Why do Americans die earlier than Europeans?

Go4Broke

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
5,030
Reaction score
1,588
Points
113


A 30-year-old American is three times more likely to die at that age than his or her European peers. In fact, Americans do worse at just about every age. To make matters more grim, the American disadvantage is growing over time. In 2017, for example, higher American mortality translated into roughly 401,000 excess deaths – deaths that would not have occurred if the US had Europe’s lower age-specific death rates. Pre-pandemic, that 401,000 is about 12% of all American deaths. The percentage is even higher below age 85, where one in four Americans die simply because they do not live in Europe.

There have been many efforts to account for the US mortality disadvantage. There is no single answer, but three factors stand out::

First, death rates from drug overdose
are much higher in the US than in Europe and have risen sharply in the 21st century.

Second, is the rapid rise in the proportion of American adults who are obese. In 2016, 40% of American adults were obese, a larger proportion than in Europe. Higher levels of obesity in the US may account for 55% of its shortfall in life expectancy relative to other rich countries.

Third, the US stands out among wealthy countries for not offering universal healthcare insurance. One analysis suggests that the absence of universal healthcare resulted in 45,000 excess deaths at ages 18-64 in 2005. That number represents about a quarter of excess deaths in that age range.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...earlier-than-europeans?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
2,883
Points
113
Stress and an overall horrible diet play a role in my opinion.

I did work with a bunch of partners there and they would laugh at me when I was up and working at 5 am EDT to have a conference call with them about an issue; I wanted to catch them before lunch.

Not so much in UK and Germany, but in France, Spain and Italy their offices closed for 2-3 weeks; they work to live, whist we live to work. This is true all over the global, it's a crazy way to live.
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
11,158
Reaction score
1,780
Points
113
A 30 year old American is three times more likely to be shot dead at Walmart, at church, at McDonald's drive-thru or in bed than any European. 💀
 

Nokomis

Nothing To Say
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Messages
5,255
Reaction score
819
Points
113
Stress and an overall horrible diet play a role in my opinion.

I did work with a bunch of partners there and they would laugh at me when I was up and working at 5 am EDT to have a conference call with them about an issue; I wanted to catch them before lunch.

Not so much in UK and Germany, but in France, Spain and Italy their offices closed for 2-3 weeks; they work to live, whist we live to work. This is true all over the global, it's a crazy way to live.
All true. But Americans choose this lifestyle, for better or worse. Adults are adults making adult decisions. But then we pass that same stress & diet on to our kids. That's the real shame IMO.
 

diehard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
32,272
Reaction score
249
Points
63
IMO length of life is not as important as quality of life. Don't have time to look for stats but I bet we lag even worse there. Urban/woke culture (street violence) and obesity are killers of quality and length of life.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,959
Reaction score
3,226
Points
113
I was nodding along, of course yes for number one. Number two is insanely obvious, yes nodding. Oh no. We went off the rails. Nobody is dying at 30 because we don’t have universal healthcare. Uninsured still get treated. It’s the law. Nonsense.
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
2,883
Points
113
All true. But Americans choose this lifestyle, for better or worse. Adults are adults making adult decisions. But then we pass that same stress & diet on to our kids. That's the real shame IMO.
Yup, that's why my goal is to leave the US in the next couple of years, tired of it.

Also, I once interviewed with a French company's NYC office and they offered 4 weeks of vacation, excluding all the US holidays. My interviewer said, "Of course you get the 4 weeks just as all of us do, we've found employees perform better when they're happy and live a balanced life." My floor hit the ground and she followed it up, with taking the vacation was mandatory and I laughed at how many years I didn't take all my allotted time and it didn't end up benefitting anyone but my employer. Moi, a Sucka!
 

STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,789
Reaction score
522
Points
113
Stress and an overall horrible diet play a role in my opinion.

I did work with a bunch of partners there and they would laugh at me when I was up and working at 5 am EDT to have a conference call with them about an issue; I wanted to catch them before lunch.

Not so much in UK and Germany, but in France, Spain and Italy their offices closed for 2-3 weeks; they work to live, whist we live to work. This is true all over the global, it's a crazy way to live.
I've only visited a few European countries, but my brief observations support what you posted. In Germany sometimes the days are long, but weekends and holidays/ vacations are actually used/ taken. Time away is important. Collaboration appeared to be important. Contentment appeared to be important.

IIRC Scandinavian culture(s) embrace Hygge. https://www.scandinaviastandard.com/what-is-hygge/

Interesting thoughts to ponder.
 

hungan1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
10,637
Reaction score
1,230
Points
113
I remembered a story about a combat veteran saying that he felt safer while in Afghanistan than in his L.A. area neighborhood.

There is more violence, gun violence in particular here.

Big business governs our lives and health lifestyle. Try telling the government to get rid of all the cereals and process foods laden with unhealthy additives. They are promoting healthy lifestyles, but they are not following up with regulations.

Not having a national health insurance has a lot to do with preventable deaths and diseases. We missed a golden opportunity in history to enact national health insurance legislation about the time that they introduced the Social Security Act under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Interestingly, it was the American Medical Association that was the leader in opposition to national health insurance. All they had to do was yell socialism. FDR had bigger fish to fry with the war in Europe and against Japan. So, he tabled it. We all now what happened. he died in office in his final term.
 

STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,789
Reaction score
522
Points
113
I was nodding along, of course yes for number one. Number two is insanely obvious, yes nodding. Oh no. We went off the rails. Nobody is dying at 30 because we don’t have universal healthcare. Uninsured still get treated. It’s the law. Nonsense.
Depends on where. Minnesota? Yes, other states, not necessarily. I recall hearing about a case several years ago (? maybe more) in Missouri where a patient died because the hospitals refused to treat him because he had no insurance. IIRC it was a gunshot wound.

Often our ER's have had many patients coming from North and South Dakota. Not 100% sure why, but I've been told that some are there because we can't refuse them.

What needs to be considered is affordability. Treating someone in the ER is very expensive. Perhaps low cost or no cost preventative care is a viable alternative. IIRC The U.K. at one time, perhaps now, put a premium on the prevention model. Early primary care and preventative care was emphasized. Doctors were and maybe still are graded on prevention.

Just something to consider.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
53,796
Reaction score
11,086
Points
113
Depends on where. Minnesota? Yes, other states, not necessarily. I recall hearing about a case several years ago (? maybe more) in Missouri where a patient died because the hospitals refused to treat him because he had no insurance. IIRC it was a gunshot wound.

Often our ER's have had many patients coming from North and South Dakota. Not 100% sure why, but I've been told that some are there because we can't refuse them.

What needs to be considered is affordability. Treating someone in the ER is very expensive. Perhaps low cost or no cost preventative care is a viable alternative. IIRC The U.K. at one time, perhaps now, put a premium on the prevention model. Early primary care and preventative care was emphasized. Doctors were and maybe still are graded on prevention.

Just something to consider.
No hospital can refuse true emergency care such as a gunshot wound.
 

STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,789
Reaction score
522
Points
113
No hospital can refuse true emergency care such as a gunshot wound.
Like I said, this was some time ago. It was even on the news. It surprised me because I didn't know that it could be done. I stated that because laws change. If that is the case now everywhere then great! IMHO We should never turn someone away.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,056
Reaction score
1,939
Points
113
I've only visited a few European countries, but my brief observations support what you posted. In Germany sometimes the days are long, but weekends and holidays/ vacations are actually used/ taken. Time away is important. Collaboration appeared to be important. Contentment appeared to be important.

IIRC Scandinavian culture(s) embrace Hygge. https://www.scandinaviastandard.com/what-is-hygge/

Interesting thoughts to ponder.
They walk WAY more than the average American. Public transportation is a staple for the middle class - efficient, clean, expansive, affordable. Walk to the train, get off the train, walk to destination, walk back to train, walk back home.

Also, the idea that lack of national health insurance doesn’t impact health negatively - except at the extreme - is beyond laughable.
 
Last edited:

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
2,883
Points
113
Depends on where. Minnesota? Yes, other states, not necessarily. I recall hearing about a case several years ago (? maybe more) in Missouri where a patient died because the hospitals refused to treat him because he had no insurance. IIRC it was a gunshot wound.

Often our ER's have had many patients coming from North and South Dakota. Not 100% sure why, but I've been told that some are there because we can't refuse them.

What needs to be considered is affordability. Treating someone in the ER is very expensive. Perhaps low cost or no cost preventative care is a viable alternative. IIRC The U.K. at one time, perhaps now, put a premium on the prevention model. Early primary care and preventative care was emphasized. Doctors were and maybe still are graded on prevention.

Just something to consider.
our country is beyond backwards in how we don't make preventative care a priority; part of that for me, is education as well, including in our schools.

Reminds me of one of my favorite commercials of my youth (Pay me now or pay me later) -

 

STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,789
Reaction score
522
Points
113
They walk WAY more than the average American. Public transportation is a staple for the middle class - efficient, clean, expansive, affordable. Walk to the train, get off the train, walk to destination, walk back to train, walk back home.

Also, the idea that lack of national health insurance doesn’t impact health negatively, except at the extreme is beyond laughable.
Yes to all. In my short visit, I got to know trains very well. Did have a rental car for part of the trip, but most of the travel was by train/ walking.
 

STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
5,789
Reaction score
522
Points
113
our country is beyond backwards in how we don't make preventative care a priority; part of that for me, is education as well, including in our schools.

Reminds me of one of my favorite commercials of my youth (Pay me now or pay me later) -

This is scary. I was thinking that, and often refer to that slogan from the Fram commercials.
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
2,883
Points
113
They walk WAY more than the average American. Public transportation is a staple for the middle class - efficient, clean, expansive, affordable. Walk to the train, get off the train, walk to destination, walk back to train, walk back home.

Also, the idea that lack of national health insurance doesn’t impact health negatively, except at the extreme is beyond laughable.
NYC is a walking city which is one of the ancillary benefits of living here.
 

Go4Broke

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
5,030
Reaction score
1,588
Points
113

Yes. Not having health insurance can kill you.

Here’s some of research:
  • In 2002, the Institute of Medicine estimated that the “death rate of the uninsured is 25 percent higher than for otherwise similar people who have health insurance. According to the study, 18,000 excess deaths occurred each year because 40 million Americans lacked insurance.”
  • In January 2008, the Urban Institute updated that study. “Subsequent research has continued to confirm the link between insurance and mortality risk. The true number of deaths resulting from un-insurance will be “significant.”
  • A 2009 rebuttal study by the Health Research and Education Trust found that “when adjusted for health status and other factors, the risk of subsequent mortality is no different for people who lack insurance than for those who are covered by employer-sponsored plans.” But the study also had a second conclusion: “With health status excluded, the uninsured have a 10 percent higher mortality rate than similar insured persons.”
  • The Harvard researchers compared 2001- 2005 death rates in Massachusetts to the four-year period after a new healthcare law was enacted and found that “mortality rate decreased by 3 percent between 2006 and 2010 when greater access to health care may have prevented as many as 320 deaths per year. Providing health coverage to 830 uninsured adults prevented one death per year.”
  • A 2012 New England Journal of Medicine study analyzed the effects of Medicaid expansion on adult mortality in several states. It found a connection between access to Medicaid and reduced mortality: the exact figure was a 6.1 percent reduction in mortality.
  • The Center for American Progress projected what would happen if the NEJM results were applied to the states which had not expanded Medicaid. “In these states alone more than 12,000 lives per year could potentially be saved if state governments agree to expand their Medicaid programs.”
  • In 2017, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted that 22-24 million Americans would lose coverage under the AHCA. If 3 percent of these Americans died presumably because of this impediment to receiving healthcare, then 720,000 Americans might have died because of that lack of coverage over time.
https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/yes-not-having-health-insurance-can-kill-you/
 

Gopher_In_NYC

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
4,195
Reaction score
2,883
Points
113
. Nobody is dying at 30 because we don’t have universal healthcare. Uninsured still get treated. It’s the law. Nonsense.
Read any non-biased, i.e. respected medical professionals opionion on the topic, and no not some Dr. who believes in Demon Spum, and you might learn something, you child, or save yourself some legwork and read Broke's new post.

What's infuriating about you Seditionist 2, is that you make statements on here rarely supported by any corroborating evidence and expect it to be treated like Gospel. Then you get all butt hurt when you're called on your BS.

Golf, though I rarely agree with him, puts in some work to support his suppositions, you not at all.
 

Go4Broke

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
5,030
Reaction score
1,588
Points
113
A Prospective Cohort Study: The Association between Health Insurance and All-Cause, Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer and Cause-Specific Mortality:

Uninsured individuals are less likely to have a regular source of care; more likely to forgo care or prescription drug treatment due to cost; less likely to receive preventive services like cancer screenings, blood pressure and cholesterol checks, Pap smears, and blood sugar screenings; and more likely to forgo follow-up care for a chronic condition than those with public or private coverage (47,48).

With lower rates of follow-up cancer screenings (49), uninsured patients are at higher risk for being diagnosed with disease or cancer at later stages and have higher mortality rates than those who are insured (50,51,52). When uninsured patients do seek hospital care, they receive fewer diagnostic and therapeutic services and experience higher rates of mortality compared to those who are insured (50,51,53,54). ...

When uninsured patients do seek hospital care, they receive fewer diagnostic and therapeutic services and experience higher rates of mortality compared to those who are insured (50,51,53,54). Hence, ensuring adequate coverage for Black, Indigenous, Latinx, Asian American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and other persons affected by discrimination because of their race, ethnicity, or cultural identity is one of many actions needed to reduce disparities in health outcomes. ...

https://www.researchgate.net/public...nce_and_Mortality_Is_Lack_of_Insurance_Deadly
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,959
Reaction score
3,226
Points
113

Yes. Not having health insurance can kill you.

Here’s some of research:
  • In 2002, the Institute of Medicine estimated that the “death rate of the uninsured is 25 percent higher than for otherwise similar people who have health insurance. According to the study, 18,000 excess deaths occurred each year because 40 million Americans lacked insurance.”
  • In January 2008, the Urban Institute updated that study. “Subsequent research has continued to confirm the link between insurance and mortality risk. The true number of deaths resulting from un-insurance will be “significant.”
  • A 2009 rebuttal study by the Health Research and Education Trust found that “when adjusted for health status and other factors, the risk of subsequent mortality is no different for people who lack insurance than for those who are covered by employer-sponsored plans.” But the study also had a second conclusion: “With health status excluded, the uninsured have a 10 percent higher mortality rate than similar insured persons.”
  • The Harvard researchers compared 2001- 2005 death rates in Massachusetts to the four-year period after a new healthcare law was enacted and found that “mortality rate decreased by 3 percent between 2006 and 2010 when greater access to health care may have prevented as many as 320 deaths per year. Providing health coverage to 830 uninsured adults prevented one death per year.”
  • A 2012 New England Journal of Medicine study analyzed the effects of Medicaid expansion on adult mortality in several states. It found a connection between access to Medicaid and reduced mortality: the exact figure was a 6.1 percent reduction in mortality.
  • The Center for American Progress projected what would happen if the NEJM results were applied to the states which had not expanded Medicaid. “In these states alone more than 12,000 lives per year could potentially be saved if state governments agree to expand their Medicaid programs.”
  • In 2017, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted that 22-24 million Americans would lose coverage under the AHCA. If 3 percent of these Americans died presumably because of this impediment to receiving healthcare, then 720,000 Americans might have died because of that lack of coverage over time.
https://www.healthinsurance.org/blog/yes-not-having-health-insurance-can-kill-you/
These are correlations, not causation. People living in poverty have higher death rates, that’s all that this is saying.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
10,889
Reaction score
2,559
Points
113
Why do Americans die earlier than Europeans?

I was going to say because of the difference in the time zones, but I guess that is not what the thread was about.

But on a serious note, Americans are just too bleepin' fat because our eating habits are terrible.

After my heart attack, I went through the local Hy Vee with their in-house nutritionist. We went around the store looking at labels, and I found out that almost everything I use to eat was high in sodium and high in (bad) fat. Processed food, canned food - all loaded with sodium.

I completely changed my diet and lost 25 pounds - went from 168 to the 140's. . Also trying to get more exercise when my bleepin' job permits.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
47,959
Reaction score
3,226
Points
113
Why do Americans die earlier than Europeans?

I was going to say because of the difference in the time zones, but I guess that is not what the thread was about.

But on a serious note, Americans are just too bleepin' fat because our eating habits are terrible.

After my heart attack, I went through the local Hy Vee with their in-house nutritionist. We went around the store looking at labels, and I found out that almost everything I use to eat was high in sodium and high in (bad) fat. Processed food, canned food - all loaded with sodium.

I completely changed my diet and lost 25 pounds - went from 168 to the 140's. . Also trying to get more exercise when my bleepin' job permits.
Exactly. It’s not exercise, it is diet. It is all diet. You can run 10 miles a day and still be fat and unhealthy if your diet sucks, and vice versa. We are the fattest country in the history of the world, and all you hear about is our “hunger crisis” and food “deserts”.
 
Top Bottom