A message from JFK

Ooooooops!!!


Life Expectancy Still Heading Higher

U.S. Life Expectancy Rose By More Than a Year From 1997 to 2007
By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

Aug. 19, 2009 -- Life expectancy continues its upward trend in the U.S., notching up by about two-and-a-half months in 2007 over 2006.
That may not sound like a lot, but step back and look at the gain over a decade: Babies born in 2007 have a life expectancy that's 1.4 years greater than babies born in 1997.
Here are the latest life expectancy figures, as published by the CDC today, based on preliminary data from 2007:

• Overall life expectancy for babies born in 2007: 77.9 years (up from 77.7 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for white females born in 2007: 80.7 years (up from 80.6 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for white males born in 2007: 75.8 years (up from 75.7 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for black females born in 2007: 77 years (up from 76.5 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for black males born in 2007: 70.2 years (up from 69.7 years in 2006)

The report also lists the top 15 causes of death among U.S. adults and the change in their age-adjusted death rate since 2006:

1. Heart disease: down 4.7%
2. Cancer: down 1.8%
3. Stroke: down 4.6%
4. Chronic lower respiratory diseases ( lung diseases): up 1.7%
5. Accidents: down 5%
6. Alzheimer's disease: no significant change
7. Diabetes: down 3.9%
8. Influenza and pneumonia: down 8.4%
9. Kidney disease: no significant change
10. Septicemia (an infection that affects the blood and other parts of the body): unchanged
11. Suicide: no significant change
12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis: no significant change
13. High blood pressure (hypertension): down 2.7%
14. Parkinson's disease: no significant change
15. Homicide: down 6.5%

The preliminary infant death rate was 6.77 infant deaths per 1,000 live births -- essentially unchanged from 2006. The top three causes of infant death were birth defects, disorders related to short gestation and low birth weight, and sudden infant death syndrome.
A total of 2,423,995 people of all ages died in 2007, down from 2,426,264 in 2006, and the nation's age-adjusted death rate dropped.
The CDC will publish final life expectancy and death data for 2007 later this year. Cause of death data may change, as the cause for some 2007 deaths may not have been determined in time for the CDC's preliminary report.
Curious about how U.S. life expectancy stacks up against the rest of the world? In May, a World Health Organization report showed that Japan has the world's highest life expectancy -- 83 years -- while the African nations of Burkina Faso, Burundi, Mali, and Nigeria have a life expectancy of 49.


TERRIBLE HEALTH CARE>>>JUST TERRIBLE!!!!

CrackerJax said:

Ooooooops!!!


Life Expectancy Still Heading Higher

U.S. Life Expectancy Rose By More Than a Year From 1997 to 2007
By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

Aug. 19, 2009 -- Life expectancy continues its upward trend in the U.S., notching up by about two-and-a-half months in 2007 over 2006.
That may not sound like a lot, but step back and look at the gain over a decade: Babies born in 2007 have a life expectancy that's 1.4 years greater than babies born in 1997.
Here are the latest life expectancy figures, as published by the CDC today, based on preliminary data from 2007:

• Overall life expectancy for babies born in 2007: 77.9 years (up from 77.7 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for white females born in 2007: 80.7 years (up from 80.6 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for white males born in 2007: 75.8 years (up from 75.7 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for black females born in 2007: 77 years (up from 76.5 years in 2006)
• Life expectancy for black males born in 2007: 70.2 years (up from 69.7 years in 2006)

The report also lists the top 15 causes of death among U.S. adults and the change in their age-adjusted death rate since 2006:

1. Heart disease: down 4.7%
2. Cancer: down 1.8%
3. Stroke: down 4.6%
4. Chronic lower respiratory diseases ( lung diseases): up 1.7%
5. Accidents: down 5%
6. Alzheimer's disease: no significant change
7. Diabetes: down 3.9%
8. Influenza and pneumonia: down 8.4%
9. Kidney disease: no significant change
10. Septicemia (an infection that affects the blood and other parts of the body): unchanged
11. Suicide: no significant change
12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis: no significant change
13. High blood pressure (hypertension): down 2.7%
14. Parkinson's disease: no significant change
15. Homicide: down 6.5%

The preliminary infant death rate was 6.77 infant deaths per 1,000 live births -- essentially unchanged from 2006. The top three causes of infant death were birth defects, disorders related to short gestation and low birth weight, and sudden infant death syndrome.
A total of 2,423,995 people of all ages died in 2007, down from 2,426,264 in 2006, and the nation's age-adjusted death rate dropped.
The CDC will publish final life expectancy and death data for 2007 later this year. Cause of death data may change, as the cause for some 2007 deaths may not have been determined in time for the CDC's preliminary report.
Curious about how U.S. life expectancy stacks up against the rest of the world? In May, a World Health Organization report showed that Japan has the world's highest life expectancy -- 83 years -- while the African nations of Burkina Faso, Burundi, Mali, and Nigeria have a life expectancy of 49.


TERRIBLE HEALTH CARE>>>JUST TERRIBLE!!!!

Click to expand...

yawn yawn yawn ..... again too easy ..Countries by life expectancy: http://bit.ly/Q1RVq Where's U.S.? Down past all the countries with GOV. HEALTH CARE!

There are many factors which determine life expectancy. Where is the US when it comes to serious diseases..... ahead of EVERYBODY.... where it counts....anyone can hand out aspirin.

And again, what counts is the DIRECTION.... upwards....hardly an indication of a failed system... and isn't that your entire argument? Was ur entire argument...

Wanna take a look at population growth? The EU is imploding as well as Russia. That's your future tax base by the way..... things are only getting tougher for socialized medicine.... not easier....and their all going broke right now..... the future? Inverted pyramid of tax payers will end it all and it's going to be quite a mess.

CrackerJax said:

There are many factors which determine life expectancy. Where is the US when it comes to serious diseases..... ahead of EVERYBODY.... where it counts....anyone can hand out aspirin.

And again, what counts is the DIRECTION.... upwards....hardly an indication of a failed system... and isn't that your entire argument? Was ur entire argument...

Wanna take a look at population growth? The EU is imploding as well as Russia. That's your future tax base by the way..... things are only getting tougher for socialized medicine.... not easier....and their all going broke right now..... the future? Inverted pyramid of tax payers will end it all and it's going to be quite a mess.

Click to expand...

Their population is not growing because of their lifestyle. In America, it's the norm to get married and have kids. In Europe, it's a different paradigm. So what the fuck are you talking about?

It would be interesting to do the math on how WWII adds into this, because that was 65 years ago, so with most men around then being killed in europe, hmm, I may need to go data mining....

Especially due to 1 death having greater weight with smaller population numbers.

hanimmal said:

It would be interesting to do the math on how WWII adds into this, because that was 65 years ago, so with most men around then being killed in europe, hmm, I may need to go data mining....

Especially due to 1 death having greater weight with smaller population numbers.

Click to expand...

Here's a small example. In the summer, I spend a couple of months each year in Italy. Their birth rate just equaled their death rate last year. People simply don't have many kids over there. Most women wait until their late 30's to marry and most couples who have kids only have one. Look up the numbers. So their growth rate is simply a result of their paradigm. It's simple and has nothing to do with health care, as Cracker would have it. In essence, he's saying "Italy has universal health care and more people die than are born. Therefore, their system is killing their old people." I mean, come on....

Socialism leads to apathy..... there's ur lifestyle. Want to copy that for us? At some point the EU will be unrecognizable as European....and sooner than u think.

CrackerJax said:

Socialism leads to apathy..... there's ur lifestyle. Want to copy that for us? At some point the EU will be unrecognizable as European....and sooner than u think.

Click to expand...

So now the conservative stance is its socialistic to wait until you're in your 30's to get married and only have one child?

BadDog40 said:

So now the conservative stance is its socialistic to wait until you're in your 30's to get married and only have one child?

Click to expand...

Oh, it'll get worse. These guys (not republicans or conservatives, but conspiracy whackos) have a disease. They can't control it.

jrh72582 said:

Your logic here is so flawed. You must admit this if you have any semblance of intellectual integrity. The fact that the Nazis killed 6 million Jews clearly dominates German history from 1930 to 1945. You know this. Everyone knows this. Their past is not dictated by the fact that Hitler was a socialist. It was dictated by the fact that Hitler orchestrated genocide. The socialist leanings had NOTHING to do with the genocide. You ARE mixing up your causal logic. Hitler could have been a capitalist, a socialist, a libertarian, a democrat - it doesn't matter. The socialist plan was NOT a means to allow the murders either. There's NO connection. And you're trying to make an explicit connection between the two. In essence, you're clearly saying "socialism will lead us to the exact same history as Germany and we'll forever be known for killing Jews". Do you see how flawed this logic is? You must.

Click to expand...

I didnt feel like getting into the flawed logic (lazy stoner), but I am glad you did. Gotta love those material conditional statements.

CrackerJax said:

Socialism leads to apathy..... there's ur lifestyle. Want to copy that for us? At some point the EU will be unrecognizable as European....and sooner than u think.

Click to expand...

The definition of socialism is the government regulating the means of production. How will socialism lead to apathy?

I was born in Germany, but am by no means a German citizen. A couple of years ago, while visiting family I ended up having some stitches at a German hospital. It was quick, the service was phenomenal, and best of all it was free. They took my info for the purpose of records and that's it.

I guess I would trade.

I have great health insurance and still cant get service that good.

How will socialism lead to apathy? Will lead? Try... HAS led. In every society that has tried it. Still a mystery?

The definition of socialism is the government regulating the means of production. How will socialism lead to apathy?

I was born in Germany, but am by no means a German citizen. A couple of years ago, while visiting family I ended up having some stitches at a German hospital. It was quick, the service was phenomenal, and best of all it was free. They took my info for the purpose of records and that's it.

I guess I would trade.

I have great health insurance and still cant get service that good.

Click to expand...

One thing that I think we can learn from countries like Germany is the ability to enjoy what you have. One thing here in the states we seem to constantly overlook in the name of advancement.

We are the worlds leader in almost every sense of the word, but at what point do we say, this is good enough, and get to relax? Everyone that I meet from other European countries always have a easy sense about them and are not so worried about having a million dollars. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems like they have a much better sense of 'self worth'.

But funny enough people I meet from India seem appalled that we don't work 15 hour days and work 6-7 days a week and cry when we have to work 50 hour work weeks. It is very interesting and one of the reasons that I feel if India gets their shit together they will be the next largest economy.

BadDog40 said:

So now the conservative stance is its socialistic to wait until you're in your 30's to get married and only have one child?

Click to expand...

No, the OBSERVANT stance is seeing the data that says the EU is imploding population wise. There are tons of studies on it. Look for urself. You will see that the "nanny state system" of the EU is causing apathy...a lack of vibrancy. Now of course this has always been the case economically. Europe never puts up stellar performance. I'm talking about the societal effects of Socialism. It's been around long enough now to reveal accurate data....and it isn't looking good for Socialism. It isn't looking good for the EU, nor Russia. The waves of immigration washing over the EU will become the majority at some point. The structures will be the same, but the ppl will not. It's happening right now.

CJ I think that is a bit of a reach there man.

Look at America, which families have the most children, wealthy or poor? I would argue that the more that you have the more responsible you are, and the less children you tend to bring into this world. Europe has a higher rate of savings, so they don't have to worry about relying on future generations at the same level that we do here.

[FONT=arial,helvetica,univers]
Certainly the numbers seem to show a savings crisis. Over the past year, the household savings rate has averaged a meager 0.8% of disposable income, the lowest level since the Great Depression.[/FONT]

Click to expand...

[FONT=arial,helvetica,univers]Americans look especially imprudent when compared with their global rivals. National savings rates in Europe run around 20%, on average, while Japan saves around 25%. [/FONT]

Click to expand...

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_03/b3916043_mz011.htm

So they would not need to worry about a shrinking population, because population numbers don't equate to a healthy society. And immigration is not a bad thing. It allows the natives to keep the higher level jobs, while the service jobs that are needed are filled by the people moving in. We just have our priorities ass backwards here in the states.

CrackerJax said:

No, the OBSERVANT stance is seeing the data that says the EU is imploding population wise. There are tons of studies on it. Look for urself. You will see that the "nanny state system" of the EU is causing apathy...a lack of vibrancy. Now of course this has always been the case economically. Europe never puts up stellar performance. I'm talking about the societal effects of Socialism. It's been around long enough now to reveal accurate data....and it isn't looking good for Socialism. It isn't looking good for the EU, nor Russia. The waves of immigration washing over the EU will become the majority at some point. The structures will be the same, but the ppl will not. It's happening right now.

Click to expand...

Something tells me you never been outside the US if thats what you think. And as far as 'Europe never puts up stellar performance economically' Switzerland is now considered the world's most competitive economy, not the US, care to explain that?

BadDog40 said:

Something tells me you never been outside the US if thats what you think. And as far as 'Europe never puts up stellar performance economically' Switzerland is now considered the world's most competitive economy, not the US, care to explain that?

Click to expand...

Just stop responding to him. He's admitted that he only posts bullshit to get us all worked up. He knows it's all fairlyland tales and conjured evidence, so don't take it seriously. He has no clue.

said the man with no data to support his claims.

I have been "outside" the USA many times over. I have close friends overseas. I'm a bit of a globetrotter, although I have never had a business that sent me.... it's all been on my own.

Like I said, look at the overall numbers of the EU in all areas.... there is an apathy. Socialism dampens and lessens the human condition. Capitalism, for all its faults (and there are some for sure) harnesses and rewards and improves the human condition like no other system available.

If you have two ppl who are relatively equal in education without any other factors such as nepotism, racism, etc. and drop one in the USA, and the other in the EU, statistically the person A will live a more comfortable and more importantly a more rewarding life. People need rewards, and capitalism gives it in abundance. Life isn't fair, which is why ppl need EVERY advantage.

I can see why someone from abroad may be confused on what all the fuss is about. They have not our history of being capitalist and productive. They weren't asked after WW2 to take a step BACKWARDS. Europe was laid waste and in ruins, both economically, and socially. They had nowhere to go but up, with the great help of the Marshall Plan I might add. Who rebuilt Europe? We did. Capitalism also breeds generosity. If you have more and can keep more of what YOU work so hard, you can also give more. The USA gives more than any other society..... it's not even close.

So pardon the USA for being upset, but for us, Socialism is a step backwards. It will be for the EU as well if the USA proceeds further. Without the giant capitalist engine going...... the EU will have a cold stiff wind, and fewwer natives each year to face that wind.

As for the switz in ranking... yes.... the US just slipped to number 2. It's not because Switzerland went up as much as we have gone DOWN. This reinforces my position on Socialism. We are cooling the engine down as I type this. Not good... not good for us, not good for the EU.....

The main difference between the USA and Europe is.......

http://carcino.gen.nz/images/image.phpi/66490086/euro_vs_america.jpg?cb=1115204527

lol cj, you just proved that Europe is happier in that link!