A recent study in the journal American Medical Association (JAMA) found that life expectancy in the United States has fallen since 2014 for the first time in half a century. The New York Times published an opinion piece Thursday, which attributed it to America’s “broken” health care system. In the article “The American Health Care System Is Killing,” the article is open to calling for a speedy reform of health care in the United States: to reform the “under the control of health care institutions” into “government-controlled” health care systems.
The authors argue that a bloated, bureaucratic health care system would only benefit vested interests and would not benefit American civilians. He stressed that the broken health care system is killing Americans.
“America’s Health Care System Is Killing,” New York Times Screenshot
Last Tuesday (November 26), the journal American Medical Association, a leading American medical journal, published a comprehensive study after tracking death rates in the United States for more than half a century. The survey found that life expectancy in the United States and other rich countries in the world continued to rise between 1959 and 2010, and that in 2014, unlike other rich countries, life expectancy in the United States reversed and began to decline.
What is causing the decline in Life expectancy in the United States? The researchers found that suicide, drug overdose and alcoholism were the main causes, as were other diseases, including heart disease, stroke and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
The article points out that many of these causes can be directly attributed to “special and functional disorders” in the U.S. health care system, citing the hotly debated opioid addiction in the U.S.
The opioid epidemic dates back to the advent of oxyContin, a prescription painkiller, in 1996. Purdue Pharmaceuticals, the drug’s founding company, is seen by the public as the “initiator” of drug addiction.
Purdue Pharmaceuticals is indeed “unusual” in promoting the U.S. health care system, according to the study. Purdue has been courting doctors, patients and insurance companies to convince them that Ostco is a new type of opioid that is not addictive and less prone to abuse. Even if the company doesn’t have any scientific evidence to prove it.
Subsequently, Oskandin’s sales soared. After all, it’s much more cost-effective for a medical institution to prescribe pain relief tablets to a patient than to use traditional physiotherapy.
Journal of the American Medical Association Report: Life Expectancy and Mortality in the United States, 1959-2017
However, the authors do not place the blame entirely on pharmaceutical companies that sell drugs to medical institutions. Opioid addiction, he argues, is linked to the overall lack of high-quality, low-cost health care.
The Journal of the American Medical Association reported that “middle-aged people” (sic) had the largest increase in mortality. Unlike retirees and many children, “middle-aged people” often do not have access to government-provided health care and therefore do not have access to affordable health care (only to choose lower-cost pills).
The article cites the report as describing that “countries with higher life expectancy do better than the United States in providing universal health care” and that “the cost barriers to health care are removed”. “In contrast, costs are a key obstacle in the Us. “
A study last year in the American Medical Journal found that 42 percent of the nearly 10 million Americans diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2012 were forced to pay for their health care.
Changes in “middle-aged” mortality rates in U.S. states 2010-2017 (the deeper the color, the greater the increase), pictured in the New York Times
The backwardness of the American health care system is killing the lives of Americans. How does this work?
The article suggests that it is imperative to reform the medical system”, which will be “under the control of medical institutions” and reformed into a medical system “under the control of the government”. Even some jobs will be lost as a result.
“It’s a good deal,” the authors argue, “because it could improve the current dilemma: more people will be able to afford health care and continue to live healthy lives.” He was blunt, saying that the current health care system is only a benefit to some vested interests, and that some of the jobs were created in the process of overspending by these facilities.
In total, Americans pay about $500 billion in administrative costs for health care, according to the data. That is, $500 billion is spent on bills and insurance, not for actual health care.
These costs are significantly higher than in most other rich countries. According to 1999 data, each American pays about $1,059 a year for health care overhead; The authors believe the difference between the two countries will be much higher in 2019.
The article concludes that all overspending creates a lot of jobs, and that moving toward a more efficient and equitable health care system inevitably means cutting a lot of administrative jobs.
If the U.S. adopts a public health-care financing system, about 1.8 million jobs will become unnecessary, according to a study. But bureaucracy in the health-care system is bound to be eliminated and indirect costs will be reduced.