Why American Babies Die

[GBCW 397]

According to a report published last week by the Centers for Disease Control, out of the 34 developed countries that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation (24 European nations, plus Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan, Korea, Israel, Mexico, New Zealand, the United States, and Turkey), the U.S. ranks 27. Worldwide, we’re number 56, sandwiched between Serbia and Poland.

...

Health economists at the University of Chicago, University of Southern California, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology argue that these national numbers don’t tell the full story.

...

When the researchers broke the statistics down by age, they discovered that neonatal deaths were actually less frequent in the U.S. than in Austria and Finland. (“Neonatal” refers to infants up to a month old, while “postneonatal” includes those between one month and one year.) In other words, American babies are mostly fine while they’re in the hospital and during their first days at home—but over time, that changes.

...

Unsurprisingly, the states with the highest rates are also among the poorest. “If Alabama were a country, its rate of 8.7 infant deaths per 1,000 would place it slightly behind Lebanon in the world rankings,” Christopher Ingraham recently noted in The Washington Post, while “Mississippi, with its 9.6 deaths, would be somewhere between Botswana and Bahrain.”

When the researchers took socioeconomic status into account, they found no significant difference in mortality ... among babies born to wealthy, well-educated women. Lower down the socioeconomic ladder, though, the differences became stark; children of poor minority women in the U.S. were much more likely to die within their first year than children born to similar mothers in other countries.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/10/why-american-babies-die/381008/

[eieio 1,594]

You forgot……Gods will

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You forgotGods will

God hates babies?

[eieio 1,594]

God hates babies?

No…..He just spares them from growing up in a man made climate change era. It's for the best, I guess.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

No..He just spares them from growing up in a man made climate change era. It's for the best, I guess.

That was one of the most distasteful insensitive attempts at humor ever. However I laughed my buttocks off

When you pay kids to have babies and they have one parent you would expect such results

[Póg mo 1,749]

When you pay kids to have babies and they have one parent you would expect such results

I think the problem has more to do with paying parents enough to look after their children or providing paid maternity leave, such as they do in the developed world.

[MyLittlePony 340]

Overpopulated as is.

[Karee 4,190]

I think the problem has more to do with paying parents enough to look after their children or providing paid maternity leave, such as they do in the developed world.

Yeah must be someone elses fault.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Yeah must be someone elses fault.

I think he simply stated a fact. It's not about fault.

Many countries put more value on social health and welfare than the US does. We can sit here and call them socialists or whatever but we shouldn't be surprised when those countries rank ahead of us in measures like overall health or happiness. Health is a big part of happiness.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

Everything is almost artificial, fake food, growth hormones in food, high sugar, obesity and let's not forget the U.S.'s high poverty rate. The poorer you are the less likely you can afford healthier meals.

[belinda63 3,038]

First the data is skewed. The US attempts to save a newborn's life no matter what the chances. So if a baby is born at 26 weeks gestation it is considered alive although chances of survival are low. These children also, if they survive to go home, have lots of needs and problems. Although they may live a few months, long-term viability is low. Same with defects. Surgery and therapy are tried but unsuccessful thus raising the mortality rate. So, unlike some countries where the newborn would be considered non-viable we attempt to save them.

Given that information there is also a dearth of care for the poor/uneducated/uncaring. Some people simply don't have the resources to provide for the child as they need to.

[Karee 4,190]

Many countries put more value on social health and welfare than the US does.

Folks in those countries probably see it for what it is. Something for the greater good. People in this country see it as a way to take advantage of the system.

[Dakine10 5,452]

First the data is skewed. The US attempts to save a newborn's life no matter what the chances. So if a baby is born at 26 weeks gestation it is considered alive although chances of survival are low. These children also, if they survive to go home, have lots of needs and problems. Although they may live a few months, long-term viability is low. Same with defects. Surgery and therapy are tried but unsuccessful thus raising the mortality rate. So, unlike some countries where the newborn would be considered non-viable we attempt to save them.

Given that information there is also a dearth of care for the poor/uneducated/uncaring. Some people simply don't have the resources to provide for the child as they need to.

That's a 2 sided coin. The US has one of the highest rates of preterm birth in the world.

Premature birth is a significant risk factor for infant mortality but we don't manage it differently here than in many of the other countries on the list. The bigger question should be why is the US ranks with countries like Somalia in terms of premature births in the first place.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Folks in those countries probably see it for what it is. Something for the greater good. People in this country see it as a way to take advantage of the system.

I agree with that. It's an attitude, but its an attitude that's going to put us at a disadvantage down the road.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

There is a supposed correlation between high c section rates and high infant mortality rates. 33% of all births in the USA are via c section. The WHO reccomends a national rate of just 5-15%. Too often doctors will be irresponsible in scheduling a c section or granting one at the request of the mother when there is no medical reason to do so. Reasons are often cited as planning for family to be there, cosmetic reasons, planning around doctor's vacation time.