Maybe the private system is better but the numbers are skewed by America's horrible lack of hygiene?
Seriously.
Ever wondered why circumcision is all but compulsory in the USA, but not in the UK?

http://www.conunderground.com/two-obama-healthcare-myths/

The entire reporting system is so flawed.

Right now all government sources are using modified statistics.

ALL

"Although most countries require that all live births be reported, limits on birth registration requirements for some countries do have the potential to affect infant mortality comparisons, especially if very small infants who die soon after birth are excluded from infant mortality computations (7,8). There is also concern that birth registration may be incomplete near the lower limit of the reporting requirement, as the exact gestational age may not always be known.

Differences in national birth registration notwithstanding, there can also be individual differences between physicians or hospitals in the reporting of births for very small infants who die soon after birth.

For this reason, births and infant deaths at less than 22 weeks of gestation are excluded from the subsequent analysis in this report. "

that supposes that the bulk of variation lies within 22 weeks of gestation.  If there's a consistent trend to refuse to count the severely deformed at all stages of pregnancy, that won't be cancelled out by knocking premies out.

The CIA doesn't send people to your local doctors' offices to obtain its numbers. It relies on nations' counting practices and reporting. It has already been pointed out that this is not uniform.

>>the only time surgery can be cancelled due to health concerns is if the risk of death outweighs the gain in the quality of life.<<

I would just love if some asshole in a suit could make that decision for me. God forbid I be responsible for making decisions regarding my life. Anyone who sees nothing wrong with this is a pansy and should go suck on a pacifier: nobody wants a piece of their lack of intellect.

>>Still if non emergency surgery would kill someone in the US would they still insist on surgery?<<

There is no "they." In the USA you're not treated as a child all your life and are free to make stupid decisions. And life-saving ones. You're not overtaxed to provide abortions and viagra then denied the latest treatments because they're unapproved.

>>This still doesnt answer the crux of the issue, if our health service is so bad in UK and Canada, why are both our life expectancy ratings significantly above the USA as rated by the CIA world factbook and the United Nations?<<

As Mr. Balsz has been kind enough to point out: "Dunno what your health care system has to do with violent crime, road accidents and our lifestyle choices, which are our main killers." It is certainly not because your healthcare is superior. Nobody seriously makes that claim. It would be laughable.

>>Ever wondered why circumcision is all but compulsory in the USA, but not in the UK?<<

All but compulsory? Wow. You must look at a lot of dicks. But seriously, we don't talk about or care about dick nearly as much as you. Circumcision isn't something we talk about. Do what you want with your kids' genitals. Woah. I meant only as far as circumcision is concerned.

This has become rather silly.

>>got some money? go to a private doctor and try or luck<<

That everyone is forced to pay for everyone else's inferior healthcare, including viagra and abortions and other things that many do not care to pay for, reduces their ability to purchase superior care. This is the way in which socialized medicine hurts the poor, literally.

>>There are accidents, lifestyle choices and violent crime everywhere.<<

I don't care to read sources in support of your claim that accidents, lifestyle choice, and violent crime and their effects on life expectancy are uniform across the globe, as you presume in attributing life expectancy variations purely to healthcare quality. And that's even if they were uniformly reported and uniformly used in calculating life expectancy. Which they are not. Such a claim doesn't even have any face validity.

not if we agree to bail them out and bar our own companies from pwning too hard

ummm what the hell kind of preventative medical care do you have that counters harmful lifestyle choices in a statistically significant manner? Jean Claude Van Damme dragging folks out of Burger King?  Did you translate Time for Timer into other languages? "il faut que je demander pour un morceau de fromage"

Flint, even your terrible non-source didn't accuse the UK of under reporting infant mortality. I'm afraid the claim that the UK with a nationalised health service has a lower infant mortality rate and longer life expectancy than the USA is completely unchallenged.

Even if differences in reporting existed they are unlikely to show a swing big enough to be evidence that a nationalised health service is inferior in care quality to a personal insurance based system.

I would be very surprised if the largely sparsely populated USA had a higher road death rate than the much more densely populated UK. Is violent crime really different enough to cause such a difference in infant mortality and life span? I'm highly sceptical but if it is, then sucks to be you guys!

[]

[]

most ppl here seem to forget that for example countries of the eu. are forced to stay above a certain minimum of care;

so you can keep yapping all you want about the medical care of countries with healthcare being bad without giving proof. the fact that in europe these regulations are in place is enough to partly reject that claim.

also something called medical tourism is a nice indicator. for example this study shows that indeed some ppl travel to america for well trained doctors and stuff; but also a lot of americans travel out of usa to get medical care. some for lower costs in the hospital but also for complex procedures that can be done cheaper here in europe.
so this  kind of claims that whilst indeed some countries will have lower standards others have standers just as high as the us( hard to prove but equally hard to disprove) the only difference is that those services in europe are paid partially back to the person undergoing the procedure and you are neckdeep in dept in america probably.

United States

Although much attention has been given to the growing trend of uninsured Americans traveling to foreign countries, a McKinsey and Co. report from 2008 found that a plurality of an estimated 60,000 to 85,000 medical tourists were traveling to the United States for the purpose of receiving in-patient medical care;[64] the same McKinsey study estimated that 750,000 American medical tourists traveled from the United States to other countries in 2007 (up from 500,000 in 2006).[65] The availability of advanced medical technology and sophisticated training of physicians are cited as driving motivators for growth in foreigners traveling to the U.S. for medical care,[64] whereas the low costs for hospital stays and major/complex procedures at Western-accredited medical facilities abroad are cited as major motivators for American travelers.[65] Also, it has been noted that the decline in value of the U.S. dollar is offering additional incentive for foreign travel to the U.S., although, costs differences between the US and many locations in Asia far outweigh any currency fluctuations.

Several major medical centers and teaching hospitals offer international patient centers that cater to patients from foreign countries who seek medical treatment in the U.S.[66] Many of these organizations offer service coordinators to assist international patients with arrangements for medical care, accommodations, finances and transportation including air ambulance services.

It should be noted that many locations in the US that offer medical care comparable in price to foreign medical facilities are not Joint Commission Accredited.

so yeah if you got the money get it done in the usa but if you want to save a bit or can't afford a european hospital is cheaper and if you do a bit of research just as good.

hence one of belgium's less known exportproducts is high tech medical equipment.

Germany

Germany is a destination for patients seeking advanced medical technology, high standards, safety, and quick treatment.[108] All German citizens have health coverage,[109] resulting in a high hospital density, with twice as many hospitals per capita as the United States.[110] The high hospital density results in shorter waitlists for treatment. Costs for medical treatment compete well with other developed European countries and are commonly 50% of those in the USA.[111]

Germany is an attractive destination for patients from the Middle East since traveling to the USA has become more difficult for them since the September 11 attacks. US citizens sometimes travel to Germany to seek treatments such as artificial cervical disc replacement that are not US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved.
[edit] Poland

Since 2004, when Poland joined the European Union, it has become another locale for people seeking cheaper medical treatments. The quality of care in Poland must comply with EU standards.

> All but compulsory? Wow. You must look at a lot of dicks. <
Trying to avoid a point made by an openly bisexual man by questioning his sexuality? Stroke of genius that is.

> But seriously, we don't talk about or care about dick nearly as much as you. <
Define "We" & "you". Actually, just define "we" because I just googled America's #1 cause of divorce, and it indicates to me that your "we" loves cock even more than me on weekends.

> Circumcision isn't something we talk about. <
Or hygiene, apparently.

> Do what you want with your kids' genitals. Woah. I meant only as far as circumcision is concerned. <
How was this funny?

What happened to you, what made you into Finty-boys' poodle?