Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52
Thanks Tree39Thanks

Thread: US has the worst rate of maternal deaths in the developed world

  1. #11
    Franken-Stein DemoKKKrats excalibur's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    7,685
    Thanks
    2719

    From
    The Milky Way
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    The U.S.ís maternal deaths cannot be compared to other countries. The criteria are not the same between countries and the heterogeneity of the U.S. vis-ŗ-vis other countries is not taken into consideration.

    The criteria:

    The U.S. defines maternal deaths from the start of pregnancy until one year after the end of the pregnancy. The calculation that the U.S.ís maternal deaths are compared to internationally is WHOís definition of maternal death:

    Maternal death is the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management but not from accidental or incidental causes. To facilitate the identification of maternal deaths in circumstances in which cause of death attribution is inadequate, a new category has been introduced: Pregnancy-related death is defined as the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the cause of death.

    There is no calculation or filter in the WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, World Bank Group, or the United Population Division Maternal Mortality Estimation Inter-Agency Groupís calculations from 1990 to their latest data of 2015.

    The heterogeneity:

    What is not taken into consideration is the lifestyle and behavior that are extraneous to medicine: American women are becoming pregnant much later in life coupled with the highest rate of obesity in the world, high diabetes rates, high blood pressure, etc. than other countries.


    STOP! Stop confusing people by using facts.

  2. #12
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    30,315
    Thanks
    23896

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    The story is about mothers not getting appropriate attention or other complications. Not babies. And the article lists several interesting reasons.

    The babies are statistically doing pretty well.
    Did you read to the end of her post?

  3. #13
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    30,315
    Thanks
    23896

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    And do you know why? Crack and meth whores. And drugs drive our infant mortality rate up too. So are you calling for stepping up drug enforcement?
    Sticking with the medical theme, how about treatments?
    Thanks from Friday13

  4. #14
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    30,315
    Thanks
    23896

    From
    On a hill
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    The U.S.ís maternal deaths cannot be compared to other countries. The criteria are not the same between countries and the heterogeneity of the U.S. vis-ŗ-vis other countries is not taken into consideration.

    The criteria:

    The U.S. defines maternal deaths from the start of pregnancy until one year after the end of the pregnancy. The calculation that the U.S.ís maternal deaths are compared to internationally is WHOís definition of maternal death:

    Maternal death is the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the duration and site of the pregnancy, from any cause related to or aggravated by the pregnancy or its management but not from accidental or incidental causes. To facilitate the identification of maternal deaths in circumstances in which cause of death attribution is inadequate, a new category has been introduced: Pregnancy-related death is defined as the death of a woman while pregnant or within 42 days of termination of pregnancy, irrespective of the cause of death.

    There is no calculation or filter in the WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, World Bank Group, or the United Population Division Maternal Mortality Estimation Inter-Agency Groupís calculations from 1990 to their latest data of 2015.

    The heterogeneity:

    What is not taken into consideration is the lifestyle and behavior that are extraneous to medicine: American women are becoming pregnant much later in life coupled with the highest rate of obesity in the world, high diabetes rates, high blood pressure, etc. than other countries.
    High blood pressure, obesity, diabetes, and "etc", are medical issues.
    Thanks from Friday13

  5. #15
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,981
    Thanks
    437

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    For anyone who is actually interested in the issue here is the embedded link:

    What's Behind America's Maternal Death Rate? : NPR


    Includes a couple of very moving/tragic real life stories which have occurred. Along with some explanations for how these situations arise.

    And no, the conclusions are not a blast on Obamacare. Nor the capitalist system. More identifying some gaps that need fixed.
    That is an anecdote, not a pattern.

  6. #16
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,413
    Thanks
    315

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    High blood pressure, obesity, diabetes, and "etc", are medical issues.
    I could have been more clear: extraneous to neo-natal medicine and they are generally byproducts of though not mutually exclusive.

  7. #17
    Junior Member Claudius the God's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,966
    Thanks
    1257

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Maybe if you actually read the article you could find some clues??

    Sorry.....crazy talk.
    Did I miss something? We are the only civilized nation that does not have universal health care. From my experience abroad, we also do a terrible job in pre-natal care, child care and stress relief for young couples and families. When we live in France, our American daughter went to the local creche for free. We value money over people, its the American way.
    Thanks from labrea and Friday13

  8. #18
    Junior Member Claudius the God's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,966
    Thanks
    1257

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    High blood pressure, obesity, diabetes, and "etc", are medical issues.
    Exactly and if people could have access to the health care industry on an on-going basis, maybe these things can be avoided. Or maybe we could start looking at food and the food industry itself. Nah, Michelle tried that and all we heard was more junk food please.
    Thanks from labrea and Friday13

  9. #19
    New Member
    Joined
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    120
    Thanks
    192

    From
    Massachusetts
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    The story is about mothers not getting appropriate attention or other complications. Not babies. And the article lists several interesting reasons.

    The babies are statistically doing pretty well.
    No. As you should be aware, the babies are doing very, very poorly. Despite our incredible wealth and the fact we spend about twice as much per capita on healthcare as the average wealthy nation, we only have the 56th lowest infant mortality, according to our own CIA statistics:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2091rank.html

    We're sandwiched between Bosnia and Serbia, for Christ's sake! Our under-five mortality is also a complete disgrace. Of the 34 developed nations, only four of them are worse than us. Even Hungarian and Polish kids are more likely to survive early childhood than our kids are.
    Thanks from Friday13

  10. #20
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,413
    Thanks
    315

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Arkady View Post
    No. As you should be aware, the babies are doing very, very poorly. Despite our incredible wealth and the fact we spend about twice as much per capita on healthcare as the average wealthy nation, we only have the 56th lowest infant mortality, according to our own CIA statistics:

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2091rank.html

    We're sandwiched between Bosnia and Serbia, for Christ's sake! Our under-five mortality is also a complete disgrace. Of the 34 developed nations, only four of them are worse than us. Even Hungarian and Polish kids are more likely to survive early childhood than our kids are.
    US infant mortality rates cannot be compared to other countries either.

    The US is the only country that uses the full WHO definition of live birth and other countries eliminate several of the criteria. Switzerland uses only two of the four criteria. Italy uses only three of four criteria, etc. This allows other countries to use weight, gestation period, and length to classify a baby as not being born alive, and the US counts all as a live births. Other countries do not count premature births as live births if they die afterwards. The U.S. counts them as live births. The U.S. does more for premature infants than most countries, which also skews the numbers when they do not survive. When factoring in all the criteria, the US has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world.

    The data regarding Infant mortality rates in the US compared to the rest of the world come from the CDC, and the CDC gets their information from the OECD and the United States Childrenís Fund. The data is brutally skewered and misleading.

    There is no standard or continuity regarding the registration of babies born too early, too light, and too short in the other countries.

    There is no standard or continuity regarding the registration, or preventing selective registration, of pre-term infants who survived in other countries.

    There is no standard or continuity regarding the systematic under-registration of infants who did not survive in other countries.

    There is little to no data from the cultures that do not attempt to save prematurely born infants with birth defects. The US always does its best to save any baby born regardless of its condition, and those that do not survive are added to the misleading statistic used by the OECD.

    When infants born before 24 weeks are subtracted from the CDC report, the mortality rate decreases by 30%. This accurate data puts the US equal or lower than any other developed country.

    Many countries do not consider an infant that dies at birth weighing less than 500 grams as a live birth. The US considers an infant that weighs less than 500 grams and dies at birth a live birth. Eighty percent of these births in other countries do not survive and are not counted, but are counted in the US.

    Many countries classify a baby as stillborn or as a miscarriage if it survives less than 24 hours regardless if it is breathing and has a beating heart. The US classifies these infants as live born. Forty percent of all infant deaths happen within twenty-four hours.

    If a child in Hong Kong or Japan is born alive but dies within the first 24 hours of birth, he or she is reported as a miscarriage and does not affect the country's reported infant mortality rates.

    In Switzerland and other parts of Europe, a baby born who is less than 30 centimeters long is not counted as a live birth. The U.S. counts these infants as live births.
    Thanks from pragmatic

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 3rd November 2015, 12:52 PM
  2. America Is the Developed World's Second Most Ignorant Country
    By Babba in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 18th November 2014, 12:10 PM
  3. Why Switzerland Has The Lowest Crime Rate In The World
    By michaelr in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 21st December 2012, 08:02 PM
  4. The world's worst economies
    By meridian5455 in forum Economics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 9th August 2012, 06:01 AM
  5. UK: Worst developed country for Kids
    By Roach in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 15th February 2007, 06:00 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed