I assume the WHO relies on local census & medical data to generate these statistics (the Reuters piece doesn't have a citation on ths) so I'd take this data with a grain of salt until we hear more details about the methodology.
When you look at the obesity numbers:
US 36%, New Zealand 31%, Canada 29%, Australia 29%, UK 28%, Israel 26%, Ireland 25%
Thailand 10%, Indonesia 7%, China 6%, Philippines 6%, South Korea, 5%, Vietnam 2%
Vietnam's life expectancy will overtake the US in the next 10-15 years as well most likely (they're about three years behind). In most cases if you prevent people from starving or suffering serious malnutrition, provide a basic level of healthcare & sanitation, and have single digit obesity levels, you'll almost automatically see 75-80 year life expectancies.
South Korea's life expectancy went from 65 years, to 82 years currently, from just 1980 to 2015. They passed the US around 2003. South Korea's GDP per capita was $14,000 at that time, versus $40,000 for the US. One would expect China to have no problem replicating that.
It's a small wonder life expectancies in the developed, high obesity countries are as high as they are. The US is no doubt expending hundreds of billions of dollars extra per year on healthcare as a consequence of its obesity level (cancer, disability, diabetes, etc).
Or to Californians...
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/22/us-life-expectancy-is-low-an...
We have to acknowledge that the lack of Universal Healthcare in the US is a big driver of our poor life expectancy showing.
What changed? A few big things. Healthcare in the US became wildly expensive after the 1980s, following an extreme cost increase far beyond inflation, whereas before it was not far out of line vs other developed nations (eg share of GDP spent on healthcare; today it's commonly 2x the next closest nations on cost). And obesity exploded dramatically higher after the early to mid 1980s. Diets overloaded with sugar, carbs, high fructose corn syrup in everything, drive thrus as a routine, etc.
I do believe universal healthcare would have prevented that life expectancy gap from opening up between the US and the UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. Based on the expectancy increase path the US was on as recently as the early 1980s, it should be at 82-83 years now, rather than 78.x.
Apparently the actuaries reckon I’ll make it to 91 and wife to 94.
As mentioned elsewhere, overdoses are significantly impacting average lifespan figures.
Many Americans are afraid to go to the doctor because it's incredibly expensive. Many people brush off the early symptoms of serious illnesses because "well, what if it goes away and I get into debt for a small problem?" It's why a lot of Americans with cancer aren't diagnosed until it's too late--that apprehensiveness about getting a simple exam.
When it comes to getting major surgeries or treatment for complex illnesses, yeah, America is great if you've got the cash. But most countries can handle illnesses treated by a quick run of antibiotics or other relatively simple and routine treatments. America is special because it's a wealthy country on paper, yet people brush off illnesses like that and end up dead.
I'm almost tempted to say it is political advertising, but I'd sooner admit it is just emotional dialogue
2013: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-us-life-expectancy-lowes... 2018: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...
It includes our diet, restaurant culture, stress, play culture, misinformation, corporate influence, architecture, work culture, as well as our healthcare administration.
Unfortunately, theses 'lifespan' measurements have a lot to do with violent crime, car accidents, suicides, war deaths etc. - i.e. things that aren't so much about health than otherwise.
It's why average lifespan isn't necessarily a very good measure of health outcomes.
I think US is down due to overdoses, which is a kind of health issues, but not necessarily a regular measure of diet and quality of regular medicine, it's an epidemic.
http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2010/09/china-study-ii-...
So other factors are probably responsible.
>>With 1.6 physicians per 1000 population in 2012, China had much fewer doctors per capita than the OECD average (3.2 physicians). The number of nurses per capita in China (1.8 nurses per 1000 population in 2012) is also much lower than the OECD average (8.8 nurses).
As for the affordability of dental services, would you say that's an argument for deregulation and lowering of mandatory quality standards?
That explains why the public spending on healthcare is less - less doctors/nurses per capita, together with far less pay for doctors/nurses. the 1.6 doctors per 1000 population vs 3.2 in OECD countries is not a surprise, Chinese doctors have for decades been forced to work much longer hours.
> As for the affordability of dental services, would you say that's an argument for deregulation and lowering of mandatory quality standards?
It is the complete opposite - the cost is so low because they got over-regulated. The mind set of the government is that "dental issues are usually not life threatening, it thus shouldn't be expensive", all charges by public hospitals are exclusively set by the Price Bureau (Yes, there is Price Bureau!) and dental costs are just stupidly low.
But the standards that need to be met to be licensed as a dentist must be much lower for dentist pay to be that low without massive shortages of dentists.
Which goes back to my question on whether you think China's case is an argument for lowering of mandatory quality standards.
https://paste.fedoraproject.org/paste/TIApj2qMvvIcmN-DkPd5RA...
I might still will watch something that makes that mistake, especially if I appreciate the previous history of the mistake maker. In this case, it's a first person experience that jives with what I know since I know a few Canadians and have plenty of US emergency room experience.