And my point is that, beyond the elderly, most citizens don't qualify for any of America's public insurance plans (I certainly don't):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance_in_the_United_...
Insurance does nothing to really insure your health. It is intended to help protect your wallet. A better way to protect your health is to take care of yourself so you are healthy. The discussion in the US about "the healthcare crisis" always focuses on the financial piece of it. There are differences between Europe and the US that impact health having nothing to do with who pays the medical bills: Europe is generally more pedestrian-friendly, there is a different food culture and so on. All of those things impact health. I get tired of seeing "health insurance" held up as a) the only meaningful difference in health costs between the US and Europe and b) the only important part of "how to control medical costs" in the US debate on health care.
That's why I bring it up: Because to me the two things are related.
You are confusing "insure" and "ensure."
And if you get cancer, despite your healthy lifestyle, which happens to millions?
If you are concerned about getting cancer, you can get a very affordable cancer policy for a lot less money than major medical coverage costs. As with the above situation, the expenses involved if you get cancer are likely to far exceed what insurance covers. And cancer is influenced by lifestyle. Most Americans aren't terribly healthy. For example, obesity is rampant in the US. So I would be interested in a citation for your assertion that "millions" of people with "healthy lifestyles" get cancer.
Thanks.