unique to the US.

1 Monaco 89.73 2011 est.

2 Macau 84.41 2011 est.

3 San Marino 83.01 2011 est.

4 Andorra 82.43 2011 est.

5 Japan 82.25 2011 est.

6 Guernsey 82.16 2011 est.

7 Singapore 82.14 2011 est.

8 Hong Kong 82.04 2011 est.

9 Australia 81.81 2011 est.

10 Italy 81.77 2011 est.

11 Jersey 81.38 2011 est.

12 Canada 81.38 2011 est.

13 France 81.19 2011 est.

14 Spain 81.17 2011 est.

15 Switzerland 81.07 2011 est.

16 Sweden 81.07 2011 est.

17 Israel 80.96 2011 est.

18 Iceland 80.90 2011 est.

19 Anguilla 80.87 2011 est.

20 Bermuda 80.71 2011 est.

21 Cayman Islands 80.68 2011 est.

22 Isle of Man 80.64 2011 est.

23 New Zealand 80.59 2011 est.

24 Liechtenstein 80.31 2011 est.

25 Norway 80.20 2011 est.

26 Ireland 80.19 2011 est.

27 Germany 80.07 2011 est.

28 United Kingdom 80.05 2011 est.

29 Jordan 80.05 2011 est.

30 Greece 79.92 2011 est.

31 Saint Pierre and Miquelon 79.87 2011 est.

32 Austria 79.78 2011 est.

33 Faroe Islands 79.72 2011 est.

34 Malta 79.72 2011 est.

35 Netherlands 79.68 2011 est.

36 Luxembourg 79.61 2011 est.

37 Belgium 79.51 2011 est.

38 Virgin Islands 79.33 2011 est.

39 Finland 79.27 2011 est.

40 Turks and Caicos Islands 79.11 2011 est.

41 Korea, South 79.05 2011 est.

42 Wallis and Futuna 78.98 2011 est.

43 Puerto Rico 78.92 2011 est.

44 European Union 78.82 2010 est.

45 Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.81 2011 est.

46 Saint Helena, Ascension, and Tristan da Cunha 78.76 2011 est.

47 Gibraltar 78.68 2011 est.

48 Denmark 78.63 2011 est.

49 Portugal 78.54 2011 est.

50 United States 78.37 2011 est.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html

Surely YOU'RE not arguing that every country in the world is so similar and interchangeable that they can be compared straight across the board without ever adjusting for any mitigating factors?

Perhaps you'd like to tell us exactly what the point is of YET AGAIN dredging up this incredibly old, repeatedly chewed-over and already-endlessly-discussed useless factoid? Was there some sort of fucking point you were trying to make . . . and I will pray (most likely in vain) for it to be a new and different point, rather than a mindless repetition of some previously debunked-in-detail point that you just didn't bother to check for before running your gums?

 

[uscitizen]

So america is going about SS and medicare reform from the opposite end?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Rankings: Average Life Expectancy in the United States (2005) - by State

Rank / State / Life Expectancy (in years, 2005)
*************************************
1 Hawaii 81.7
2 Minnesota 80.5
3 Connecticut 80.1
4 North Dakota 79.8
5 Massachusetts 79.8
6 California 79.7
7 Vermont 79.6
8 New York 79.6
9 New Hampshire 79.5
10 Utah 79.5
11 Washington 79.4
12 Iowa 79.3
13 Nebraska 79.2
14 New Jersey 79.2
15 Rhode Island 79.2
16 Colorado 79.1
17 Wisconsin 79.0
18 Idaho 78.9
19 Oregon 78.7
20 South Dakota 78.6
21 Alaska 78.5
22 Florida 78.5
23 Arizona 78.2
24 Illinois 78.1
25 Maine 78.1
26 Virginia 78.1
27 Kansas 78.0
28 Maryland 78.0
29 Montana 77.9
30 Wyoming 77.8
31 New Mexico 77.7
32 Michigan 77.7
33 Pennsylvania 77.7
34 Texas 77.6
35 Delaware 77.4
36 Ohio 77.1
37 Indiana 76.9
38 Missouri 76.8
39 North Carolina 76.6
40 Nevada 76.3
41 Georgia 76.2
42 South Carolina 75.8
43 Arkansas 75.5
44 Kentucky 75.5
45 Tennessee 75.3
46 West Virginia 75.3
47 Oklahoma 75.1
48 Alabama 74.6
49 Louisiana 74.0
50 Mississippi 73.9

American Human Development Report

"Patrick2" contends that not only are the "WHO statistics, renowned for their anti-US bias," but the "the CIA is renowned for getting things wrong" so that any attempt to rank and compare nations beyond "beyond stupid!"

Interestingly enough, my critics repeatedly fail to mention any alternate sources of data that they would accept!

I believe that "beyond stupid is in the "eye of the beholder" and that those who question a source, just because it doesn't place America in a favorable position, are in a state of denial by attempting to "shoot the messanger."

You don't have to the address a problem if refuse to admit that one exists and the easiest way to accomplish that is to repeatedly question the validity of any source of the data that doesn't happen to coincide with their preconceived view of the world.

Rather getting into another prolonged discussion about the CIA source, I'll take an alternate approach. The American Human Development Report indicates that in 2005 the average life expectancy in America can vary 7.8 years (if you can find more recent data, be my guest).

Presumably this comparison will by-pass these arguments concerning international comparisons and ant-American biases.

What is interesting is that the 7.8 year difference between #1 Hawaii (81.7 years) and #50 Mississippi (73.9 years) is almost as great as the difference which separates the first 50 nations on the CIA list.

A 7.8 year life expectancy difference among American states (using US data), is even more appalling than ranking 50th in the world (using international data).

#1 Hawaii (81.7 years) would rank 11th in the world.
#50 Mississippi (73.9 years) would rank 112th in the world.

108 Saudi Arabia 74.11 2011 est.
109 Romania 73.98 2011 est.
110 Venezuela 73.93 2011 est.
111 Gaza Strip 73.92 2011 est.

MISSISSIPPI 73.9 years

112 Malaysia 73.79 2011 est.
113 Thailand 73.60 2011 est.
114 Bulgaria 73.59 2011 est.
115 Seychelles 73.52 2011 est.
116 Jamaica 73.45 2011 est.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...ook/index.html

Is there going to be a point to this endless repetition of bolded numbers at any moment in the near future? Shockingly, writing everything in heavy black letters neither makes what you say more important nor more interesting.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I wonder if population size is a factor.

It is. Homogeneity is also a factor.

 

[bill5]

The average is thrown off by a number of factors.

,,,and the diff is a whopping 2, 3 years. lol @ this being more than a yawn.