Barack just needs to look to his neighbours to understand health policies
That America has not done as well in supporting health issues over the years is a given fact. But how bad is ‘not done as well’? The answer is pretty bad. Not many would know that in the US, the incidence of cancer among males and females is 562.3 and 417.3 per 1,00,000 respectively (American Cancer Society, Surveillance and Health Policy Research, 2009), life expectancy is 77.8 years, infant mortality rate is 6.9 deaths per 1,000 live births (CNN once reported that the US has the second worst newborn death rate in the modern world), mortality rate under the age of five years for males and females is 9 and 7 per 1,000 live births respectively, only 2.7 acute care beds per 1,000 people are available (5th worst amongst all OECD nations), 2.8 physicians per 1,000 and ranks 72nd by overall level of health on WHO parameters!
Perhaps today, the biggest issue in the US is the failure of its healthcare system, especially given the debate on Obama’s policy decisions. Though Obama is not labelled a failure, yet when it comes to healthcare reforms, it might not take too long for his 300+ million supporters to ‘change’ their point-of-view. One need not travel miles to prove what ails the States. Their next door neighbour – Canada – is a case in point, or rather, against the point. Canada has a healthcare model that is better; because it works!
Even after having a US-like healthcare model, Canada has successfully achieved better results in its healthcare report card. Healthcare spending in Canada is around $160 billion or 10.1% of its GDP in 2007, which is one percentage point higher than the average spending by OECD countries. But very interestingly, it is far lower than the US allocation, which is 16% of GDP. Canada also spends lesser on a per capita basis compared to the US. Canada’s total healthcare per capita spending was around $3,895, which is lower than the $7,290 per capita spending of the US. The critical reason why the system, despite spending less, works better in Canada is that while the public sector is the main source of funding for Canadian healthcare, the US system is dependent on private source funding.
That America has not done as well in supporting health issues over the years is a given fact. But how bad is ‘not done as well’? The answer is pretty bad. Not many would know that in the US, the incidence of cancer among males and females is 562.3 and 417.3 per 1,00,000 respectively (American Cancer Society, Surveillance and Health Policy Research, 2009), life expectancy is 77.8 years, infant mortality rate is 6.9 deaths per 1,000 live births (CNN once reported that the US has the second worst newborn death rate in the modern world), mortality rate under the age of five years for males and females is 9 and 7 per 1,000 live births respectively, only 2.7 acute care beds per 1,000 people are available (5th worst amongst all OECD nations), 2.8 physicians per 1,000 and ranks 72nd by overall level of health on WHO parameters!
Perhaps today, the biggest issue in the US is the failure of its healthcare system, especially given the debate on Obama’s policy decisions. Though Obama is not labelled a failure, yet when it comes to healthcare reforms, it might not take too long for his 300+ million supporters to ‘change’ their point-of-view. One need not travel miles to prove what ails the States. Their next door neighbour – Canada – is a case in point, or rather, against the point. Canada has a healthcare model that is better; because it works!
Even after having a US-like healthcare model, Canada has successfully achieved better results in its healthcare report card. Healthcare spending in Canada is around $160 billion or 10.1% of its GDP in 2007, which is one percentage point higher than the average spending by OECD countries. But very interestingly, it is far lower than the US allocation, which is 16% of GDP. Canada also spends lesser on a per capita basis compared to the US. Canada’s total healthcare per capita spending was around $3,895, which is lower than the $7,290 per capita spending of the US. The critical reason why the system, despite spending less, works better in Canada is that while the public sector is the main source of funding for Canadian healthcare, the US system is dependent on private source funding.
Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.
An Initiative of IIPM, Malay Chaudhuri
and Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist).
and Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist).
For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
Zee Business Best B-School Survey 2012
Prof. Arindam Chaudhuri’s Session at IMA Indore
IIPM IN FINANCIAL TIMES, UK. FEATURE OF THE WEEK
IIPM strong hold on Placement : 10000 Students Placed in last 5 year
IIPM’s Management Consulting Arm-Planman Consulting
Professor Arindam Chaudhuri – A Man For The Society….
IIPM: Indian Institute of Planning and Management
IIPM makes business education truly global
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri
Rajita Chaudhuri-The New Age Woman
IIPM B-School Facebook Page
IIPM Global Exposure
IIPM Best B School India
IIPM B-School Detail
IIPM Links
IIPM : The B-School with a Human FaceProf. Arindam Chaudhuri’s Session at IMA Indore
IIPM IN FINANCIAL TIMES, UK. FEATURE OF THE WEEK
IIPM strong hold on Placement : 10000 Students Placed in last 5 year
IIPM’s Management Consulting Arm-Planman Consulting
Professor Arindam Chaudhuri – A Man For The Society….
IIPM: Indian Institute of Planning and Management
IIPM makes business education truly global
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri
Rajita Chaudhuri-The New Age Woman
IIPM B-School Facebook Page
IIPM Global Exposure
IIPM Best B School India
IIPM B-School Detail
IIPM Links
