Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The latest article repeats the same thing - it focuses on a narrow demographic of American and British 50 to 60 year olds and makes the claim that Americans have more health issues - even while they have higher rates of survival from them than their British counterparts.
And most of it’s word count is, surprise, using “inequality of health” or whatever to obfuscate for the claim that “Americans are less healthy than British people”.
Manipulative nonsense and negates literally none of what I said.
You lost the obesity argument, you lost the exercise argument, now your flailing about trying to take this one too.
White people in the USA generally have a lower percentage of body fat for the same BMI than do those in Europe.19 Therefore, if the US prediction formula12 is applied to the European population, the percentage of body fat in Europeans is underestimated by 2·8 (SD 4·6%).
Brave New World currently posting every result of the search quarry “Americans less healthy than British” in her post. Maybe she’ll arrive at something that negates the healthcare outcomes I already posted. Who knows.
I can’t emphasize enough that the fact that there are so many articles from around the Internet that impugn that America is unhealthy (particularly obese) relative to every other western nation despite the conflicting data and logical inconsistencies in that claim was the entire point of the post. So posting such illuminating, repetitive diatribe from such wonderful direct sources as “Slate” and “NPR” and “UPI” is not helping your cause here, nor contradicting any point that was made.
Yes, these people think they have intellectual justification, but all I see is “statistical activism” for state healthcare. It’s the “infant mortality rate” claim writ large. Trying to manufacture a body of literature to appeal to, to show that they’re absolutely right, and America has to change to universal healthcare if it wants to see better healthcare outcomes and “less health inequality”. Yeah. Mkay.
Brave New World currently posting every result of the search quarry “Americans less healthy than British” in her post. Maybe she’ll arrive at something that negates the healthcare outcomes I already posted. Who knows.
I can’t emphasize enough that the fact that there are so many articles from around the Internet that impugn that America is unhealthy (particularly obese) relative to every other western nation despite the conflicting data and logical inconsistencies in that claim was the entire point of the post. So posting such illuminating, repetitive diatribe from such wonderful direct sources as “Slate” and “NPR” and “UPI” is not helping your cause here, nor contradicting any point that was made.
Yes, these people think they have intellectual justification, but all I see is statistical activism for state healthcare. It’s the “infant mortality rate” claim writ large.
What healthcare outcomes, you haven't provided a single piece of evidence to back up your nonsense.
As for exercise, the US is a far more car dominated country and ranks quite low in terms of basic exercise such as walking.
Whilst most countries participate in sports and have gyms.
The US does have an obesity problem, as does the UK and many other countries, but it's better to try and find positive solutions rather than just dispute the figures.
One positive may be the growing numbers who now cycle, including those in cities such as NYC, another may be an increase in non-meat diets and salads, others may be taxes on sugar and salt or more physical education in schools etc.
It's usually more productive to look for solutions rather than trying to dispute their is any problem.
This is directly compiled data, not some Slate article.
And the fact that you’re reduced to arguing “steps counted” and “passive exercise” because you couldn’t argue that British people get more exercise is kind of funny.
Yes, I’m aware of this cliché argument. And French people get less passive exercise and walk less than British people do. So what point are you trying to make here?
The US does have an obesity problem, as does the UK and many other countries, but it's better to try and find positive solutions rather than just dispute the figures.
One positive may be the growing numbers who now cycle, including those in cities such as NYC, another may be an increase in non-meat diets and salads, others may be taxes on sugar and salt or more physical education in schools etc.
It's usually more productive to look for solutions rather than trying to dispute their is any problem.
Dude, stop it with the dishonesty. You call it nonsense and then just pretend to not see my links. I posted them multiple times:
Thus, no, the links you were posting were bunk. Statistical activism. British people have worse rates of survival for cardiovascular, cancer, and stroke disease than Americans do.
And we’re reduced to measuring passive exercise? French people get less “passive exercise” than British people do under similar surveys. So do Australians. That’s to my original point - this metric shows poor correlation to “obesity”, apparently.
Like, if we can concede that British people might get more passive exercise than Americans, but Americans get more vigorous exercise than British people, than we’d be getting somewhere. Not holding my breath for an actual concession on even one point here.
Whether there’s a “problem” vis a vis obesity is obfuscated by the fact that our ways of measuring it are so poor. You can’t say “there’s an obesity problem, we’re way more obese now”, when the reality is, the WHO lowered the threshold for what they consider obese to 30…that’s not a real problem? They literally made it a problem overnight. Do you see what I’m saying?
This only creates a landscape of confirmation bias around the issue. It’s very frustrating having to dig people out of it.
Thus, no, the links you were posting were bunk. Statistical activism. British people have worse rates of survival for cardiovascular, cancer, and stroke disease than Americans do.
And we’re reduced to measuring passive exercise? French people get less “passive exercise” than British people do under similar surveys. So do Australians. That’s to my original point - this metric shows poor correlation to “obesity”, apparently.
Like, if we can concede that British people might get more passive exercise than Americans, but Americans get more vigorous exercise than British people, than we’d be getting somewhere. Not holding my breath for an actual concession on even one point here.
Whether there’s a “problem” vis a vis obesity is obfuscated by the fact that our ways of measuring it are so poor. You can’t say “there’s an obesity problem, we’re way more obese now”, when the reality is, the WHO lowered the threshold for what they consider obese to 30…that’s not a real problem? They literally made it a problem overnight. Do you see what I’m saying?
This only creates a landscape of confirmation bias around the issue. It’s very frustrating having to dig people out of it.
How many false accounts do you actually have.
Britain is 20th in terms of healthcare and the US 36th.
According to research you are less likely to be diagnosed with cancer in the UK, and the UK has a lower cancer rate, in the US there is actual an over diagnosis of cancer, which leads to high rates of both cancer and survival rates.
Survival rates for many common cancers are fairly similar in most countries.
Over-diagnosis is more prevalent in the US, and UK mortality rates from cancer are much the same as those in the US, as US higher survival rates often rely on over-diagnosis. So it's not miracle hospitals and treatments in the US that account for this.
Britain is 20th in terms of healthcare and the US 36th.
According to research you are less likely to be diagnosed with cancer in the UK, and the UK has a lower cancer rate, in the US there is actual an over diagnosis of cancer, which leads to high rates of both cancer and survival rates.
Survival rates for many common cancers are fairly similar in most countries.
“In terms of healthcare” - so, now we’re doing broad rankings of healthcare systems? That tend to be biased towards nationalized ones?
The healthcare outcomes I linked to included survival rates for cardiovascular disease (heart attack), and stroke. America performed better for these as well than the UK did.
I think there’s an over diagnosis of a lot of things in the US relative to many other countries, which is what leads to a lot of these claims against American health…
“In terms of healthcare” - so, now we’re doing broad rankings of healthcare systems? That tend to be biased towards nationalized ones?
The healthcare outcomes I linked to included survival rates for cardiovascular disease (heart attack), and stroke. America performed better for these as well than the UK did.
I think there’s an over diagnosis of a lot of things in the US relative to many other countries, which is what leads to a lot of these claims against American health…
You haven't included any evidence, other than a ranking of healthcare systems in which the US does far worse than the UK.
I also think you are confusing slightly different hospital mortality rates with overall chances of developing a condition in the first place.
There is also no supporting data regarding the age or the overall health of individuals being admitted, and hospital mortality rates can depend on numerous factors.
Generally Americans have a lower life expectancy than those in the UK, and most hospital admissions involve the elderly, meaning the UK may have a higher percentage elderly and infirm patients.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
